2020 Presidential Election -- Biden v Trump: Sleepy Joe vs Dopey Don [Results begin on page 409]

[Aqua Buddha 14489]

27 minutes ago, Snake Diggity said:

There is no way that oil comment was a 8-10% swing comment in PA.  Stupid to even suggest it.  It may have been a 2% swing in Texas, which could be the difference in that state.  But very unlikely it affects the outcome in PA.

None of the oil people were voting Biden anyway.  They were always driving to the polls in their F-150 Raptors while wearing their Oakley sunglass to vote Trump.

[Huckleberry 32685]

4 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

I used to like Nate Silver but he never commits to anything.  Biden could be up 80-20 and he's like "Well, there is still a chance so we just don't know."

That's exactly what 80/20 means. Assuming you're talking about election victory probability. 

Edited October 23, 2020 by Huckleberry

[DigDug 1649]

6 minutes ago, 'stache said:

If Biden wins Texas it will just give them fodder to claim election fraud. It's been a red state so long they'll claim that Biden could only win the state by fraud. They'll cry from every rooftop in the country until January 20 when the military will kick that fat fuck out of the oval office if required.

I don’t see any way he wins here, and I don’t think it will be that close.  We all hope I’m wrong.

People can try to downplay the oil comment, but it is going to make a huuge difference.  It may be the spark as to why he loses the entire election.  He’s getting hammered everywhere on it.

I’m a little pissed.  All he had to do was run out the clock and he tripped on his own feet and fumbled the damn ball.

[Bateshorn 9882]

Eh, I don't read him being non committal there: He's right.  There's just enough swing in the polls that Biden is the strong, but not prohibitive favorite to win.  Gillum had a solid lead over Desantis and lost by 20-30K votes.  The polling is good, but they rely a lot more on modeling these days, so if the models are off or everyone has been herding, then you get an upset/unexpected result.  

I get it, the maffs are hard:  I'm a liberal arts major, but there is a path to victory for Trump and it needs to be acknowledged. It's a very difficult unlikely path, given the time & distance left in the race, but it's there.

Edited October 23, 2020 by Bateshorn

[Pato del Muerto 52322]

1 minute ago, DigDug said:

I don’t see any way he wins here, and I don’t think it will be that close.  We all hope I’m wrong.

People can try to downplay the oil comment, but it is going to make a huuge difference.  It may be the spark as to why he loses the entire election.  He’s getting hammered everywhere on it.

I’m a little pissed.  All he had to do was run out the clock and he tripped on his own feet and fumbled the damn ball.

Holy shit calm down

[Huckleberry 32685]

2 minutes ago, DigDug said:

I don’t see any way he wins here, and I don’t think it will be that close.  We all hope I’m wrong.

People can try to downplay the oil comment, but it is going to make a huuge difference.  It may be the spark as to why he loses the entire election.  He’s getting hammered everywhere on it.

I’m a little pissed.  All he had to do was run out the clock and he tripped on his own feet and fumbled the damn ball.

lulz

That comment might make a 0.5% difference in Texas. 

[Bateshorn 9882]

Dude, the polling consistently shows most PA voters are OPPOSED to fracking.  Just like most American's believe in climate change.

It's a GOP echo chamber thing. Literally only Fox News is carrying it.  CNBC, CNN, and Bloomberg don't even have on their front page. 

Edited October 23, 2020 by Bateshorn

[cactusflinthead 27593]

3 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

I used to like Nate Silver but he never commits to anything.  Biden could be up 80-20 and he's like "Well, there is still a chance so we just don't know."

I don't know that I ever really liked him, but it's data. He's not the kind to dismiss the chances no matter how slim. He's not immune to criticism either. G. Elliott got himself blocked in a nerd fight over modeling or something math. 

The 2 Nates and Harry, G. and who else? Bitecofer. Wasserman. She and G are probably the most certain of their opinions on the chances. 

