Politics

Hi to all open-minded people Republic Religious Tell us your opinions with source like as me.

I really have a problem with the American Supreme Court, and the Canadian equivalent. It seems that the people we entrust with making laws, your Congress, and our Parliament, don't give a damn about passing just or complete laws, then, rely on a partisan and unelected Supreme court to 'interpret' those laws in their favor. It doesn't seem to matter which party is doing it ( they both do it ), D Trump wants a Republican leaning Supreme Court so he can get rid of the ACA and get a favorable election result from the E College, neither of which he can legally do as the laws are now interpreted. The Democrats on the other hand, want to have a Democrat leaning Supreme …

He's going to try and mess up this election, I think.

I was wondering which side of the political isle is more likely to seek out opposing viewpoints, if there is a difference at all. If we asked people who identify as liberals or conservatives how often they visit cnn.com vs. foxnews.com, which group would be more likely to equally visit both?

Being "triggered" is what the kids say these days when someone gets upset, perhaps overly so, when they hear an opposing viewpoint. I was wondering if conservatives or liberals are equally likely to be triggered, or if there is a difference in likelihood. One way of quantitatively gauging which group is more likely triggered is to see look at websites like Reddit, where liberals and conservatives have separate spaces, and we can observe their up-voting and down-voting behavior, i.e. if there are a greater number of highly down-voted comments in subreddits dominated by liberals when compared to subreddits dominated by conservatives then we can conclude that liberals are mo…

“Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the demure firebrand who in her 80s became a legal, cultural and feminist icon, died Friday. The Supreme Court announced her death, saying the cause was complications from metastatic cancer of the pancreas.” https://www.npr.org/2020/09/18/100306972/justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg-champion-of-gender-equality-dies-at-87?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't openly supporting Trump be what makes them too biased?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54171571 Would have thought there was more than enough wrong in the USA for Biden to get his teeth into at the moment. If there is no trade deal, one advantage would be further delay in being stuck with US food and agricultural standards and practices, I don't wish to adopt.

Given the news of Trump's "Covid Catch": What do you suppose would be the likely impact upon the election result? If the condition were to prove fatal for him before the election how would that be handled? Can the Republicans select another candidate? Would Pence automatically step-up? How would ballot papers be handled? Same questions post-election if he won the election. Any other thoughts?

President Trump has been stricken with Covid-19. I prayed for him and I mailed him a get well card. Certain people hate Trump but he does not deserve to have Covid-19. Nobody does. Trump haters should remember something. Donald Trump gave us $1,200 stimulus payments, plus $500 per child. That money has helped a lot of good people during this terrifying pandemic. Trump isn't well and he needs our prayers.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/09/27/us/donald-trump-taxes.html

The re-impeachment of trump could and should happen, as there are multiple legitimate offenses to be considered not covered in the first trial. It is my understanding that if the dems on the house side vote again to impeach, the work of congress must stop until impeachment is resolved, one way or another. This could allow sufficient time to elapse before Trump has her replaced, given the short time to the November election. If our democratic electors claim that there is no recourse to having yet another arch conservative on the court, they are complicit in the further destruction to our democracy in their inaction to do a simple and logical task, and a direct affront to …

Technically it could be news, but rather baffling, the CDC has changed public recommendation on who should be tested. On some parts of the website they recommended: Specifically, they stated reasonably: But now the website reads: Now it is likely that the ability of testing is getting overwhelmed (again), but testing folks, especially potential asymptomatic spreaders should be very high on any testing hierarchy. It is really just baffling to me why they would do that. Edit: one thought might be that with limited testing available one cannot test folks repeatedly (as in other countries), and if only one shot is possible, it might make sens…

A professor at Columbia University has been arrested and charged with having a sexual relationship with his 24-year-old daughter. Some info may be found here: http://www.columbiaspectator.com/2010/12/10/professor-david-epstein-charged-incest-his-daughter Ok, it's kinda scummy and I'm sure some would say disgusting, but why is it illegal? They're both adults. Seems to me that it's just another example of the government sticking its nose into people's private business. This is also creating an interesting ruckus in media circles. Some info on that may be found here (comments invited): http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2010/12/abc-news-asks-on-faceboo…

This seems like a no brainer but she had to get it wrong. "Be Best" suggests that we should all strive to be THE BEST. That is absurd. People should strive to be THEIR best. It should be "Be Your Best." But they had to screw it up and make it sound like you need to be THE best, which is very hard to accomplish, a fool's errand. This is probably because Trump always talks in generalizations and hyperbolic absolutes. So Melania follows her husband's example and sounds as stupid as Trump does. If you are not THE best it means you are a LOSER, which is a permanent condition for a lifetime of failure which Trump uses as a curse to his enemies. Trump's base are WINNERS…

