Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Celexi posted:

Back in the 90s there was a crazy theory that letting your kids skateboard would make them join a gang

I miss the terrified wailing of the old people who insisted that skate gangs and rollerblade gangs were the next evolution of civilization's decline.

Of course all the kids who stayed inside to avoid the neon violence of the streets were then of course tricked into selling their soul to satan via dungeons and dragons.

Also the outlandish ways that AIDS would be transmitted to you were almost as entertaining as police hysterics over deadly Fent.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

Full statement from Trump just emailed out a minute ago:




It remains insane that the starting point of a key part of American History is universally acknowledged to be marked by a loving escalator trip.

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

Someone will definitely record and upload this soon, but a Fox News host was arguing that Trump will be considered "a badass" for getting arrested and said his mug shot will make him seem incredibly cool to the youth just like Tupac's mugshot did.

Yes, we all remember when the talk of the school halls was Tupac's mugshot. That is what everyone liked about him.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

Pence's live interview is currently airing on CNN.

It's already off to a strong start.

Pence says that Trump's prosecution "will offend the overwhelming majority of the American people who believe in fairness, who believe in equal treatment before the law" and that Trump's prosecution will "convince people that there is a two-tiered justice system in America."

He also says that if Trump is convicted, he doesn't think he should drop out of the race - but, he also doesn't think he should definitely stay in - and he will make a decision on that if it ever comes to fruition.

Nothing convinces people that there's a two-tiered justice system in America like rich famous people freaking out over a rich famous person actually getting charged for a crime.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Tempest_56 posted:

The data here is spotty - most of the studies I can find are pretty old. The only recent one I can locate is by the Times (which is of course looking at an entirely different topic) - out of the 433 incidents they tracked, the shooter only died about half the time (230). Another older one by the Washington Post got similar results (108 out of 202.)

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/06/22/us/shootings-police-response-uvalde-buffalo.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20230329171909/https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/national/mass-shootings-in-america/

Well, then we can infer that the death penalty would totally work as a deterrent half the time. Which is why nobody is going around mass shooting in strong death penalty states like Florida, Texas, or Tennessee.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Ataxerxes posted:

Stupid question from a non-American: can these be declared secret or otherwise hidden from the public?

As soon as he's actually arraigned the charges will be public. I don't even think our terrible terrorism trials from Guantanamo had secret charges. We reserved that for evidence.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Cimber posted:

I think the general timeline is going to go like this

Next week: Trump is formally arraigned on those 30+ business crimes dealing with bank fraud, tax fraud and tax evasion. Stormy Daniel's hush payments will be lumped into the tax fraud portion. Trump will need to surrender his passport and post a bond.

Next 6-9 months: Various pre-trial hearings, complaints and appeals of process. This could easily get stretched out for a year

9-12 months from now: Trial begins, probably lasting a month.

12-14 months from now: Trump will withdraw during the primaries after anemic results, blaming the various trials and not his general unpopularity with the republican base.

12-14 months from now: Trump convicted on portion of charges.

1-3 years from now: Various appeals are filed, his lawyers doing their best to stall and delay.

After all the appeals are exhausted, Trump will finally face 'jail time'. However, citing his age and his extraordinary circumstances, Trump's lawyers successfully argue for home confinement in his apartment in Trump Tower. Trump also has to pay millions in fines to NY state.

If however at any time between now and the time Trump 'serves' time he dies, all cases are vacated and he will be considered innocent of all crimes. Yes, even if he's convicted and in the middle of the appeals process he would be considered innocent.

There is almost no scenario where Trump withdraws from the primaries. Perhaps the key reason he's even running again for the job he hates, is that he's terrified of actually answering for his myriad crimes. He's desperate for the immunity from consequences that the sitting President wields.

Which is even assuming that boring white collar business crimes are enough to turn anyone away from voting Trump in the first place. The most likely outcome of the trial is actually to buttress the support in the primary for Candidate Trump. Everyone on the right, including his handful of electoral opponents, is now all but forced to boisterously decry this "outrageous injustice", and performatively demand to be allowed to protect America's Favorite Martyr President with their own bodies.