[Saint Tacky 1609]

3 minutes ago, DigDug said:

I don’t see any way he wins here, and I don’t think it will be that close.  We all hope I’m wrong.

People can try to downplay the oil comment, but it is going to make a huuge difference.  It may be the spark as to why he loses the entire election.  He’s getting hammered everywhere on it.

I’m a little pissed.  All he had to do was run out the clock and he tripped on his own feet and fumbled the damn ball.

Meh. As mentioned above. The people that find the statement so objectionable were not going to vote for Biden anyway. It may actually motivate more voters that were looking for a stronger message from Biden on fossil fuels. 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

8 minutes ago, Saint Tacky said:

Meh. As mentioned above. The people that find the statement so objectionable were not going to vote for Biden anyway. It may actually motivate more voters that were looking for a stronger message from Biden on fossil fuels. 

Yeah, zero additional potential voters were turned off by that Biden comment.  Trumpers are going to show up at the polls.  Everyone who is offended by that comment was already going to show up and vote Trump.  However, that comment may have motivated a few disenchanted Bernie followers to actually show up and vote.  And Biden needs that.  He should actually pivot all the way left on climate change.  It will motivate more voters while not alienating the suburban housewife "undecideds."

People forget who is actually undecided in this thing.  They also forget that turning out the base in force is way more important than reaching the undecideds.  Trump knows this though.  Its why he caters to his base, rarely even gives a single soundbite where he tries to cater to the "undecideds" and always viciously attacks the "left."  His base will turnout like it always does.

Sure, Biden didn't "win" the debate because some guy that has spent the last 4 years flying a MAGA flag on his truck around the oilfield isn't going to vote for Biden.

Edited October 23, 2020 by FondrenRoad

[Horn Dog 9644]

7 minutes ago, Saint Tacky said:

Meh. As mentioned above. The people that find the statement so objectionable were not going to vote for Biden anyway. It may actually motivate more voters that were looking for a stronger message from Biden on fossil fuels. 

Yup.  I was listing the NY The  Daily on way to work.  The interviewee made this point.   Biden has a fragile left coalition and taking a stronger stance on green issues may hurt with some people who were never gonna vote for him anyway, but it will also help solidify and motivate those on the left who were luke warm to vote for him.

[jimmyjazz 45513]

23 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

lulz

That comment might make a 0.5% difference in Texas. 

40% of Texas voters have already cast their ballots as well.  It's a nothingberder.

[NIUHuskies 504]

18 hours ago, Bookman said:

I live in Shavano Park and I've seen an awful lot of Biden signs.

Humbleragging?

[TexEx15 17444]

29 minutes ago, DigDug said:

I don’t see any way he wins here, and I don’t think it will be that close.  We all hope I’m wrong.

People can try to downplay the oil comment, but it is going to make a huuge difference.  It may be the spark as to why he loses the entire election.  He’s getting hammered everywhere on it.

I’m a little pissed.  All he had to do was run out the clock and he tripped on his own feet and fumbled the damn ball.

So trump can literally fuck up non-stop for 4 years including a unimaginably poor response to the pandemic yet its Biden with one small misspeak at the finish line, one that is being taken completely out of context by the way, that has created a spark that may lead to his downfall.  Sure.

[JimmyJames 12271]

Regarding the supposedly important oil “gaffe” it’s almost like some of you think this is late 70s, early 80s Texas back when Matthew McConaughey was working on an oil rig and getting the AIDS in Dallas (I know there aren’t oil rigs in Dallas but that’s what the movie portrayed) and practically the whole state was completely dependent on the oil industry.

The only people that remark might have affected, in Texas or anywhere else, were already voting for trump anyway. It’s a non issue. 

[JimmyJames 12271]

1 minute ago, NIUHuskies said:

Humbleragging?

Sometimes I visit my second house in river oaks and I’ve seen a lot of Biden signs. Haven’t been to my condo in highland park lately though, so can’t comment there. 

