I never compared ignoring anything to murder. I said it was the next logical step. Ignoring people you disagree with will not make them magically go away and certainly will not change their minds. If anything, it will make them think you have no valid argument and prove them right in their minds. So what are you left with? Seek a better education. You're reading comprehension is pathetic.

Believe it or not, most people behave differently depending on how they're dressed. Since the senate is supposed to be the "higher" branch of congress, you'd expect a little more decorum. Civility is sorely lacking in congress these days. How does allowing senators to dress like slobs help in any way? Additionally, the dress code is still in place for everyone else who comes onto the floor of the senate.

The senate was never supposed to be a body elected by the people. They were supposed to be put in office by the elected officials of each state. And that's how it worked until FDR, if I recall correctly.

Sure, the farms are owned by businessmen. But they don't live there for the most part. The people who work for them are still living there running the farms and doing all the work. But yes, they are all interdependent on each other. Thank you for reiterating my point.

While I agree, trump is certainly a populist, Obama was just as much so. He was just more polished. Neither one of them had the experience or skills necessary to do the job when they were elected originally.

Hell the wingnuts on both sides of the spectrum are populists by definition. The right wingnuts claim they're going to stand up against the elites and big government. The left wingnuts claim they're going to stand up against the corporations and the rich. Meanwhile they both take campaign money from the very groups they claim to be against. It's just awesome.

The Mueller report showed that there was Russian interference in the 2016 election. It also showed there was a lot of obstruction in the investigation as well as meetings with Trump's people with Russians. What it didn't show was actual collusion.

Three dozen indictments and 7 guilty pleas/convictions came out of it. As far as I know all of Trumps people were charged with financial fraud, witness tampering, lying, None of it is/was good. But there was no conclusive proof that he actually colluded with Russia.

Look, I personally can't stand the guy, but this shit has gotten ridiculous. His first impeachment was for doing the exact same thing that Biden did as vice president. Biden even proudly admitted to it. Alan Dershowitz, who was Al Gore's attorney for the 2000 election said he did the exact same thing in Florida as Trump did with Georgia. Al Gores own attorney said charging Trump with a crime for election interference for 2020 is insane. You want to talk about collusion? Look at Ted Kennedy's correspondence with Andropov from the 1984 election. Trump's done nothing that hasn't been done by someone else prior to him. He's just really unlikable.

Trump is an ass. But dealing with him differently than previous politicians is not going to end well. At this point I'm guessing every president going forward will be facing impeachment.They're probably going to be charged with all kinds of shit after they leave office. We can't get a qualified person to run now. What's it going to be like in 5 years? This is also going to embolden Trumps base as they're seeing it all as political persecution.

The senate has now suspended the dress code. The house should officially change it's name to the "House of Representin" We keep getting closer to Idiocracy every year.

Not at all. But by necessity farm land will have a much lower population density. Do you feel those people who are feeding the majority should have less say? They are as important as any other group, if not more so. What's good for the farmers isn't the same thing that is good for miners, or manufacturers, or bankers. But you have a much denser population of bankers and business people in an area than farmers.

If you end up having the white collar businessmen making all of the decisions you're going to have a revolt among the farmers, a succession, or maybe just a refusal to send food to the cities. How well would that work out?

You seem to not understand the definition of tyranny of the minority. This is a small group of people having absolute say over the majority. The electoral college does not grant absolute authority of the country to a select few. What it does is try to balance things out between the minority and the majority with regards to who gets into the executive branch. .

The electoral college is supposed to protect against the majority having total say over who the president is. Unfortunately the constitutional rights have been slowly eroded away over time.

That was one reason.

Additionally, the founders didn't want a populist president being able to appeal to the public and gain too much power. FDR was a good example of this. He's also the reason why we have a 2 term limit for the executive branch. Apparently a lot of folks agreed with this thought 150 years later.

There was also a lot of fear of a popular vote trampling over less represented people. I suppose we call them fly over country these days. What's good for the coasts is not always good for the mid west and plane states.

I'm not saying its perfect, I don't think anyone has ever said it was. But it's better than anything else I've seen suggested. The US is not a democracy. It's a representative democratic republic. What's interesting is we have the technology to make a true democracy now if we wanted to. That wasn't possible 250 years ago. Or even 50 years ago. But doing so runs the risk of alienating a large chunk of the states.

The top 15 most populated states have nearly 70% of the population. But there's only an overlap of 6 states when it comes to agricultural production. Mineral production is similar. around a 1/3 of the largest mining states are in the most populous. If you go straight popular vote, then you end up with very few states making decisions for all of them. That's called tyranny of the majority and will lead to problems.

No, he figured out how the election system worked better than career politicians understood it. There is no such thing as "the popular vote" in the US political system with regards to the president, and for a damn good cause. The electoral college is there for a reason. If you don't understand how it works and why it's there, educate yourself.

Ah, I see. You're an idiot. How many times and for how long as this bullshit been proven to be a total fabrication? You can't even get your facts straight on something as simple as what turned out to be a hoax and expect anyone to believe you on a matter as complicated as anthropomorphic global climate change. Please shut up. You're making it more difficult to fix the problem than it already is.

