2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins

[Nobby style]

Grinner said: ↑
What kind of job do you get windfarming?

They all work as either engineers, or patrol boat skippers, or skippers that take the engineers back and forth to the farms or deckhands on any of those boats. The guys doing the patrol boats basically get paid for doing feck all, as they just sit anchored in an area or occasionally circling the farm, and they are usually at sea for a month at a time.

I had a Kiwi wind farming engineer in my house a while ago and he was basically saying the above. Loads of engineers and technicians due to huge maintenance requirements and the absolute need for precision in these massive animals. Cables and grids and whatnot as well. And when they´re offshore, multiply this necessity. And as also mentioned above, the mere logistics of it all is another large, constant field of permanent employment.

If you look at the Keystone pipeline, with one of the biggest arguments being the job creation schtick, it´s been shown over and over again that there would be decent job opportunity at the get-go, but once finished it would really only create a handful of permanent jobs.

 

[adexkola]

The establishment are backing Cruz at the moment but he is still massively hated and they will dump him like a hot rock once they are free to vote for whoever they want. The logic of course will be that he would lose to Hillary and would also threaten the GOP's majority in the House and Senate.

Any Republican is running against Obama's third term, and is gonna lose the general election. Maybe they have a greater chance in senatorial/house races if a less polarizing candidate runs.

 

[langster]

I had a Kiwi wind farming engineer in my house a while ago and he was basically saying the above. Loads of engineers and technicians due to huge maintenance requirements and the absolute need for precision in these massive animals. Cables and grids and whatnot as well. And when they´re offshore, multiply this necessity. And as also mentioned above, the mere logistics of it all is another large, constant field of permanent employment.

If you look at the Keystone pipeline, with one of the biggest arguments being the job creation schtick, it´s been shown over and over again that there would be decent job opportunity at the get-go, but once finished it would really only create a handful of permanent jobs.

Yeah, I agree. The amount of jobs needed to keep the sea wind farms operational is unbelievable, and yet obviously very profitable as well. I agree they can be unsightly, but so can oil rigs, and if they are far enough offshore, then you don't really see them anyway. And another huge benefit that is often overlooked by many is that they become huge fish breeding grounds as well. Obviously fishing boats aren't allowed in to fish the areas, and couldn't anyway because of the cables, so the fish just flock to them for safety, and of course, pelagic fish especially love shoaling around structures of any kind, so the areas become an anglers paradise, but anywhere that can't be commercially fished and promotes fish breeding grounds or safe havens can only be a good thing.

I still think that the sea will ultimately provide the majority of power for the world and more money seriously needs to be invested into hydroelectricity. The power of the sea and tides is immense and as soon as it can be captured affordably then the world won't ever have to worry about electrical power ever again. Couple that with more solar panels on houses and in deserts etc, and with the rise of electric cars and transport and I think we could be sorted. Obviously the big oil companies and the politicians in those companies pockets will try to prevent this for as long as possible, but anyone can see that is the best way forward.

 

[unchanged_lineup]

Yeah, I agree. The amount of jobs needed to keep the sea wind farms operational is unbelievable, and yet obviously very profitable as well. I agree they can be unsightly, but so can oil rigs, and if they are far enough offshore, then you don't really see them anyway. And another huge benefit that is often overlooked by many is that they become huge fish breeding grounds as well. Obviously fishing boats aren't allowed in to fish the areas, and couldn't anyway because of the cables, so the fish just flock to them for safety, and of course, pelagic fish especially love shoaling around structures of any kind, so the areas become an anglers paradise, but anywhere that can't be commercially fished and promotes fish breeding grounds or safe havens can only be a good thing.

I still think that the sea will ultimately provide the majority of power for the world and more money seriously needs to be invested into hydroelectricity. The power of the sea and tides is immense and as soon as it can be captured affordably then the world won't ever have to worry about electrical power ever again. Couple that with more solar panels on houses and in deserts etc, and with the rise of electric cars and transport and I think we could be sorted. Obviously the big oil companies and the politicians in those companies pockets will try to prevent this for as long as possible, but anyone can see that is the best way forward.