['stache 21743]

2 minutes ago, TexEx15 said:

So trump can literally fuck up non-stop for 4 years including a unimaginably poor response to the pandemic yet its Biden with one small misspeak at the finish line, one that is being taken completely out of context by the way, that has created a spark that may lead to his downfall.  Sure.

I mean, I can agree that it's not a big problem for Biden, but you know goddamned well that the standards are different for republicans and democrats, and especially so for Trump. He only interrupted joe and the moderator 25 or 30 times last night, so thats a big win for trump based on the low as hell standard he has set up for himself. And on substance, trump continues to lie about literally everything, and nobody cares. But taking a strong position on oil and Joe is done? As Joe would say "give me a break."

Edited October 23, 2020 by 'stache

[Bateshorn 9882]

33 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

I don't know that I ever really liked him, but it's data. He's not the kind to dismiss the chances no matter how slim. He's not immune to criticism either. G. Elliott got himself blocked in a nerd fight over modeling or something math. 

The 2 Nates and Harry, G. and who else? Bitecofer. Wasserman. She and G are probably the most certain of their opinions on the chances. 

I like Nathan Gonzales alot, but he's not a data guy, just one of the better horse race analysts along with Charlie Cook.

[ndawg 1242]

5 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

Sometimes I visit my second house in river oaks and I’ve seen a lot of Biden signs. Haven’t been to my condo in highland park lately though, so can’t comment there. 

Last week when I landed my helicopter in the Dominion to play a few rounds of golf with George Strait and David Robinson, I noticed a lot of Biden signs littering the relatively (to me, at least) puny chattel houses strewn about the landscape.

[Brisketexan 104465]

Eh, I don't read him being non committal there: He's right.  There's just enough swing in the polls that Biden is the strong, but not prohibitive favorite to win.  Gillum had a solid lead over Desantis and lost by 20-30K votes.  The polling is good, but they rely a lot more on modeling these days, so if the models are off or everyone has been herding, then you get an upset/unexpected result.  
I get it, the maffs are hard:  I'm a liberal arts major, but there is a path to victory for Trump and it needs to be acknowledged. It's a very difficult unlikely path, given the time & distance left in the race, but it's there.

Gosh, dude....your sounding Brisket-y. Welcome aboard.

So trump can literally fuck up non-stop for 4 years including a unimaginably poor response to the pandemic yet its Biden with one small misspeak at the finish line, one that is being taken completely out of context by the way, that has created a spark that may lead to his downfall.  Sure.

You’re discounting how stupid and fragile our democracy is. You shouldn’t do that.

[DigDug 1649]

7 minutes ago, TexEx15 said:

So trump can literally fuck up non-stop for 4 years including a unimaginably poor response to the pandemic yet its Biden with one small misspeak at the finish line, one that is being taken completely out of context by the way, that has created a spark that may lead to his downfall.  Sure.

Absolutely.  Trumpians and Qers and the like are a hard core cult.  And their family members, friends and co-workers are subject to the trappings and influence of the cult.   

[Fudge Nuggets 19118]

3 hours ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Yeah, the fact that the oil comment is drawing more attention than “we treat the kids real nice after we rip them from their parents” is depressing as hell.

It's only drawing more attention on this message board.  Most of America thinks we need to transition off oil at some point... hell, at some point we won't have a choice.

[SydneyCarton 47809]

1 minute ago, DigDug said:

Absolutely.  Trumpians and Qers and the like are a hard core cult.  And their family members, friends and co-workers are subject to the trappings and influence of the cult.   

So you’re suggesting Biden’s oils comment lost him the a QAnon and Trump vote? No fucking shit?

