One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
GOP Bil Weld: The Republican Party is becoming a party of R****M!!!
Page <<first <prev 16 of 18 next> last>>
Jul 31, 2019 15:30:10   #
Carol Kelly
 
PeterS wrote:
Really nothing else need be posted. Here we have a Republican and a member of the GOP who is calling Trump a r****t and because of that the Republican Party is becoming the Party of R****m. Myself, I think you cons have always been r****t which is why Men or women like Weld won't v**e for him. That you will only goes to show what I have always believed is correct...


So far in America, you’re free to believe what you will. You’d better hope you don’t lose that privilege.

Reply
Aug 1, 2019 09:20:00   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
EconomistDon wrote:
That's funny!!! Anybody with a WHOLE BRAIN realizes that Obama-appointed judges are working hard to block everything Trump does. They don't care if they are within the law or not. So everything gets bumped up to the Supreme Court, who must waste their time overturning the i***t Obama judges.

Sorry, I promised that our discussion was done, but I just couldn't resist the "half a brain" comment. Go back to your porch.


If the orange con man followed our law, the courts would not have to block him..

As you pointed out the SC was put in to make trumps desires pass the bench..

Sunrise, bringing more wind generator parts to the plains of Dakota...
Sunrise, bringing more wind generator parts to the...

Reply
Aug 1, 2019 09:23:46   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
nwtk2007 wrote:
The point is, no one else is, why should we?

Also, if our number one polluter is fuel for cars, why stop the use of coal?




??? current #1... coal has been cut down by mostly market forces..

With coal being used in power plants rather the t***sportation, i did not bother to make distinction..



Reply
 
 
Aug 1, 2019 11:22:31   #
nwtk2007 Loc: Texas
 
permafrost wrote:
If the orange con man followed our law, the courts would not have to block him..

As you pointed out the SC was put in to make trumps desires pass the bench..


Actually, I think most liberal court rulings against him have been over turned by the higher courts; emoluments, border wall funding, the "Muslim" ban, sanctuary cities, anti-union EO, etc.

Reply
Aug 1, 2019 11:24:14   #
nwtk2007 Loc: Texas
 
permafrost wrote:
??? current #1... coal has been cut down by mostly market forces..

With coal being used in power plants rather the t***sportation, i did not bother to make distinction..


You said our number one polluter was burning fuel in cars.

And don't even imply that the market worked against coal. That is a laugh. Obama and Clinton worked to shut down coal but now it's coming back.

Reply
Aug 1, 2019 12:56:52   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
nwtk2007 wrote:
Actually, I think most liberal court rulings against him have been over turned by the higher courts; emoluments, border wall funding, the "Muslim" ban, sanctuary cities, anti-union EO, etc.



Better check once more.. while the courts have made some bitter decisions in my view.. overall they tended to support the contestants..

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/10/politics/court-rulings-trump-record/index.html

Trump's win/loss ratio in court
According to Nolette's analysis, state attorneys general have won 51% of their suits against Trump and lost less than 11%. More than a third haven't had any sort of judicial action yet.
Even with a loss, the tactic slows down, frustrates and ultimately changes a proposed policy. Nolette pointed to Trump's early efforts to impose a travel ban on Muslim-majority countries. That ban ultimately was pushed through with his executive action, but the courts forced dramatic alterations.
It is a symptom of partisanship in the country. A bloc of Republican attorneys general bring their lawsuits in, say, the 5th US Circuit Court in Texas. Democrats choose either New York or the 9th US Circuit on the West Coast, which they perceive to be friendlier.
Not all of the suits are brought against Trump or by Democratic states. There's carryover from the Obama administration on the Affordable Care Act, which Republicans have been unable to repeal except to zero out the tax Americans must pay if they fail to obtain health insurance.
Judges in Texas sounded sympathetic to the argument made by Republican states that zeroing a tax makes it not a tax, which invalidates the whole law. Democratic states have stepped in to defend the law. Trump's administration joined the Republican effort after a lower court judge agreed with it. There are huge implications if the law is thrown out, since it is now woven into the fabric of the US health care system and millions get insurance directly as a result of it.

Reply
Aug 1, 2019 13:02:11   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
nwtk2007 wrote:
You said our number one polluter was burning fuel in cars.

And don't even imply that the market worked against coal. That is a laugh. Obama and Clinton worked to shut down coal but now it's coming back.



Nwtk,,, I am very surprised you would post this remark..

https://climatenexus.org/climate-issues/energy/whats-driving-the-decline-of-coal-in-the-united-states/

The U.S. coal industry is declining in the face of lower-cost natural gas, renewable energy and regulations designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect public health. Decades of mechanization have also reduced employment. This has spurred a wave of coal companies to declare bankruptcy, including four industry giants between 2015 and 2018.

Utilities are accelerating their retirement of coal plants because they are increasingly uneconomical. According to cost estimates from investment bank Lazard, the lower-end of the average price for coal-fired power is now almost $20 higher per megawatt hour than that for a natural gas. The lower-end of the average prices per megawatt hour for wind and utility-scale solar are even more competitive with coal, even without subsidies, at $29 and $36 respectively.