Of all the dumbfucks running for the Republican nomination, only Donald J. Trump has the inherent immunity to shame and the carnival barker skills to successfully both defend and demolish an opponent in the same breath. Nobody else is going to successfully build a case against the guy they're forced to repeatedly defend as the greatest and bestest innocent man to ever be framed by Soros.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Cimber posted:

I respectfully disagree.Come mid April 2024 if Trump is significantly down and polling is trending against him I think he would withdraw as not to be seen even more as a loser. Of course he would not blame the actual reasons (People tired of his poo poo, people want a firebreathing conservative who can get poo poo done and see that in DeSantis), but would instead blame the democrats for weaponizing the courts against him. His reputation is all he cares about, and its going to majorly sting if he keeps losing primaries.

[stealth edit] He mgiht et a minor bump in polls now from this indictment, but that's going to fade fast as the actual charges come out. This is a short term 'gain' for him but a long term loser.

I just don't see anything here that would detract from his position with the base. Convicted Criminal Donald Trump, I believe, almost certainly becomes less popular with the national electorate. It will make a difference in November of 2024. The issue is that before those forces can come to bear on him, the only opinions that matter are the Republican primary electorate. Those crazy fucks are not going to abandon their avatar of petulance just because the New York lawyers got him on "bullshit" charges.

This is especially true when all the other possible choices in the primary are loudly agreeing that the charges are all bullshit and it's all just another attempt by the left to take out America's Greatest American. The party is incapable of talking bad about daddy Trump, and the assembled other guys trying to take over from him are unable to avoid hagiographic groveling at his feet. They were already facing a steep climb to overcome their own voids of charisma in any attempt to beat Donny without triggering their own base. Now they're all but guaranteed to have to defend and prop up Trump every 5 minutes when they're asked about his trials and crimes durring the primary.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

Some of the Tories were just recently saying he has "destroyed the special relationship" and that he was irrationally pro-Ireland too, lol.







https://www.express.co.uk/news/us/1746174/Rishi-sunak-Joe-Biden-special-relationship-trade-talks-Brexit-tory-party-latest-news-dxus

I do love that the Tories seem to think this is a uniquely Biden issue, and not an ongoing historic aspect of how something like 35 million Americans insist they're Irish. Like, during the entirety of The Troubles it was an ongoing issue between the US and UK that like every politician from New England was vocally pro IRA. Often publicly fundraising for them. Obama and Trump may not have had Irish affinity, but there's a decent chance the next President is going to be pro-Ireland too.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Fister Roboto posted:

It's OK for Milton Berle, Monty Python, Kids in the Hall, etc to do drag because they're not drag queens. It's bad for drag queens to do drag because they're drag queens. That might sound ridiculous to people who aren't huge pieces of poo poo, but that's fascism for you.

Basically it's this. Popular media with guys dressed like ladies is US having a good giggle over how stupid the very idea of a guy dressing like a lady is. Drag shows themselves are unforgivable affronts to the natural order where THEY get ideas about being normal people.

When Tom Hanks dressed up like a lady in Bosom Buddies it was for sound economic and heterosexual sexy reasons. When a drag queen does it, it's subverting the natural order and obviously directed at me despite my never having been within 500 feet of a drag show. The fact that nobody else in society gave two shits, and even seemed to be enjoying it, is perhaps the gravest offense in the whole thing.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK
Looks like the race to the nomination just got blown wide open. Nothing will ever be the same again.

https://twitter.com/AsaHutchinson/status/1642549889740488704

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Keyser_Soze posted:

It is absolutely mind-boggling to me that this is continually ignored in this thread.

It's his groundless persecution complex that really speaks to them. The only thing they love more than that is a preposterous shitthatdidn'thappen testimonial about how terrible a person you were before Jesus saved you.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

davecrazy posted:

"The Acquittal of Donald Trump by the Coward Juror Number 4."

You could make a pretty penny on the wingnut welfare circuit as the juror who bravely declared no consequences for Presidents. I mean, I'd have to at least consider it for the money. My existent conscience, and the pure joy of getting to vote GUILTY on ol' Donny, would obviously outweigh any such minor temptations. However, there's enough silver pieces there to at least cross your mind.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

PT6A posted:

I think anyone who was telling themselves that drinking was healthy and/or free of risk, was deluding themselves and should've known better. It's like when I talked to my mom, a former smoker, about smoking cigarettes.