From what I remember in Engineering, this is really, really difficult. Tidal power successes are few and far between.
http://www.dailypost.co.uk/business/business-news/70m-anglesey-tidal-project-shelved-11078552
http://e360.yale.edu/feature/will_tidal_and_wave_energy_ever_live_up_to_their_potential/2920/

 

[Nobby style]

Yeah, I agree. The amount of jobs needed to keep the sea wind farms operational is unbelievable, and yet obviously very profitable as well. I agree they can be unsightly, but so can oil rigs, and if they are far enough offshore, then you don't really see them anyway. And another huge benefit that is often overlooked by many is that they become huge fish breeding grounds as well. Obviously fishing boats aren't allowed in to fish the areas, and couldn't anyway because of the cables, so the fish just flock to them for safety, and of course, pelagic fish especially love shoaling around structures of any kind, so the areas become an anglers paradise, but anywhere that can't be commercially fished and promotes fish breeding grounds or safe havens can only be a good thing.

I still think that the sea will ultimately provide the majority of power for the world and more money seriously needs to be invested into hydroelectricity. The power of the sea and tides is immense and as soon as it can be captured affordably then the world won't ever have to worry about electrical power ever again. Couple that with more solar panels on houses and in deserts etc, and with the rise of electric cars and transport and I think we could be sorted. Obviously the big oil companies and the politicians in those companies pockets will try to prevent this for as long as possible, but anyone can see that is the best way forward.

Actually, I´d never thought of that before. Brilliant concept for protected breeding grounds.

 

[Nobby style]

From what I remember in Engineering, this is really, really difficult. Tidal power successes are few and far between.
http://www.dailypost.co.uk/business/business-news/70m-anglesey-tidal-project-shelved-11078552
http://e360.yale.edu/feature/will_tidal_and_wave_energy_ever_live_up_to_their_potential/2920/

But it appears the MYGEN project on Scotland´s shores, the largest in the world, has been green lighted.

http://www.theguardian.com/environm...gest-planned-tidal-energy-project-in-scotland

(article from 2014 though, so I don´t know the progress)

 

[langster]

From what I remember in Engineering, this is really, really difficult. Tidal power successes are few and far between.
http://www.dailypost.co.uk/business/business-news/70m-anglesey-tidal-project-shelved-11078552
http://e360.yale.edu/feature/will_tidal_and_wave_energy_ever_live_up_to_their_potential/2920/

Yeah, it is really difficult, but not just difficult it is exceptionally expensive. However, I am absolutely certain that if enough money was invested in the research then it could easily be made far more economical. It has to be, and with advances in technology it definitely will be in the future. Obviously though, as I said, there is a reluctance to investing by many people because it's not in their best interests to do so. I'm sure that there are a few that are due to come online though, one in Scotland and one in Cornwall that I know of.

Actually, I´d never thought of that before. Brilliant concept for protected breeding grounds.

Yeah, all my friends say they often spend a lot of time fishing, especially when they are on cable/guard duty, and they say the amount of fish around the farms is unbelievable. It's quite ironic that a lot of the guard ships are ex trawlers, now being used as guard/conservation ships and the crew spend their time angling and throwing a lot of the fish back.


Edit, sorry, we have drifted well off topic here.

 

[Ole's_toe_poke]

I think Cruz is the favorite now for the nomination.

 

[Ole's_toe_poke]

I think Kasich has a better chance of being the nominee than Trump or Cruz. They will reach the convention with Trump being short on delegates and neither Trump, nor Cruz will win the first round of voting. It will go to a 2nd round and delegates will coalesce around Kasich, mainly based on electability issues. This would probably be a nightmare scenario for the Dems, as Kasich will be a "normal" candidate who will win Ohio.

Giving it to Kasich after the majority has voted for Cruz and Trump isn't going to make the base happy. They simply won't turn out in November.

I think Kasich is hoping to get the VP slot by giving his delegates to Cruz and put Cruz ahead of Trump.

 

[sun_tzu]

I think Cruz is the favorite now for the nomination.

Bookies have Trump at 4/6 odds on for the nomination
Cruz at 7/2 against for the nomination
So if you think he is favourite stick some money on it

 

[Raoul]

Giving it to Kasich after the majority has voted for Cruz and Trump isn't going to make the base happy. They simply won't turn out in November.

I think Kasich is hoping to get the VP slot by giving his delegates to Cruz and put Cruz ahead of Trump.

I'd be shocked if he collaborates with Cruz. Lyin' Ted is broadly hated by most. I actually think Kasich feels he has a clear path to the nomination.

 

[ravi2]

I'd be shocked if he collaborates with Cruz. Lyin' Ted is broadly hated by most. I actually think Kasich feels he has a clear path to the nomination.

I agree, Cruz is almost universally hated. Kasich is the best shot the GOP has at the moment.

 

[senorgregster]

We are guaranteed a meltdown as this stage, aren't we? I can't think of a good outcome for the GOP.