NicCageDontSay.gif. Fucking stupid 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

13 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I mean, I can agree that it's not a big problem for Biden, but you know goddamned well that the standards are different for republicans and democrats, and especially so for Trump. He only interrupted joe and the moderator 25 or 30 times last night, so thats a big win for trump based on the low as hell standard he has set up for himself. And on substance, trump continues to lie about literally everything, and nobody cares. But taking a strong position on oil and Joe is done? As Joe would say "give me a break."

The double standard has become somewhat infuriating.  I have no doubt that Trump could have said the n word yesterday with almost no voter repercussions.  But Trump only has his base.  He is working to turn them out.  If Biden, or Dems in general, have an issue, its that they have no base.  Biden now represents a variety of disparate interests that includes but isn't limited to Bernie fans, socialists, libertarians, environmentalists, people who care about the environment but not at the expense of the economy, urban elites, urban poor, rural elites, rural non-white poor, non-evangelical Christians, atheists, and never-Trump Republicans.  Trump can never disappoint his base.  But Biden is always going to disappoint someone that is leaning towards voting for him.

Bernie is more comparable to Trump in that he can also say whatever he wants without losing his core support.  His issue is that his base is smaller than Trump's, but Bernie also has ideals so when he says what he wants to say, there's zero chance that it is going to be something offensive.  

[DigDug 1649]

9 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

So you’re suggesting Biden’s oils comment lost him the a QAnon and Trump vote? No fucking shit?

NicCageDontSay.gif. Fucking stupid 

No you no reading dumbass.  Believe it or not there are still a large group of people out there who haven’t voted and can be swayed.  That type of statement is exactly the message the Trumpers will spread and hammer and convince those who don’t pay attention and were open to voting for either candidate.

[Wulaw Horn 18963]

2 hours ago, Lobo said:

There were 250,000+ votes in Michigan for people not named Clinton or Trump in 2016.  ~5.25%  

I don't think most of those would have gone for a Democrat.  I think most of those would have for a Republican not named Trump.  

Same in Wisconsin or Pennsylvania.  If turnout remains same, or higher.....I think a lot those 250k votes break for Biden this time around...away from Trump.  

Yeah- I think this is really accurate both ways.  I voted for McMuffin (and still maintain to this day that he had a non-zero chance of winning the election), but I think now anyone going 3rd party is a never persuadable, but anyone who moves off of third party I'd have to think is more likely to move to Biden. 

[usmc0331horn 934]

1 hour ago, Aqua Buddha said:

I used to like Nate Silver but he never commits to anything.  Biden could be up 80-20 and he's like "Well, there is still a chance so we just don't know."

He works in probabilities like many stats/data guys. 

[Guest Lobo]

60% of the time, Nate Silver is right every time.  

[TexEx15 17444]

Edit - the rare dp separated by time and space.

Edited October 23, 2020 by TexEx15

[G650 13990]

1 hour ago, cactusflinthead said:

I don't know that I ever really liked him, but it's data. He's not the kind to dismiss the chances no matter how slim. He's not immune to criticism either. G. Elliott got himself blocked in a nerd fight over modeling or something math. 

The 2 Nates and Harry, G. and who else? Bitecofer. Wasserman. She and G are probably the most certain of their opinions on the chances. 

Don't disgrace the rest of the nerds by putting Bitecofer in there.

[G650 13990]

29 minutes ago, DigDug said:

 Believe it or not there are still a large group of people out there who haven’t voted and can be swayed.

Yeah, I just don't think that is the case.

[6th Street 6340]

Nobody cares about oil - energy is 2% of the S&P500. In contrast Apple is 6.5% and and Microsoft 5.7%.

[South Austin 52037]

9 minutes ago, TexEx15 said:

So trump can literally fuck up non-stop for 4 years including a unimaginably poor response to the pandemic yet its Biden with one small misspeak at the finish line, one that is being taken completely out of context by the way, that has created a spark that may lead to his downfall.  Sure.

Ain't that America, somethin' to see, baby.

[Jhawk 1075]

7 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

Nobody cares about oil - energy is 2% of the S&P500. In contrast Apple is 6.5% and and Microsoft 5.7%.