"The studies weren't out, but obviously we all knew it was unhealthy. Things that are good for you don't make you cough up brown poo poo in the morning."

No, there was absolutely a huge push for the healthy nature of a glass of wine or a dark beer with dinner. It was impossible to get through the 90s without being insisted to that tannins were amazing for your health, and that the best place to find them was red wines and certain beers.

Froghammer posted:

Beyond that, the reality is that no, that person's doctor did not tell them to drink red wine. What their doctor probably told them was that if they have a healthy liver, an active lifestyle, aren't trying to lose weight, aren't at risk for diabetes, and were going to be drinking anyway, then not drinking to excess and only sticking with red wine is probably better for you than beer or hard liquor. That's a far cry from "drinking is good for you, actually".

Nah, doctors were 100% prescribing a glass of wine to their patients with heart disease. My dad was repeatedly told by his doctor that he needed to start drinking red wine as it would help with his arteriosclerosis. It's hard to undersell just how pervasive the notion that a single glass of wine or other tannin heavy beverage was for you.

Obviously people would then drink more than that one drink and insist that it was extra good. However the underlying "science" that was pushed through the various pop-science chains was that while alcohol itself was bad, the magical tannins were what made it good. The coffee, tea, wine, and beer industries stood united in encouraging the media to report on the therapeutic power of tannins, and the easiest way to consume them.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

PhazonLink posted:

Isnt the red wine thing mostly just rich people covering up that red wine and pills taste good together and might be the only wine pairing that tastes good.

It was almost entirely the tannins, which were part of the explosion of newly discovered/classified superfoods in the 90s. The alcohol industry just also happened to be one of the leading masters of advertising who were in possession of one of the new fad foods sweeping the nation. Fruit conglomerates may have been able to overthrow governments, but they don't know anything about convincing the public that literal poison is the greatest thing mankind ever discovered.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Randalor posted:

"In a 6-3 decision by the SCOTUS, not only is bribing Chief Justices fine, but it is now mandatory to bribe them".

They previously ruled that in order to count as a bribe, one or more of the listed types of payment:
  • a bag full of cash and emblazoned with dollar signs
  • highly valuable goods clearly labeled with their value
  • maybe services, but it's got to be very obviously and loudly declared quid pro quo while being performed
Must be paired with all of the following:
  • a verbal or written exchange that clearly and without obfuscation conveys the sentiments of "With this money I am bribing you" and "I accept your bribe and will now do a specific action for this bribe money"
  • Concrete and clear actions that directly execute the paid for behavior. Subtle wielding of influence is just not something that can be legally defined as either quid or quo.

Pretty clear that Thomas has yet to be bribed.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Class3KillStorm posted:

In a way, wasn't that how Biden ended up winning last time, though? Sanders was way ahead on delegate count and everything in the early states, until Super Tuesday, when the more conservative Dems rallied around Biden and the number of delegates flooding his way ended up totally upending that race.

It's a theoretical way for DeSantis to win, but I still haven't heard any real rational reason why he's supposed to be a "better" choice than Trump would be, or why later states would rally around him if Trump already has the momentum of an early lead.

The problem is still the same as it was when Rudy first used the plan: GOP primaries are almost entirely winner take all. So any strategy that might work in the Democratic primaries, where almost everything is proportionally awarded, is doomed to utter failure when tried by the Republicans.

It's a lot like how Hillary's team of big brains managed to absolutely poo poo the bed in 2008 when they repeatedly failed to realize how caucuses work. The Giuliani Gambit could theoretically work, but even aside from all the various machinations needed it's utterly defeated if there is an actual front runner and not an overstuffed clown car of also fans.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Charlz Guybon posted:

They drank their own Kool-Aid on this one and didn't think there would be a meaningful voter reaction.
https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1644458795920240642

They knew, which is why they purposefully didn't do it for almost 50 years. The problem is that they failed to ensure the subsequent generations of leadership realized what the actual point of it all was. So now there's a handful of dudes desperately trying to do the bidding of mammon, who're surrounded by grifters cashing in on the distractions and true believers who are burning the plan to the ground.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

virtualboyCOLOR posted:

Iíve been hearing the bolded poo poo for decades and yet the republicans have more power than ever before and are on track to have a competent fascist in the presidency (DeSantis) with the most ineffectual Dems in modern history.