As of 2018, 70 percent of coal capacity in the U.S. had a higher running cost than renewables, and by 2030, that number is expected to reach 100 percent.

Reply
 
 
Aug 1, 2019 13:34:15   #
MR Mister Loc: Washington DC
 
permafrost wrote:
Better check once more.. while the courts have made some bitter decisions in my view.. overall they tended to support the contestants..

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/10/politics/court-rulings-trump-record/index.html

Trump's win/loss ratio in court
According to Nolette's analysis, state attorneys general have won 51% of their suits against Trump and lost less than 11%. More than a third haven't had any sort of judicial action yet.
Even with a loss, the tactic slows down, frustrates and ultimately changes a proposed policy. Nolette pointed to Trump's early efforts to impose a travel ban on Muslim-majority countries. That ban ultimately was pushed through with his executive action, but the courts forced dramatic alterations.
It is a symptom of partisanship in the country. A bloc of Republican attorneys general bring their lawsuits in, say, the 5th US Circuit Court in Texas. Democrats choose either New York or the 9th US Circuit on the West Coast, which they perceive to be friendlier.
Not all of the suits are brought against Trump or by Democratic states. There's carryover from the Obama administration on the Affordable Care Act, which Republicans have been unable to repeal except to zero out the tax Americans must pay if they fail to obtain health insurance.
Judges in Texas sounded sympathetic to the argument made by Republican states that zeroing a tax makes it not a tax, which invalidates the whole law. Democratic states have stepped in to defend the law. Trump's administration joined the Republican effort after a lower court judge agreed with it. There are huge implications if the law is thrown out, since it is now woven into the fabric of the US health care system and millions get insurance directly as a result of it.
Better check once more.. while the courts have mad... (show quote)


Losses in courts are expected since the courts are overrun with Obama Marxist. But that is changing.
Nowhere in the world is anybody expected to pay for something and not receive it, only Obama could conceive of that. And calling it "Affordable care Act" is a sick joke. $10,000 deductible, sic.

Now calling to tax the rich to hell, is the words of a criminal. So, after you k**l all the rich what do you do then? They people will never understand, they should say "how can we make ever average income person rich" but that will never happen from the Left.

Reply
Aug 1, 2019 13:41:32   #
nwtk2007 Loc: Texas
 
permafrost wrote:
Better check once more.. while the courts have made some bitter decisions in my view.. overall they tended to support the contestants..

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/10/politics/court-rulings-trump-record/index.html

Trump's win/loss ratio in court
According to Nolette's analysis, state attorneys general have won 51% of their suits against Trump and lost less than 11%. More than a third haven't had any sort of judicial action yet.
Even with a loss, the tactic slows down, frustrates and ultimately changes a proposed policy. Nolette pointed to Trump's early efforts to impose a travel ban on Muslim-majority countries. That ban ultimately was pushed through with his executive action, but the courts forced dramatic alterations.
It is a symptom of partisanship in the country. A bloc of Republican attorneys general bring their lawsuits in, say, the 5th US Circuit Court in Texas. Democrats choose either New York or the 9th US Circuit on the West Coast, which they perceive to be friendlier.
Not all of the suits are brought against Trump or by Democratic states. There's carryover from the Obama administration on the Affordable Care Act, which Republicans have been unable to repeal except to zero out the tax Americans must pay if they fail to obtain health insurance.
Judges in Texas sounded sympathetic to the argument made by Republican states that zeroing a tax makes it not a tax, which invalidates the whole law. Democratic states have stepped in to defend the law. Trump's administration joined the Republican effort after a lower court judge agreed with it. There are huge implications if the law is thrown out, since it is now woven into the fabric of the US health care system and millions get insurance directly as a result of it.
Better check once more.. while the courts have mad... (show quote)


It would appear that the article you posited is out of date and inaccurate. Try again. The census issue is under appeal as is the Twitter issue. So, we shall see. Trump has won, as I stated, on the other issues I posted about. It's not a defeat when a liberal court decides against an issue which a fair and higher court later sides with Trump on.

Reply
Aug 1, 2019 13:43:53   #
nwtk2007 Loc: Texas
 
permafrost wrote:
Nwtk,,, I am very surprised you would post this remark..

https://climatenexus.org/climate-issues/energy/whats-driving-the-decline-of-coal-in-the-united-states/

The U.S. coal industry is declining in the face of lower-cost natural gas, renewable energy and regulations designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect public health. Decades of mechanization have also reduced employment. This has spurred a wave of coal companies to declare bankruptcy, including four industry giants between 2015 and 2018.

Utilities are accelerating their retirement of coal plants because they are increasingly uneconomical. According to cost estimates from investment bank Lazard, the lower-end of the average price for coal-fired power is now almost $20 higher per megawatt hour than that for a natural gas. The lower-end of the average prices per megawatt hour for wind and utility-scale solar are even more competitive with coal, even without subsidies, at $29 and $36 respectively.