But it’s 90% of daily life. Everything. EVERYTHING. Has some dependency on oil. Like it or hate it, you can’t be anti-oil right now and not be hypocritical to some degree. If you find someone that is anti-oil and they give you the time to explain that the entire country’s infrastructure is built around the industry then it is an absolute truth that it would take 100 years to leave fossil fuels.  Even the loom that weaves hemp sweaters is run through the oil industry. 
 

I’m not saying fossil fuels are going to be around forever. I think there is tremendous opportunity in renewables. But if 2035 is the goal, or even 2050, to be off the anadarko tit then that goal is 100% unattainable. We are just too dependent on it. All that being said, you eat an elephant one bite at a time. It would be interesting to see an actual economic business plan to move away from fossil fuels. I think it can be done with the right plan. This coming from a guy who made it in styrofoam manufacturing. 

Edited October 23, 2020 by Jhawk

[FondrenRoad 4378]

25 minutes ago, DigDug said:

No you no reading dumbass.  Believe it or not there are still a large group of people out there who haven’t voted and can be swayed.  That type of statement is exactly the message the Trumpers will spread and hammer and convince those who don’t pay attention and were open to voting for either candidate.

In order for this to be accurate, this large group of people would have to be siloed in a place where they can only see Trump's negative messaging about a Biden gaffe, while they are unable to see any of the negative messaging regarding Trump's 100s of daily gaffes.  So they only watch Fox News, I guess.  If that's the case, they were always voting for Trump anyway.

I know you think these people exist.  Like me, you probably thought some of your family members belong to that group.  They don't.  These are people that were always voting for Trump. When they tell you "both choices suck," or "Trump may be bad, but look at Hunter Biden," or "I can't vote for someone that is pro-choice," or "all lives matter," or "Obama was just as bad," or "Democrats are anti-Christian," they are looking for a way to justify their Trump vote to you, and perhaps to themselves.  Ultimately, they may even tell you they didn't vote or that they voted for Biden, but they'll be lying.  They are voting for Trump because they want to maintain white Christian hegemony.  Some are actively xenophobic in that desire, but most are passively afraid that minority ethnicities and religions will treat white people and Christians just as shittily as white people and Christians treated them.  So they fight against equality.  Trump only gives them mental anguish because he is so openly vile.  What they really desire is someone who maintains the hegemony somewhat quietly and who isn't as disgusting as Trump.

[cactusflinthead 27593]

9 minutes ago, G650 said:

Don't disgrace the rest of the nerds by putting Bitecofer in there.

She draws a lot of fire. But, again more data. She is all in for the negative partisanship angle and that's definitely in play.

[DigDug 1649]

 

[Texaspython 231]

If this is his only gaffe then he’s run a hell of a campaign.

[Beau Vine 53964]

3 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:

That’s where Texas would be helpful. He will win without Texas. Hopefully he’s in the 330 range without Texas. But would that be enough for the gop to admit defeat without involving the judiciary?

[burntorangebongos 10681]

SIAP. Tried to wade thru past pages and gave up. I wish this was in person and not mail-in numbers because the republicans might find a way to throw them out. Holy Moly, that is a big number of dems.

Edited October 23, 2020 by burntorangebongos
fuck auto correct

[6th Street 6340]

13 minutes ago, Jhawk said:

But it’s 90% of daily life. Everything. EVERYTHING. Has some dependency on oil. Like it or hate it, you can’t be anti-oil right now and not be hypocritical to some degree. If you find someone that is anti-oil and they give you the time to explain that the entire country’s infrastructure is built around the industry then it is an absolute truth that it would take 100 years to leave fossil fuels.  Even the loom that weaves hemp sweaters is run through the oil industry. 
 