It feels like libs and Dems huff their own farts instead of reacting to reality.

1) In no way is DeSantis on track for anything more than Florida Politician.
2) The repeated insistence that DeSantis is the competent fascist we've been warned of is ridiculous. Doing fascisms as the Republican Governor of Florida hardly takes competence.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Main Paineframe posted:

Making those empty promises for so long without ever intending to actually fulfill them is exactly what sowed the seeds of this new crop in the first place.

They weren't pretending to be anti-abortion just for the fun of it, they were pretending because there was a diehard segment of their electorate who genuinely wanted to ban abortion. But pretending only works for so long. Eventually, that diehard base rose up and started running their own candidates, and by then the GOP had driven out so many other groups that the anti-abortion diehards were a substantial force in the primaries. Their overdependence on making empty promises to fringe groups came back to bite them when the fringe groups started demanding their own seat at the table.

The issue is that both parties as they are now divvied up their their factional issues and priorities post Carter, and haven't really changed much since Clinton. The calcification of which groups and ideologies align with each party naturally led to position homogeneity of the parties. While the GOP is still an unholy alliance of Bible Trumpeters, Libertarians, Racists, Fascists, and the Chamber of Commerce, decades of alliance and proximity have lead all the groups to largely believe the same things. The end result is that instead of throwing sops and platitudes to disparate groups, they're throwing sops and platitudes to a single group.

What once was a collection of factions making up a party has instead become a party with factional subdivisions. Similar to the difference in outlook of the US pre-Civil War and in the modern era, where people went from seeing themselves as citizens of their State first and Americans second to American first and State nearing incidentally.

At the same time, the way that things fell as the parties solidified from group alliances to united fronts left Republicans with a bag of issues that are popular predominantly with those born before the end of the Vietnam War. As such their base is faced with declining membership as it is harder to find young people who agree with their issues. This further encourages the various factions to both radicalize and more closely merge.

The end result is that what was once a headlining group of assholes appeasing and hoodwinking opening acts of dickheads into continued support, has become instead a single entity of bastards. Abortion isn't just something the Jesus freaks care about, deregulation isn't just the opiate of the Libertarians, and dog whistles aren't there to keep the racists following along. Now the average member of the base believes in wacky poo poo from all the factions. Instead of letting the factional dogs hopelessly chase the cars as a distraction, now everyone is working together as the main focus to catch that loving car.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

socialsecurity posted:

No, it's not this doesn't make any sense. The reason people call him a competent fascist is because people are worried he's Trump but less likely to get in his own way to enact his agenda.

If you think that DeSantis' agenda is actually doing things, then he's kind of poo poo and has only been as successful as he is due to the unique nature of it being Florida, Jake. If you think that his agenda is performative actions that are undercut as soon as the sound byte ends, then he's hyper competent.

He would be more successful than Trump at being an effective shithead. But that's only because Trump is uniquely incompetent at governing, and hyper focused on mainlining attention and grifting money. DeSantis is a dumb gently caress who will do a lot of really dumb things and trip over his own shoes, but it won't be because he tied the shoelaces together in an attempt to show how cool he is.

Most of DeSantis' poo poo has gone off like his tangle with The Mouse. He passes a terrible bill, he prances around touting how big a culture warrior he is, and then it immediately starts falling apart. The crumbling has been much slower for everything else, but that's because one of the largest multinational corporations isn't actively disintegrating everything else. For instance, pretty much all the people he had confused cops arrest on camera for voting had their charges thrown out.

He's good at getting that media cycle, and that first move is absolutely a devastating and destructive blow to whichever innocent bystander gets hit, however he hasn't been successful at creating a sustained action after that. Florida is a run of the mill Republican run hellscape, not a uniquely dystopian hellscape. We're still sinking beneath the waves, but governor Meatball is mostly just performatively worse than any other Republican governor.