In California, I have voted by mail for decades. If it was such an unreliable method, why was it allowed in many states for so many years? The criticism of voting by mail, comes from the GOP mostly, more chances of fraud happening. They believe that voters could not be identified properly as they are when they vote in person when they show their IDs. So I propose that there could be mass identification of voters which could be done quickly in the safety of your car. You drive up, show your IDs through the window, and you are issued a unique code to use when you vote at home later. That would be much more efficient than standing in line for hours, spaced 6 fe…

People who have right-wing views seem to be more vulnerable to manipulation based on fear, e.g. terrorists want to attack us and therefore we need to increase domestic security at the putative expense of liberty. People who have left-wing views seem to be more vulnerable to manipulation based on shame, e.g. excluding outsiders is xenophobic and therefore we need to import migrants at the putative expense of the domestic population's safety. There is no judgement here about the merits of increasing domestic security or importing migrants, only a question about the differential efficacy of using fear or shame between the left and right wings in order to coerce behavior. Are…

Who do you think Joe Biden will announce as his running mate? Not who you WANT him to pick, but who you PREDICT he will pick. Polls show Elizabeth Warren as the favorite among people polled, but I doubt that’s the direction he chooses. My top picks are Susan Rice or Kamala Harris. I’d like to see Stacey Abrams, but am unsure she’ll click with Biden as the person with whom he’ll want to enjoy weekly lunch dates. Tammy Duckworth and Val Jennings seem possible, but IMO are not probable. The announcement will likely happen within the next week or two. Who do you think will be chosen? Maybe Obama? If so, which one? Lol

"Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929, fixing the number of Representatives at 435. The U.S. Constitution called for at least one Representative per state and that no more than one for every 30,000 persons." Here The 1911 House Reappointment Act increased "membership of the House from 391 to 433, with provisions to add two more Members when New Mexico and Arizona became states." Here The 1911 House Reappointment Act was the last time the number of House members has been expanded. At that time there was roughly a House Representative per 200k citizens. The Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929 capped the number of House representatives at the size outline in by the…

I know it is still early but candidates are already throwing their hats in the ring. So let's discuss it. At present the following candidates (in last name alphabetical order) have already announced their candicacy or filed the necessary paperwork to begin organizing their campaigns. There will be more candidates to come but for now I would like to discuss the ones currently in rather than speculate about others. How does everyone feel about these candidates? Julian Castro Tulsi Gabbard Kristen Gillbrand Elizabeth Warren

Instead of doing science, let's see what the highest number the average Murrciann can count to and make that the price for everything. Grow the fuck up, I won't participate in this idiocracy

Its always nice to jump on a science forum and see the activity stream filled, mostly, with politics. If we read the Politics topic, we see under it "....and how it relates to science". I almost wonder how much of it spills over into this side of the internet community by design. Facebook and Youtube are full of posts and comments designed purely to insight anger and frustration amongst a common people and the ignorance of those people rapidly takes over. Foreign entities intent on having us destroy ourselves clearly have the "science" of it figured out. Democrat vs republican, white vs black, police department funding, etc etc etc ~ none of it belongs here.

This story is dated June 26. "In a seeming slip of the tongue, President Donald Trump said Friday that his opponent Joe Biden was "going to be" elected president in November — a rare acknowledgement of the difficulty he faces seeking re-election. "Trump's disapproval hit a high this week, according to a new poll from NPR, PBS News hour and Marist that shows his approval at 40 percent overall and a 58 percent disapproval rating." https://people.com/politics/trump-says-biden-going-to-be-your-president-because-some-people-dont-love-me/ Trump speaking to Sean Hannity: "I don’t want to be nice or un-nice, okay? But I mean, the man [Biden] can’t speak,"…

Imagine living in a decent house rent free. We already should be doing this and we don't need a venus project to do so. All the places exist, all the replacement parts, the electrical grid. This is an issue of incentive, money doesn't actually do anything but grow in number as resources run out, in essence it doesn't do anything but grow like a parasite in your pocket. No, no, enough of that nonsense. Here's to the future, [url=https://www.thevenusproject.com/faq/what-is-the-plan/]coming along at a snail's pace[/url]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QorK2X7GsVU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYodgWapmgc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-M_kVZTf50 The …

Science projects can be expensive. Just look at how costly NASA is and even putting NASA aside, other science projects are expensive too such as the Hadron Collider in France/Switzerland. And back to NASA, they're now apparently going to try to create Oxygen on Mars, which will be expensive. Anyway, as expensive as pursuing science projects might be, a great benefit to putting more money into science is that doing so will create more jobs. If we're going to pursue science projects we obviously need people to do the projects and that means more jobs, so pursuing more science projects would mean more employment.