I’m not saying fossil fuels are going to be around forever. I think there is tremendous opportunity in renewables. But if 2035 is the goal, or even 2050, to be off the anadarko tit then that goal is 100% unattainable. We are just too dependent on it. All that being said, you eat an elephant one bite at a time. It would be interesting to see an actual economic business plan to move away from fossil fuels. I think it can be done with the right plan. This coming from a guy who made it in styrofoam manufacturing. 

Oil is a declining industry, both in terms of usage and efficiency. This is an opportunity for the US to lead the way in terms of funding storage (battery tech), PV solar efficiency, etc to help bring the cost down the curve. We can do that or sit back and watch Germany, China, and Korea pass is by.

[Brisketexan 104465]

9 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

We can do that or sit back and watch Germany, China, and Korea pass is by.

Oh, politically at least, we've already made that choice.  Shit, I'm surprised we haven't doubled all the way back and declared that we'll Make Woodburning Stoves Great Again.

[Jhawk 1075]

3 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

Oil is a declining industry, both in terms of usage and efficiency. This is an opportunity for the US to lead the way in terms of funding storage (battery tech), PV solar efficiency, etc to help bring the cost down the curve. We can do that or sit back and watch Germany, China, and Korea pass is by.

Absolutely. But saying we’ll be off fossil fuels anytime soon is asinine and easily shut down. It’s just a bad hill to die on. You especially don’t go as far out to say you want out 100%. One of the things Trump hit on, I think successfully, is that joe is all talk just like all politicians. This is an all talk issue and that is apparent to probably 75% or more of the population. However, the issue is something that can be attainable. Saying we’ll defund oil companies and get off oil by 2035 or 2050 (I heard both years at some point) is so easy to counter that I can’t imagine any high school debate teacher would suggest taking that stance. It’s a simple tactical error by Biden that probably hurts him more than the actual probability that joe kills O&G. You just don’t make that mistake with 10 days left until election. 

[Bama Chick 28596]

I don’t see any way he wins here, and I don’t think it will be that close.  We all hope I’m wrong.
People can try to downplay the oil comment, but it is going to make a huuge difference.  It may be the spark as to why he loses the entire election.  He’s getting hammered everywhere on it.
I’m a little pissed.  All he had to do was run out the clock and he tripped on his own feet and fumbled the damn ball.

Wait.

You think one comment from Biden about transitioning away from fossil fuels to renewable energy could lead to him losing the election??????

Seriously?

I know Texans have a bit of a problem with thinking they’re somehow special and better than everyone else but my god.

News flash - 97% of Americans don’t give a blue fuck about what he said and by this time next week, 867 horrible, weird, or unprecedented events will have happened and then 100% of Americans won’t even remember he said it.



It’s like some of y’all have subconsciously bought into the Republican talking points about about Biden being senile and Biden being a gaffe machine. And since Biden has not only been pretty gaffe free but he’s actually been pretty damn sharp and impressive y’all are looking for shit to turn into mistakes.

The complete overreaction on this board about that comment, while ignoring the hundreds of lies and terrible shit Trump said last night has been something else.

[RomaVicta 29756]

1 hour ago, JimmyJames said:

Regarding the supposedly important oil “gaffe” it’s almost like some of you think this is late 70s, early 80s Texas back when Matthew McConaughey was working on an oil rig and getting the AIDS in Dallas (I know there aren’t oil rigs in Dallas but that’s what the movie portrayed) and practically the whole state was completely dependent on the oil industry.

The only people that remark might have affected, in Texas or anywhere else, were already voting for trump anyway. It’s a non issue. 

Yes. Houston diversified long ago so as not to be destroyed by another energy bust.

I was hoping Biden would respond about oil companies investing in clean energy sources themselves because they see the future.

I just google Oil Company Investment in  and got this from NS Energy Magazine:

Quote

Of the six “super-majors” – BP, Shell, Chevron, Total, Eni and Exxon – many of them have pumped billions into clean energy projects, although question marks remain over whether they are doing enough.