As a hypothetical President he would probably largely be approximately as competent as Trump in actually turning the country into a fascist nightmare. He would get extra leeway because he doesn't poo poo on decorum like it's an adiction and he isn't as surface level a clown. However where all Trump wanted to do was get his adulation fix and sell as much copper wiring as he could find, DeSantis would be out trying to find new ways to be a caricature of a cowardly bully.

The main thing to ask yourself is how much dumb poo poo is uniquely due to DeSantis, and how much dumb poo poo would have been passed by our dumbfuck Republican Legislature regardless of who was in the Governor's mansion. Is Florida actually on a unique course of idiocy outside it's normal orbit of stupidity under JEB! or Christ?

Gyges fucked around with this message at 15:35 on Apr 8, 2023

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Morrow posted:

Trump had no issues bullying children, he bullied everyone equally. DeSantis can only literally bully children so that's what he goes after.

The main differences between the two's bullying are
  • Trump will pull the "I'd kick your rear end, but I'm being held back" defense, DeSantis will either freeze up or run away with his tail tucked between his legs. He ran screaming from facing off with Marco Rubio after Rubio got destroyed in the 2016 Presidential Primary.
  • Trump owns his bullying as a mark of pride, DeSantis tries to pretend it's a righteous act.
  • Trump can actually verbally eviscerate people and loves it, DeSantis couldn't trash talk his way out of a wet paper bag
  • Trump as faced every single American politician and at least tried to poo poo down their throat, DeSantis froze up when mildly called out by Charlie Crist.


Trump would steal candy from a baby, call a press conference to announce how amazingly he stole that baby's candy, then call the baby a dog and forever after insist the baby respected him so much that the baby gave him the candy as a bribe.

DeSantis would look all over for the baby's mom, steal the candy when he was sure nobody would confront him, and then deny he did it while also openly eating the candy just so long as the baby's mom wasn't around to call him out to his face.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

One of the Judiciary's most humiliating and lawless moments? Canceling a drug? Sir, this is America. That poo poo ain't even making the 3rd volume of the humiliating and lawless moments anthology.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Ghost Leviathan posted:

The idea that moral panics are normal and inevitable is if anything the weird thing. That might be one of those things that's literally just a Boomer problem. The Red Scare was literally government policy designed to keep as much of the world as possible from realising they're being hosed over, and willing to commit genocide to shut up anyone pointing that out. (see Indonesia)

Nah, the history of the US is almost as much a history of moral panics as it is racism and greed. The founding fathers were terrified of the machinations of the Illuminati, wich was followed by a Mason panic, wich overlapped with a Catholic panic, and so on and so on. We love a conspiratorial cabal who are corrupting the children and poisoning society. Hell we were hunting witches before we were even a nation.

Does it have to be that way? No, but avoiding future panics does seem to require drastic changes in our very fabric that approach the scale of giving up the Church of the Free Market.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Charlz Guybon posted:

You would think they would get tired of losing eventually

https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1645258292879302668

They've convinced themselves that they are the semi-silent majority, and that every loss is only possible because of a vast conspiracy.

Which is completely beside the fact that placing electability at the top of your desires in a two party system is just dumb as all gently caress.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Ben Koppleman is just out here trying to pass some laws that, of his own admission, raise his salary and fix the outrageous situation where lawmakers don't get the state to pay for their lunch. I think we can all sympathize with him, since few of use would take some crap job that wouldn't even pay for our lunches. That's just standard, and we really shouldn't be asking our politicians to accept anything less. If those lazy kids would get a job, and put some skin in the game, they'd get lunch reimbursed just like everyone else.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK
The most important reason to run for President while having no hope of winning is to make a lot of money. This can be done via the regular campaign grift as well as increasing your rates for lobbying and speaking gigs.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Tarezax posted:

TBH I wonder if the reason these crops are grown in California specifically has more to do with the water rights situation and the availability of migrant farm labor over actual growing conditions of the crop

Water rights and farming decisions made in the past. It takes 5-12 years for an Almond tree to start producing almonds, then that tree is productive for about 25 more years. So an entire cycle for a grove, assuming you planted everything at the same time, is 30 to 37 years. Almonds were first brought by monks from the Mediterranean in like 1850 or so and commercial farming started late in the 1800s, but didn't actually take off until the 1900s due to issues with the climate and planted varieties.

