Jump to content
Mayhem Requiem
politics

American presidential candidates stances on science issues


PartySick

Featured Posts

LebaneseDude
Just now, PartySick said:

Mm hmm. It just ensures me more that he's the only GOP candidate that I'd be at least ok with winning. Though he doesn't have much chance...

Someone with an "anyone but Trump" profile picture on Facebook said this:

"Here is a breakdown of what the future holds. Hillary will claim the nomination thanks to the undemocratic use of superdelegates. Kasich will win the Republican nomination in the GOP convention in July because the party will recognize him as the only chance to win the election. Kasich will win the election."

So I guess Kasich's peeps should cross their fingers? :stalkga:

Again with the super-delegates as if she doesn't have the popular vote and the swing states mostly on lock :deadbanana: 

Well Kasich is currently the Republicans' best chance at a somewhat moderate Republican who doesn't want to impose theocracy (Cruz) or an idiocracy (Trump) so if a Republican does win because Berniebots are too busy sending a message then he's the best option really.

Edited just now by LebaneseDude.
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 36
  • Created
  • Last Reply
LebaneseDude
1 minute ago, MJHolland said:

He's gonna be the nom no doubt.

Likely.

Which kinda scares me really :emma:

Edited just now by LebaneseDude.
Link to post
Share on other sites

MJHolland
Just now, LebaneseDude said:

Likely.

Which kinda scares me really :emma:

He'd make a great president I think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

LebaneseDude
Just now, MJHolland said:

He'd make a great president I think.

He's not as moderate as he presents himself but he isn't a raving lunatic either so if a Republican wins I'd rather it be him than anyone else.

Edited just now by LebaneseDude.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Morphine Prince
3 minutes ago, MJHolland said:

It's going to an open convention and he is the only candidate on the Republican side that can beat Hillary in the general in any poll released in the last few months. He's gonna be the nom no doubt.

He is the only sane candidate. It's pathetic that Republican voters are just casting him out. 

He is the only serious candidate who can compete against Clinton in November. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

MJHolland
14 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

He's not as moderate as he presents himself but he isn't a raving lunatic either so if a Republican wins I'd rather it be him than anyone else.

He's far more moderate than Trump, Crus, Sanders, and Clinton now that Sanders is pulling her left.

He is THE choice for moderate voters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

LebaneseDude
1 minute ago, MJHolland said:

He's far more moderate than Trump, Crus, Sanders, and Clinton now that Sanders is pulling her left.

He is THE choice for moderate voters.

Arguable, but that depends on the moderate. The same applies to Hillary.

He still has positions on social, economic, and political issues that lean too Republican for many moderates' tastes.

Edited just now by LebaneseDude.
Link to post
Share on other sites

MJHolland
10 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

Arguable, but that depends on the moderate. The same applies to Hillary.

He still has positions on social, economic, and political issues that lean too Republican for many moderates' tastes.

Most moderates lean conservative. So by definition a moderate republican is the perfect sampling of "moderates" in America.

Link to post
Share on other sites

LebaneseDude
5 minutes ago, MJHolland said:

Most moderates lean conservative

True, but are all conservatives content with the Republican party? Many are finding themselves looking to Hillary.

Edited just now by LebaneseDude.
Link to post
Share on other sites

MJHolland
15 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

True, but are all conservatives content with the Republican party? Many are finding themselves looking to Hillary.

I mean you're logic is right with the high amount of frustration amongst Republicans, but there is absolutely no empirical evidence that Hillary is attracting more people to the party. In fact she's probably pushing far more people out. 1 in every 4 Sanders supporters refuse to back Hillary when she becomes the nominee. ( http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-dem-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/04/sanders-supporters-not-vote-clinton-221642 )

Republicans tend to think who they vote for through, so I doubt many (or any) will vote for Hillary.