 

[langster]

Isn't there a rule where you can't be eligible for the nomination unless you have won a minimum of 8 states? I'm sure I heard that on CNN or FOX recently. Or is just winning delegates in 8 states?

 

[Ole's_toe_poke]

I agree, Cruz is almost universally hated. Kasich is the best shot the GOP has at the moment.

Kasich is their best shot but the base has overwhelming voted for Trump and Cruz. If either one of those two don't get the nomination then the voters won't turn out. As it is the base hates the establishment. Giving the nomination to Kasich will be portrayed as the establishment subverting the will of the base, especially if Kasich goes into the convention with the least amount of delegates, which looks highly likely.

 

[Ole's_toe_poke]

I actually think Kasich feels he has a clear path to the nomination.

He needs to get real. He hasn't even won as many votes, states, and delegates as Rubio yet. It's a bit ridiculous.

 

[ravi2]

Kasich is their best shot but the base has overwhelming voted for Trump and Cruz. If either one of those two don't get the nomination then the voters won't turn out. As it is the base hates the establishment. Giving the nomination to Kasich will be portrayed as the establishment subverting the will of the base, especially if Kasich goes into the convention with the least amount of delegates, which looks highly likely.

Sucks to be the GOP then because neither Cruz nor Trump can win a national election IMO.

 

[Raoul]

Kasich is their best shot but the base has overwhelming voted for Trump and Cruz. If either one of those two don't get the nomination then the voters won't turn out. As it is the base hates the establishment. Giving the nomination to Kasich will be portrayed as the establishment subverting the will of the base, especially if Kasich goes into the convention with the least amount of delegates, which looks highly likely.

That's the thing - its not about voters any more, its about delegates. They can do as they please and when push comes to shove, they are likely to coalesce around someone who can actually win. Trump's numbers with women are shockingly poor and won't change, so he would get easily trounced by either Hillary or Bernie. Cruz's numbers aren't too far behind, so he would probably lose as well.

 

[Ubik]

Isn't there a rule where you can't be eligible for the nomination unless you have won a minimum of 8 states? I'm sure I heard that on CNN or FOX recently. Or is just winning delegates in 8 states?

Much talk that they're going to change the rules on that before the convention

It will be a minor miracle if they get through this unscathed.

 

[Man of Leisure]

Bush dad wasn't bad but I would say regan was a good president.

So good you can't spell his name?

 

[Red Dreams]

Bush Sr was okay I suppose. Reagan was vacant.

 

[InfiniteBoredom]

I think Kasich has a better chance of being the nominee than Trump or Cruz. They will reach the convention with Trump being short on delegates and neither Trump, nor Cruz will win the first round of voting. It will go to a 2nd round and delegates will coalesce around Kasich, mainly based on electability issues. This would probably be a nightmare scenario for the Dems, as Kasich will be a "normal" candidate who will win Ohio.

If they can screw both Drumpf and Grandpa Munster then may as well bring in the Mittens or Marcobot or Ryan. Kasich is not an inspiring candidate to either the Establishment or Tea Party Nuts.

Edit: Apparently Drumpf can still be screwed even if he gets to 1237

http://www.vox.com/2016/3/23/11280032/brokered-convention-explained

 

[JustAFan]

Imagine the lawsuits that are coming the Republican Parties way. From Trump, from voters groups. Filed state by state fighting over who actually gets to be on the ballots as the Republican nominee. Could actually see courts allowing no presidential nominee on the ballots in some states for the Repubs in the general.

Heck the entire general election could get fecked over and Obama have to stay on until it all gets sorted.

A bit drunk right now, weird ideas keep popping into my head.

 

[Neutral]

 

[langster]

A bit drunk right now, weird ideas keep popping into my head.

Well you will like this one then.

Sarah Palin has just called out Ted Cruz and has said he has been handing out gift baskets and enticing illegal immigrants to cross the Southern border. I shit you not!





She must be smoking crack.

 

[Man of Leisure]

She must be smoking crack.

All I see is Tina Fey.

 

[langster]

All I see is Tina Fey.

The whole speech is a fecking mess, as usual, but the first 20 seconds is hilarious. Especially her little rhyme and when she forgets what she was going to say, and just mumbles about soccer balls and teddy bears and then says nonsensical. Priceless!

And the best ever, she called the crowd! "Trumpsies"

 

[InfiniteBoredom]

All I see is Tina Fey.

All I see is Lisa Ann.

C'mon man, Tina aged way better.