Basically people started growing Almonds during one of California's wet period, and largely possess water rights dating back over a century or more. Since only need about 4-5 commercial life cycles of an almond tree to get back to the first farms, they were largely an already established crop by the time the real water wars due to climate change began to pick up. I have no idea how many new Almond groves are suddenly sprouting up, but I have a feeling that the water requirements and the long gestation time mean that the newest farms are probably 60 or so years old.

In the future, Almond farming is almost certainly going to migrate to a more reasonable location. However there's a long rear end turn around from when it starts to when it's fully established. At the same time even if nobody planted a new tree in California from now on, we'd be getting shitloads of California Almonds through 2055.

Gyges fucked around with this message at 09:55 on Apr 12, 2023

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Leon Sumbitches posted:

This is fascinating, thanks.

you said migrate, which got me thinking about tree transplantation. Generally, it's best when the trees are younger and less established. It's almost impossible to conceive moving an entire industrial grove, but is there any merit to the idea of transplanting trees closer to the beginning of their 37 year lifecycle? That cuts water usage immediately while not having to wait 5-12 years for new nuts. I know it's an extreme suggestion and full of unexamined assumptions, but humans do dumb half-thought poo poo all the time so why not get the great almond tree migration started early?

Transplanting fruit/nut trees is, at best, going to cause a shock to the tree that will extend how long it takes before it starts to yield. At worst something goes wrong and the tree dies or, even more scandalously, something goes wrong and the motherfucker never bears fruit despite you pouring resources into it. The most big brain business way of doing things is going to be Big Almond running what they have into the ground, while at some point starting new groves in a better place. It's almost certainly not going to happen in the very near term, because they still own the level of water rights that lets them run a hose to the ocean with impunity. The only current pressure on them is water cost and theoretical future scarcity.

Currently the most likely scenario is new almond entrepreneurs realizing they can't plant a new grove in California so they go somewhere else. Of course there's going to be extra costs involved because they're going to have to do expensive testing to find out which grafts and species of almond work best in the new location.

Triskelli posted:

PeopleÖ eat salt though? Itís a product you can sell

We've made very sure that salt and water aren't the only two byproducts of ocean desalination. Mother nature ads in some extra biomass too, but we're putting that hydrocarbon and heavy metal good good in the mix.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Leon Sumbitches posted:

Having worked with plants but never agribusiness, this is really interesting. I don't think I can contribute anything except more questions, so I'll ask how could to press them further than just water costs?

We wait until the water dries up, overhaul water rights to something sane, or destroy the precious freedoms of the almond growers via dastardly legislation.

Kalit posted:

I still wonder how the meat/dairy industry pulled off getting almonds to be the biggest focus on CA water usage instead of alfalfa. Congrats to them, I guess it worked :sigh:

*I donít want to single out a single post, but Iím talking about how a lot of posts in the past page or two talking about water usage are overwhelmingly focused on almonds without mentioning alfalfa

It's most likely less the meat industry, more conservatives trying to own almond milk loving liberals. The topline numbers are always going to make almonds look worse than alfalfa just because nuts are a ridiculously inefficient crop from a water usage perspective. So everyone agrees to throw all the shade on almonds while everyone else continues to guzzle the rivers dry.

It's the usual thing where it's way easier for the lay person to identify the various composite parts of the problem than it is to identify the overall foundation of the problem itself. Almonds aren't single-handedly draining the river, the F-23 isn't why the Military budget is FUBAR, 6-pack rings aren't the foundation of ocean pollution, and earmarks aren't the true bane of wasteful government spending.

bird food bathtub posted:

Desalination produces brine, not dried salt ready to be used in other processes. It's a somewhat minor problem with desalination plants. If the waste brine is dumped in a bay or behind barrier reefs or something it can end up concentrating high enough to kill stuff off, but it's still just really really salty water. Not dried crystals of table salt ready to be put on the market for other uses.