Link to post
Share on other sites

LebaneseDude
3 minutes ago, MJHolland said:

I mean you're logic is right with the high amount of frustration amongst Republicans, but there is absolutely no empirical evidence that Hillary is attracting more people to the party. In fact she's probably pushing far more people out. 1 in every 4 Sanders supporters refuse to back Hillary when she becomes the nominee. ( http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-dem-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/04/sanders-supporters-not-vote-clinton-221642 )

Republicans tend to think who they vote for through, so I doubt many (or any) will vote for Hillary.

Well that's the Democrat side, not the Republican

Also a lot of it is bluster. I wouldn't trust polls like that right now. Many Clinton supporters said they would not vote for Obama.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/06/exit-polls-half-of-clintons-supporters-wont-back-obama/

A lot said they would vote for McCain

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/26/poll-democrats-might-vote-mccain-if-their-candidate-isnt-the-nominee/

Things worked out well, and McCain was a strong opponent.

If Bernie loses (and doesn't run independent), he'll probably endorse Hillary and that'll shift a lot of that dissent.

Edited just now by LebaneseDude.
Link to post
Share on other sites

En_Sabah_Nur

 This makes me STAN for Hillary even more…  Because I'm a huge science guy myself as well, and I love NASA to death! Over the years I have been very saddened by the negative outlook the democrats have taken towards science & NASA because of the cost.  They have started to believe the money can be better spent else where, or by helping the poor. Good luck telling that to the asteroid that will hit us some day in the future, and we won't even know it is coming precisely because of unfortunate thinking like that.  Smh   SHAME that we have to catch rides now with the Russians to get into space currently.  Oh how the mighty have fallen!  Smh

Egypt. W
Link to post
Share on other sites

LebaneseDude
3 minutes ago, En_Sabah_Nur said:

 This makes me STAN for Hillary even more…  Because I'm a huge science guy myself as well, and I love NASA to death! Over the years I have been very saddened by the negative outlook the democrats have taken towards science & NASA because of the cost.  They have started to believe the money can be better spent else where, or by helping the poor. Good luck telling that to the asteroid that will hit us some day in the future, and we won't even know it is coming precisely because of unfortunate thinking like that.  Smh   SHAME that we have to catch rides now with the Russians to get into space currently.  Oh how the mighty have fallen!  Smh

You shake your head a lot :poot:

Edited just now by LebaneseDude.
Link to post
Share on other sites

PartySick
Just now, En_Sabah_Nur said:

 This makes me STAN for Hillary even more…  Because I'm a huge science guy myself as well, and I love NASA to death! Over the years I have been very saddened by the negative outlook the democrats have taken towards science & NASA because of the cost.  They have started to believe the money can be better spent else where, or by helping the poor. Good luck telling that to the asteroid that will hit us some day in the future, and we won't even know it is coming precisely because of unfortunate thinking like that.  Smh   SHAME that we have to catch rides now with the Russians to get into space currently.  Oh how the mighty have fallen!  Smh

To be fair, at our current level of technology, if something is already an NEO then we don't have many defenses against it :ohno: but if it's far away, we have ways of changing its trajectory. I agree, though. NASA's valuable for so many reasons, even ones that aren't directly related to space. We have them to thank for things like prosthetic legs, smart phone cameras, CAT scans, and cordless tools. It's imperative that science is appreciated and properly funded :neyde:

Whimsical bitch
Link to post
Share on other sites

En_Sabah_Nur
21 minutes ago, PartySick said:

To be fair, at our current level of technology, if something is already an NEO then we don't have many defenses against it :ohno: but if it's far away, we have ways of changing its trajectory. I agree, though. NASA's valuable for so many reasons, even ones that aren't directly related to space. We have them to thank for things like prosthetic legs, smart phone cameras, CAT scans, and cordless tools. It's imperative that science is appreciated and properly funded :neyde:

Good point, but without funding for NASA...  We wouldn't even be able to stop the trajectory of an incoming asteroid from far away neither.  :smh:

Egypt. W
Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...