Despite the growth in renewables, “big oil” only spent 1% of its combined budget on green energy schemes in 2018.

Matthias J Pickl, economics professor at King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals in Saudi Arabia, wrote a report in November 2019 discussing whether oil companies are transforming themselves into energy firms.

Titled The renewable energy strategies of oil majors – From oil to energy?, it highlighted how wind and solar are taking an increasingly important role in the energy industry, and that oil majors are “progressively positioning themselves for the proclaimed energy transition”.

“Oil firms are essentially attempting to figure out how the best presently available cash cow in the world can be replaced for the benefit of their own sustainable future,” he wrote in the report.

“Furthermore, growing concerns about climate change following the Paris Agreement may provide an additional drive for such strategy to hedge against hardening investor sentiment towards carbon emissions.”

Here, NS Energy looks into how each of the six oil majors have invested in renewable energy projects.

The notion that I'm sitting in my little home in Texas fretting about the fate of oil is absurd. I agree with those saying that climate change deniers were already voting Trump for a number of reasons in addition to science denial.

[Texaspython 231]

13 minutes ago, burntorangebongos said:

SIAP. Tried to wade thru past pages and gave up. I wish this was in person and not mailing numbers because the republic might find a way to throw them out. Holy Moly, that is a big number of dems.

Yup, gonna need about 2 mill more though.

[G650 13990]

1 minute ago, Jhawk said:

Absolutely. But saying we’ll be off fossil fuels anytime soon is asinine and easily shut down. It’s just a bad hill to die on. You especially don’t go as far out to say you want out 100%. One of the things Trump hit on, I think successfully, is that joe is all talk just like all politicians. This is an all talk issue and that is apparent to probably 75% or more of the population. However, the issue is something that can be attainable. Saying we’ll defund oil companies and get off oil by 2035 or 2050 (I heard both years at some point) is so easy to counter that I can’t imagine any high school debate teacher would suggest taking that stance. It’s a simple tactical error by Biden that probably hurts him more than the actual probability that joe kills O&G. You just don’t make that mistake with 10 days left until election. 

To be honest, you are wildly off here. Gas power generation is here for quite awhile, but everything else is going the way of the dodo rapidly.

[South Austin 52037]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Oh, politically at least, we've already made that choice.  Shit, I'm surprised we haven't doubled all the way back and declared that we'll Make Woodburning Stoves Great Again.

I mean, c'mon, have you ever tasted a chicken pot pie made in a wood-burning stove?

[Fudge Nuggets 19118]

Good grief calm down everyone. This is like a team favored by 40 being up 41 with 0:02 left on the clock facing 4th and long at their own goal line. Fourth string deep snapper snaps it through the end zone allowing the outmatched team to get the cover. Outmatched team still got its ass kicked. 

[henrygandorf 29174]

31 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

Nobody cares about oil - energy is 2% of the S&P500. In contrast Apple is 6.5% and and Microsoft 5.7%.

everyone is talking about it, but i'm gonna quote this post to discuss something trump does that drives me up the fucking wall (yeah, i know, everything does).  i'm sure it was mentioned in the debate thread, but there's that moment when trump feels a notable cable news "soundbite" is made.  his eyes light up like he's back to segment producing the apprentice (i'm joking, that job is way too complex for him).

and he'll invariably make a remark to the moderator/audience like, "oh, did you hear that, that's a big one, yeah, that's important", as if to say to a camera man - hey, did you get that?  as if it's not being fed live through 9 networks and will be dissected frame by frame for the next 24-48 hours on tv and online.  then he'll follow it up with "texas, pennsylvania, oklahoma, did you hear that?  joe, you just lost those states, that's a big one you just said."  which of course, completely ruins it.

the days of the organic debate moment are gone as long as trump is around.  even if there's ever an "a-ha" moment, he tramples all over it, and resumes his role as the guy republicans could vote for if he wasn't such a piece of shit.