Trump was many things. A lot of them not good. But there was no collusion with Russia.

Do you know how fucking stupid and childish this sounds? Why don't you take that to the next step and just kill anyone who disagrees with you? It's what the Catholic church did for centuries when people disagreed with their "science". Mao Zedong, Hideki Tojo, Pol Pot, and dozens, if not hundreds of others went this route as well.

If your argument is so damn weak that your response is to stick your fingers in your ears and yell "LA LA LA, I'm not listening!" maybe you need to grow up.

I'm assume you are trolling, but the op did not say humans didn't exist 5K to 10K years ago. They said humans didn't cause the change. The human population estimates are 1 million to 10 million total 10K years ago and 5 million to 20 million 5K years ago. Since the industrial revolution didn't start until 300-ish years ago and oil and coal weren't used at all by humans until 2500 years ago how did we cause the melting? If the planet is so fragile that a handful of stone age humans melted the sea ice to the same extent modern humans have, then fuck it. I'm gonna start using coal powered air conditioning and leave my windows and door open all summer.

We'd be better off voting your booster shots in as president and your masks as VP over who the democrats and republicans are putting forth.

Yeah, that happens when you cut all domestic oil. Look, I'm all for electric cars and nuclear, wind and solar. But you don't fuck the economy, well, just because.

Like it or not, there's a specific amount of oil that is going to be needed each year. That amount is coming out of the ground no matter what. It can come out of countries who support terrorism, have extremely lax pollution laws, or just be dirty and dangerous as hell to get. But it will be pumped out of the ground.

So you can pump it from easy sources that are monitored well in the US and use pipelines. Or you can force it to come from more risky areas and ship it by train/tanker ships. Which also cost more as well and are more likely to have accidents. It also gives more control over the oil production to unfriendly folks. The US is going to screw itself as it is if the R5 becomes the currency of choice for oil pricing.

The other thing no one seems to want to discuss is even if all gas and diesel powered cars and trucks were taken off the road tomorrow, we well need oil. About 10% of the average gasoline powered car is plastic by weight. It's higher on an electric car. Plastic is made from? You guessed it, oil. 8 to 10% of all oil pumped out of the ground goes toward plastic production. The amount needed will go up as electric cars gain market share.

Furthermore, just about every moving mechanical thing on the planet need some form of lubrication. There's also asphalt. currently a barrel of crude oil is processed 45% gasoline, 29% diesel, 10% plastic, 9% jet fuel, 3% asphalt, 1% lubricants. The rest is used for lipsticks, aspirin, and other miscellaneous stuff.

Even if we get rid of the gasoline vehicles tomorrow, you can't use the 45% of oil that is refined into gasoline into something else. So the same amount of crude oil is still needed. Probably more for the increased need for plastic in electric cars. Likely an increase in Diesel as well because of all the mining needed for rare earths in batteries. More asphalt will be needed as roads wear more due to the heavier weight of electric cars. The cost of everything made from oil will have to go up as the refineries will be losing 45% of their profit product as well.

Even more fun, electric cars put off a lot more particulate matter from tire wear than gasoline cars. The particulate matter size given off from tires has been liked to increased cardiac disease.

It's a multifaceted issue and really needs a lot more thought than the average person wants to put into it, let alone a politician or anyone with an agenda. I don't know what the answer is, but a lot more thought needs to be put into it than "oil bad, the sooner we stop it the better"

CFC's were much easier to point to and say, yep this is the problem. But China is/was still using them at least as recent as 4 years ago.

There's more than global warming causing the heat waves we've been seeing this year. Both NASA and the ESA have stated that the underwater volcanic eruption near Tonga in 2022 blasted a bunch of water into the atmosphere and is a big contributor.

The sun is also contributing more than usual. While 2024/2025 was predicted to be the high, some believe that it may be this year.

While Iraq did not have an active chemical weapons program, in 2014 The New York Times published that Iraq did, in fact, still have some chemical weapons left over from pre-1991 when they they had an active program.

The problem was the west, including the USA and European nations had aided Iraq with this program. So it was a bit embarrassing to publicly talk about it. GWB even chose to not bring it up while he was still in office.

Iraq had a habit of mislabeling munitions to hide this stuff in plain sight. They also hid it all over. Iraq is a big place. Who knows what is still hidden there. I'm not saying there was justification to invade Iraq over this. But to say there were no WMD's there is incorrect. It's also very likely that we didn't find all of what was there before withdrawing.

You do realize that situations change, right? In the case of putting the Shah back in power, the people never asked for it. In fact, it was the opposite. But in the case of the Arab Spring, they were asking for US intervention.

Because I don't think the US is bad. On the contrary, I think it's a fantastic country. Unlike many who claim it's awful, I've been outside of the US enough to understand just how great it actually is. Do I think it's perfect? No.

You may want to read you last sentence out loud while looking in a mirror.

The US also did nothing to help the Iranian people when they were asking for the US to help during the Arab spring.Basically it's been one eff up after another in regards to Iran ever since the UK asked Eisenhower to overthrow their elections.

The JCPoA was a joke as well.