 

[langster]

That's her best ever speech, and that's saying A LOT! Seriously, absolutely not one thing made any sense whatsoever and her facial expressions were all over the shop and her voice was up and down. Nothing but incoherent rambling and gibberish and sayings like Trumpsies and "crashing your fish fry" "The world stopped using steel" What the feck?

Then some of the crowd shaking their heads in confusion at her and some laughing at her, and the tiny uncomfortable ripples of applause, and the silence at her bad joke. Wow! I think she has finally gone full Palin.

 

[njred]

Bush Sr was okay I suppose. Reagan was vacant.

Just watched Reagan / Bush 1980 debate. They sound like Democrats compared to todays Republicans.
Reagan even said about illegal immigration from Mexico " why build walls when we should have workers come in- work- pay taxes- and go back and forth over the border as they please"
Unbelievable difference to Trump.

 

[unchanged_lineup]

Just watched Reagan / Bush 1980 debate. They sound like Democrats compared to todays Republicans.
Reagan even said about illegal immigration from Mexico " why build walls when we should have workers come in- work- pay taxes- and go back and forth over the border as they please"
Unbelievable difference to Trump.

Bush was similarly tactful, here's the two of em

Which one of these guys is Bernie Sanders again?

Edit: Bah, something gone weird here, it starts at 45:27

 

[Red Dreams]

Just watched Reagan / Bush 1980 debate. They sound like Democrats compared to todays Republicans.
Reagan even said about illegal immigration from Mexico " why build walls when we should have workers come in- work- pay taxes- and go back and forth over the border as they please"
Unbelievable difference to Trump.

was just thinking this morning. Are Hillary and Trump the best this country has to offer?

pretty sad

 

[Raoul]

Bush was similarly tactful, here's the two of em

Which one of these guys is Bernie Sanders again?

Edit: Bah, something gone weird here, it starts at 45:27

Back when Republicans actually used debates to talk policy instead of calling each other Lyin Ted, Little Marco, and comparing hand sizes. Neither Reagan nor Bush would see the light of day in today's GOP shit show.

 

[Neutral]

That's the funny thing...Republicans - pundits, talk show/radio cnuts, tea party, establishment all froth at the mouth at the mere mention of Reagan...yet, Reagan would have been hounded out as a soft cock by the GOP today.

 

[InfiniteBoredom]

A simple but effective way to show their hypocrisy would be to show actual clips like that at their primary debates, or ge debates for that matter, like what Fox did to the Donald.

 

[Raoul]

Just watched Reagan / Bush 1980 debate. They sound like Democrats compared to todays Republicans.
Reagan even said about illegal immigration from Mexico " why build walls when we should have workers come in- work- pay taxes- and go back and forth over the border as they please"
Unbelievable difference to Trump.

These two simply aren't Republicans by today's standards.....

 

[Nobby style]

Yeah, but let´s not go too overboard on Ronald Reagan being that different of a Republican. I lived as a young adult under his rein and he was plenty nasty like these Republikan cnuts of today. Race baiter extrodinaire with his mythical welfare queen bollocks, propagated the right wing propaganda machine against lazy minorities who were always after "free stuff" (while giving donkey loads of free stuff to the military industrial complex and corporate cronies), the "greed is good" doctrine and wall street became a different ballgame, he brainwashed America with the trickle down economic bollocks, waged probably a more vicious drug war than any president, was all for tough on crime and super pro police, had an aggressive, militaristic swashbuckling foreign policy, especially in Latin America. Don´t forget the death squads and contras in central america. As pro business, anti taxing, anti union as any Republican today. Appointed James Watt as Sec of the Interior who is probably the most anti environmentalist, anti hippy Sec of Interior ever. The christian right and moral majority monsters flourished under his presidency.

I could go on and on about the nasty, very right wing American forces unleashed during his time. He was a skilled actor who put on a nice, gentlemanly face and public relations for ugly Amerika, and today what was sowed is being reaped massively. Hence the St. Ronnie legend.

 

[Red Dreams]

indeed Nobby.

 

[Nobby style]

Except I forgot . . . creater and sponsor of Osama bin Laden, the Taliban and eventually Al Qaeda. St. Ronnie indeed!

 

[Raoul]

Except I forgot . . . creater and sponsor of Osama bin Laden, the Taliban and eventually Al Qaeda. St. Ronnie indeed!

In fairness, Reagan was just a continuation of decades of prior policy. What you have a problem with is cold war and post cold war US foreign policy, where the battle to avoid the spread of Communism resulted in interventionism and unwitting (and sometimes not unwitting) support for militants, some of which eventually metastasized into what are current day Jihadis.