As of 2018, 70 percent of coal capacity in the U.S. had a higher running cost than renewables, and by 2030, that number is expected to reach 100 percent.
Nwtk,,, I am very surprised you would post this re... (show quote)


Even the liberal NPR admits that new coal plants are opening up but tries to claim it doesn't reverse the overall trend. LOL. Bringing coal mines back on line can take a full year, so sit tight!.

Reply
Aug 1, 2019 14:20:02   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
MR Mister wrote:
Losses in courts are expected since the courts are overrun with Obama Marxist. But that is changing.
Nowhere in the world is anybody expected to pay for something and not receive it, only Obama could conceive of that. And calling it "Affordable care Act" is a sick joke. $10,000 deductible, sic.

Now calling to tax the rich to hell, is the words of a criminal. So, after you k**l all the rich what do you do then? They people will never understand, they should say "how can we make ever average income person rich" but that will never happen from the Left.
Losses in courts are expected since the courts are... (show quote)



I bet you have never been forced to live without health insurance.. I have..

You do not like to tax the rich.. graduated taxation is not what you like?

do you have any alternative plan?

Your interpretation of the idea shows you have no concept of that policy either..



Reply
 
 
Aug 1, 2019 14:30:03   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
nwtk2007 wrote:
It would appear that the article you posited is out of date and inaccurate. Try again. The census issue is under appeal as is the Twitter issue. So, we shall see. Trump has won, as I stated, on the other issues I posted about. It's not a defeat when a liberal court decides against an issue which a fair and higher court later sides with Trump on.



July 10, 2019....Out of date???

Find something newer in 21 days we have not move much from that ratio..

trump is a loser, has been all his life..

every business that he started has failed, even owning a casino failed..

Only his fathers money has sustained the life style he thinks he deserves..now with all that gone, how and where did the orange pestilence get the many millions he has thrown around the last few decades?

You have no answer because the orange POS has never given an answer..

So you think any time trump criminal attempt to defeat our constitution, it is the fault of some liberal minded judge??

you better review all those dozens of judges, I will not do it for you..

If you do a search, which I very much doubt, you will find a number of those judges were place by past republicans.



Reply
Aug 1, 2019 14:34:49   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
nwtk2007 wrote:
Even the liberal NPR admits that new coal plants are opening up but tries to claim it doesn't reverse the overall trend. LOL. Bringing coal mines back on line can take a full year, so sit tight!.



if you have seen anything like that, supply a link....

To my knowledge, only one new mine has opened or been started in the last 3 or 4 years, let alone during trump term..



Reply
Aug 1, 2019 16:33:02   #
nwtk2007 Loc: Texas
 
permafrost wrote:
if you have seen anything like that, supply a link....

To my knowledge, only one new mine has opened or been started in the last 3 or 4 years, let alone during trump term..


LOL.

YOu don't just go back in and turn on the lights.

Environmental - regulations. what does your government require you to do to restart it? This list is growing very very long in developed countries, to the point where it would be impossible to restart many coal mines now.

Environmental - water for underground mines especially. All underground mines fill up with water so the longer it’s been mothballed, the more water to move. This water is often considered contaminated so it may need to be purified and/or pumped into a special dam, and building that dam might cost a lot. This is a $/regulation problem.

Safety - collapsed mines, underwater mines… This is a $ problem.

Community - sometimes old coal mining towns have gotten used to not having the mines operating, and many old coal mine towns are built around/on top of the mines where everyone used to work. Restarting a mine in/near a town today is much harder than 100 years ago. This is a time/perception/$/regulation problem.

Plant & Equipment - is everything broken/rusted/underwater for 5 years… This is a $ problem.

All in all, it can be a very tough gig, and it will get steadily tougher as community perceptions of coal worsen.

Reply
Aug 1, 2019 19:09:46   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
nwtk2007 wrote:
LOL.

YOu don't just go back in and turn on the lights.

Environmental - regulations. what does your government require you to do to restart it? This list is growing very very long in developed countries, to the point where it would be impossible to restart many coal mines now.

Environmental - water for underground mines especially. All underground mines fill up with water so the longer it’s been mothballed, the more water to move. This water is often considered contaminated so it may need to be purified and/or pumped into a special dam, and building that dam might cost a lot. This is a $/regulation problem.

Safety - collapsed mines, underwater mines… This is a $ problem.

Community - sometimes old coal mining towns have gotten used to not having the mines operating, and many old coal mine towns are built around/on top of the mines where everyone used to work. Restarting a mine in/near a town today is much harder than 100 years ago. This is a time/perception/$/regulation problem.

Plant & Equipment - is everything broken/rusted/underwater for 5 years… This is a $ problem.

All in all, it can be a very tough gig, and it will get steadily tougher as community perceptions of coal worsen.
LOL. br br YOu don't just go back in and turn on ... (show quote)



well said,,

I had not considered all of those things, but clearly they make reopening a mine very questionable.. or starting a new one..

We will see very little of coal from now on..



Reply
Page <<first <prev 16 of 18 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.