Maybe we could dump it in the salt lake, or blast it into the sun with all our nuclear waste.

Gyges fucked around with this message at 12:40 on Apr 12, 2023

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK
All livestock rearing is an the inefficient process where we
  • spend a bunch of resources to raise a bunch of perfectly good plants
  • stuff all those plants into an animal who then wastes a bunch of plant energy by living and not being eaten for a few years
  • dumping a bunch more water into the animal
  • throwing out 40% or so of the end result animal because it isn't meat

It's going to be rather hard to find a plant that is less resource intensive than whatever dumb herbivore we're eating. Omnivore livestock are even worse since they're sometimes eating something that ate something else first.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

Feinstein releases a statement saying she will try to return to D.C. as soon as possible, but is not planning on retiring. She has spoken to Chuck Schumer and will temporarily step down from the Senate Judiciary committee so that Democrats can start voting on Judges again.

Kind of weird to take the extreme step of removing themselves from the committee, but also not resigning.

https://twitter.com/Bencjacobs/status/1646306910969135104

She can't give up until McConnell does. At least not until a plucky young hero heals our government.

Besides, McConnell is almost certainly spending half his energy fighting for his life, and half fighting off Rick Scott's attempts to steal his power.


Willa Rogers posted:

She has had Medicare for almost a quarter century, although it's likely her secondary insurer.

Maybe she couldn't get treated at Walter Reed anymore once she steps down, but I'm not sure even they could resurrect her mind or body at this point.

She's also rich as gently caress. No reason to avoid burning it all for every fleeting second it can buy.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK
If you do college right, you should have a very hazy memory of large parts of it.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Edgar Allen Ho posted:

If sweet and low or Coke Zero is making an appreciable dent in your daily calories, you werenít going to lose weight anyway.

Hell when Iím cutting I donít even track veggies. Ten heads + of broccoli or 50+ packs of sweetener is what it would take to put my daily calories back at maintenance. Better of teaching Americans that a salad with 500 kcal of ranch is worse than a burger.

When you're drinking multiple liters of non-water drinks a day, switching over to sugar alternative drinks is most certainly going to make an appreciable dent in your daily calories. Your diet may otherwise be atrocious and your physical activity may be near zero, but if you make no other change you're still going to lose weight.

Edit: 2 liters of Coke by itself is 800+ calories, and a very high portion of Americans are daily drinking soft drinks by the liter.

Gyges fucked around with this message at 13:09 on Apr 14, 2023

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Zwabu posted:

It's not just that they can't beat Trump at this game. It's that they refuse to even PLAY the game or engage Trump in any way, it's a freaking joke.

I mean yeah Ted and Marco tried a little and failed but those guys have been humiliated enough by Trump and understand that they have no chance challenging him in 2024 and no way will they enter this cycle.

But Ron and Tim Scott and Haley are entering this race (presumably in the case of Ron) somehow with a plan that they might win without ever engaging or attacking their main opponent. Their runs seem based entirely on the presumption that Trump will either not run (too late, he's in the race), will drop out, be jailed or die or become medically infirm prior to the election, or that he will somehow refrain from throwing poop at them like Donkey Kong throwing flaming barrels.

In the case of Haley, and maybe Scott, perhaps it's just a VP audition in which case it might actually make sense. But no way will DeSantis ever be Trump's VP even if he wanted it, Trump would never tolerate a potential rival to be one heart attack away from taking his job.

I mean it looks like maybe DeSantis is just a paper tiger anyway and he just wouldn't have the chops to get elected President, Trump or not. But it certainly looks like he would have been a lot better off just sitting this one out like Ted and Marco instead of making the motions to run.

He's (making motions like he's) coming at the king. And it's looking like he missed. Badly.

Honestly I wouldn't be surprised is Ronnie Boy dropped out before he ever officially jumps in. It's near impossible to oversell how much of a craven coward he is, and this would be the first actual for real primary fight of his career. Ducking Lil Marco but squaring up with Daddy Trump is odd.


Push El Burrito posted:

He's a Chicago man, there woulda been the deepest of dish pizza and some dogs with all the toppings (no ketchup).


I'll continue to question just how real Chicago he is until I seem him slap ketchup out someone's hands.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Mooseontheloose posted:

I thought the Supreme Court decided that all death penalty rulings had to be unanimous?

That's a problem for another day and another headline. Besides, they don't actually want to kill a doctor or parent who helps a trans kid. They want to bully and scare people, but actually trying to give a parent the death penalty is a media poo poo storm they don't want to touch at all. Instead they'll do what they've been doing, posture up hard knowing that their bullshit is going to be reigned in while they get pats on the back from the insane primary base they've courted.

Almost everything coming out of the Florida legislature since 2020 has been designed to grab headlines and be held together just long enough for DeSantis to win the primary. After that the whole loving sandbar can sink into the Atlantic, who gives a poo poo.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Quixzlizx posted:

Hopefully he settles into the uncanny valley of not enough carny charisma to attract the MAGA Festival crowd, but enough ineffective stable genius cosplay to turn off number go up billionaires.

He was never going for a charisma build, even he knows he ain't got it. He's trying to be the craziest social issue warrior in the race to try and become the darling of the Christian Right. At the same time he's trying to do it in boring enough ghoul way that he can viably be the Trump alternative. The bet he's making is that all the other clowns flame out when Ronnie and Donny split 70% of the vote in the early states.

As far as Republican plans to beat Trump in a primary, it's probably about as good as it gets. It still operates under a false assumption that the Evangelicals actually believe in anything at all politically. However aside from hoping a lifetime of terrible life decisions finally catch up with McDonalds' Favorite President, there's really not much to strategically work with in a primary field greater than 2 people.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Velocity Raptor posted:

I know that right now the focus is on Thomas, but could this end up causing an investigation into all current sitting justices as well to make sure they're complaint?

Like, could Thomas have just hosed up the "good thing" the other justices had going?

Who's going to stop them? They only actual limit is being so egregiously corrupt that they're successfully impeached. That's something that's never happened, though one did get the Clinton/Trump treatment back when Thomas Jefferson was President. Then there's the judge who got charges entered into the House, but they didn't pass, for giving a quick stay of execution to the Rosenbergs. Abe Fortas also pulled a full Nixon, resigning before he could be impeached.

So, you've got to be more ridiculously corrupt than a guy who went full Nixon in order to get Impeached from the Supreme Court.

Kavros posted:

really? i assume that doesn't include removal?

Judicial impeachment runs on the same rules as Presidential impeachment, except the President Pro Temp presides over the proceeding instead of the Chief Justice.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Timby posted:

Isn't the standard for losing judicial immunity, like, crazy high?

You know how insane the level of qualified immunity are for cops who commit unconscionable acts are? Now imagine if they didn't really have the opportunity to beat the poo poo out of people in the course of their job. So, yeah, judicial immunity is also extremely wide reaching.

Recently a West Virginia judge actually got denied their claims of judicial immunity when they took a court field trip. She ordered, without a warrant, a man to let the judge, her bailiffs, and sundry court officers into his house. When the man objected she threatened him with contempt and arrest. She also realized he was filming her actions and ordered him to not do so. Then, since it was a divorce proceeding, she told the ex-wife to wander around and just take whatever property she felt was hers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oS-MIdnwWPg

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

BiggerBoat posted:

Oh yeah. I forgot about the (possible) tax fraud thing if he didn't disclose those things.

It looks more like he reported the income to the IRS, but lied about the actual source of that income everywhere else. I'm also pretty sure that Thomas has been caught lying on his disclosure forms multiple times over the years. The response has consistently been a shoulder shrug followed with "whatayougonnado?" by everyone in the vicinity of oversight.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Willa Rogers posted:

Members of Congress get caught on the reg for not disclosing stuff like stock purchases and sales so I doubt they'd remove the motes in their own eyes long enough to take Thomas to task.

And that's when they have insider knowledge about industries they're purportedly regulating or bestowing with contracts!

Don't most of them use the Rick Scott defense of "oh no, I don't own any stocks. I gave them all to my wife"?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply