Mccain, Obama who do you think will win and why

[matt1522]

CaptainCranky and SNGX1275

What about using wind energy to replace the 22% of energy being produced by natural gas and building natural gas cars(the plan was dreamed up by a guy named Pickens). It almost seems viable.

I know we cant go to all renewable energies(mainly because Oil and coal companies would not stand for it they like the fact that they can charge use as much as they want and we cant do a thing about it)

 

[NetCablesPlus]

matt1522: As you might imagine, I do have a candidate in mind. However, it would take me two-three full pages of text to go through my reasoning (based upon 40 years of observing politics in this country...I started following politics seriously in the 1968 elections, was a political science major in college, etc.) and I am certain that neither you nor I nor anyone else bothering to read this thread is interested in seeing such a diatribe at this time.

 

[matt1522]

Ok I was just curious two-three pages would be a bit much for a thread.

 

[mopar man]

Ok, this has gotten over my head, so let me just say this:

My dad loved the 70's oil crysis. Why? All those gas guzzling hot rods (Mopars, for him) got extremely cheap, so he bought everyone he came across for less than 200, and that was a LOT in Orlando.

Funny thing is, our 4500 lb. 1968 Plymouth VIP (Fury, every package available) gets about 26MPG from what we've calculated.... With a 383 big block, 4 bbl not 2.

 

[captaincranky]

Well......

My dad loved the 70's oil crysis. Why? All those gas guzzling hot rods (Mopars, for him) got extremely cheap, so he bought everyone he came across for less than 200, and that was a LOT in Orlando.

Did you ever sit in a gas line?

Funny thing is, our 4500 lb. 1968 Plymouth VIP (Fury, every package available) gets about 26MPG from what we've calculated.... With a 383 big block, 4 bbl not 2.

OK, the trick here is, the front two barrels of a four barrel carb, are generally smaller than if the carburetor were a only two barrel. Since the throttle is about 2/3rds open before the back barrels kick in, I'd say "mystery solved". And no, if you drive around blasting into the back two barrels, you won't get 26 mpg

 

[captaincranky]

It is the 1970's all over again: the press demoralizing the general public with nonstop negative reporting on a war they do not like and the economy that they want to bring to its knees; oil prices going through the roof, a financial scandal/crisis, unemployment on the upswing, Iran rattling its sabers in the Middle East, and a recession. Enter an unknown, and mostly clueless, liberal Democrat that everyone voted for because they wanted "change". Carter had a big smile and a reputation as a man of great intellect and moral character who would be what Washington DC needed as a wake up call.. Sound familiar? Ultimate result: have you heard the terms:; "stagflation" and "economic malaise"? They were coined during those miserable four years in which Carter bungled everything from economic policies to allowing Iran to humiliate us while they held our hostages until the end of his presidency. Pity that we may have to go through this again due to short memories.

First of all Jimmy Carter was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. IMHO all that tells you is that he was/is the king of fairies. I sincerely doubt that Barack Obama has the same emotional make up or background as Jimmy Carter. In fact, Jimmy Carter came from a plantation and Obama is from Chicago. You're dismissing all liberal democrats using Mr Carter as a yardstick, when in fact he was/is an a** hole unto himself . Mr Carter was the worst president I've ever seen until George Bush, and nobody could mistake him for a liberal. In fact, if you mistake him for anything other than a high functioning *****, you simply haven't been paying attention for the past eight years.

And when you talk of short memories, how could a culture than survived oil embargos, and gas lines wind up with the bigger the better SUV as the principle method of transportation?

Jack Kennedy and Bill Clinton could reasonably be called "liberal democrats", an I'd take either one over Obama, McCain, Bush, and last but not least, Jimmy Carter.

The "stagflation" you're going on about is a product of greed and stupidity at all levels of our culture, not just elected officials.

I heard Sarah Palin say that our economic troubles were caused by "people buying $300,000 dollar houses when they could only afford a $100,000 dollar house". She is a complete ***** for missing this subtlety; the $100,000 dollar houses were all selling for $300,000 dollars because you had *****s willing to pay those prices, and more *****s willing to approve the loans.

 

[KINGMEET]

I believe there will be a re-count. I am not sure who I am voting for. I respect both candiates and agrees with both of them on ceertain issues. Let me say something from my pont of view, on how i see things. In the media Obama is seen as the savior, and the only one who can make things right. He is "The Chosen One". Well on the flip side if anyone listens to 750AM. That's the station NewsTalk radio comes on in ATLANTA,GA, then you know from Hanney, Bortz, and Cain that Obama is everything but the "Savior". It seems to me that no one cares about to real facts, the real truths, the real reason "WE ARE AMERICANS"(No offense to non-Americans). Obama said that he would cut "capital gain taxes for small business owners." That sounds good, but last time I check we didnt pay captial gain taxes, we pay "Income Taxes" Im just saying. Yes I find myself lost in Obama speeches.


what can I say, he can speak hands down. I feel like hope and a sense of renewness with him. And on the flip side, I want to keep my money I make. I shouldnt have to divy up my earning to support others. Or should I. Mccain, gives me the picture of a true American. Its ok to go out and work hard, save your money and spend how ever you want to. So I am undecided.


Mccain I feel will not last his whole term in office do to "heath reasons". And yes I dont want to see Palin in as president either. I hear so much dirt about Obama, wheres the dirt on Mccain? Let me know, can someone help me?

I like both, but I dont want to live in a socialist environment, I mean I could be wrong.

Someone get dirt on Mccain(because right now, I want to keep my money and have less government in my business as possible.) I dont want people to vote for Obama just because he is black. Vote for him because you believe in his cause. Dont vote for Mccain because Obama is black. Come on people we got to do better. We have came a long way over 250 years. So I do what you want to do, but make sure its WHAT you want to do.


P.S. yall dont get mad at me, its just how I feel.
KINGMEET

P.S. Obama, because he is "different".

 

[captaincranky]

Someone get dirt on Mccain(because right now, I want to keep my money and have less government in my business as possible.)

Here's the dirt you wanted on McCain. He was held prisoner by the North Viet Namese for many years. We are all the sum total of our experiences, and as such, they color our outlook and actions. I'm sure that some lonely nights, he's still there.

I dont want people to vote for Obama just because he is black. Vote for him because you believe in his cause. Dont vote for Mccain because Obama is black. Come on people we got to do better. We have came a long way over 250 years. So I do what you want to do, but make sure its WHAT you want to do.
KINGMEET

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but, at least 75% of the registered African-American voters are going to vote for Barack Obama because he's black, whether you want them to or not.

The sad part of our political system is this; you're generally only given two choices, and both of them are generally wrong, deal with it.

I believe there will be a re-count.

No, there absolutely won't be a recount. Sen. Obama will receive at least 55% of the popular vote, and only the truly delusional would try to overcome that plurality with the "hanging chad" BS.

 

[mopar man]

I didn't set in a gas line, but my dad did.

And yes, we get into the four barrel quite often and still got that, but we kinda over-granny'd (if you know what im saying) it about just as often, so I think it'd even out.

 

[captaincranky]

I didn't set in a gas line, but my dad did.

And yes, we get into the four barrel quite often and still got that, but we kinda over-granny'd (if you know what im saying) it about just as often, so I think it'd even out.

Is every direction downhill from your house? LOL

 

[BorisandBailey]

This is the first election ever that me and my wife have written in a candidate. The two choices we've been given on the ballot are completely unacceptable.

 

[mopar man]

No! We don't live in heaven, sorry!

 

[captaincranky]

This is the first election ever that me and my wife have written in a candidate. The two choices we've been given on the ballot are completely unacceptable.

First let me say I'm on board with the protest and defiance of your actions. However, all you accomplish is throwing your vote away. You're supposed to choose between the lesser of two evils, it's the American way.

Here's Jackson Browne's take on it:

"They sell us the President, the same way,
They sell us our clothes and our cars.
They sell us everything from youth to religion,
The same time they sell us our wars."

Here's my take on it:

The sad part of our political system is this; you're generally only given two choices, and both of them are generally wrong, deal with it.

Sorry to be tacky enough to quote myself, but it seemed appropriate.

 

[BorisandBailey]

Darn right we threw our votes away. That's the American way, too. We found ourselves in a cul-de-sac, and we likely threw up the white flag which of itself is not any better, but that's how we dealt with it. We wrote in Hillary, and I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people did the same, but not enough to offset the election. I don't think I've seen as horrible of a choice of candidates as I've seen this year. Either way, next stop is hell. The question is, which method would you like to choose to get there? I do enjoy reading your take on things, Cranky; you're very insightful and you cut through the fluff.

 

[SNGX1275]

CaptainCranky and SNGX1275

What about using wind energy to replace the 22% of energy being produced by natural gas and building natural gas cars(the plan was dreamed up by a guy named Pickens). It almost seems viable.

I know we cant go to all renewable energies(mainly because Oil and coal companies would not stand for it they like the fact that they can charge use as much as they want and we cant do a thing about it)

Wind only works in certain areas, where Pickens is putting in his huge wind farm is one of the places it will work. Other places its not very viable. I think one of the big issues is storage of electricity, you can't really store AC. Coal power plants can ramp up electricity production and cut back based on demand. With wind you can't, how much you generate is based on how hard the wind is blowing. But I do think Wind should be more utilized as a suppliment.

As far as natural gas for cars. Perhaps. I think the busses in downtown Denver (that just run up and down a long street full of places to shop) run on Propane, I'm sure that isn't much different logistically than Natural Gas. I wonder how much you can safely store in a car though, it will need to be enough to drive a vehicle ~300 miles. I'm sure these questions are all answered on some websites out there, I just haven't looked into them, these are just some things that came to mind.

 

[captaincranky]

How Long........?

I live in PA, and it's always pointed out how wealthy we are with respect to coal reserves. Hey, it's even supposed to be anthracite, not that dirty old bituminous coal. So, some estimates say we have 500 years of coal left! Imagine that!

Personally, I think that seems a bit short of a time, but what do I know.

One of the most original concepts I've seen for alternative energy was either in "Omni" or "Popular Science", can't remember which. It went like this; we should sink giant turbines into the Gulf Stream, and generate power from them. Hey, it's a bit far fetched but, who knows.

Personally, I think we need to let the genie back out of the bottle. (Nukes).

 

[matt1522]

SNGX1275

Just the supplement of alternative energies would reduce green house gas emissions from coal.

Like putting solar panels in Death Valley it would be a really good supplement to our energy needs but in all likely hood would not completely get rid of our needs for other not so clean energies.

I like the we campaign at(http://www.wecansolveit.org) They say that we can completely change to clean energies within 10 years.( probably not likely but its a good goal to shoot for).
It would help move toward that goal if the word got out and more people atleast believed in the Oranization a little.

captaincranky

the only problem with nuclear fuel is dealing with waste and spent rods and the possibility of a melt down

 

[captaincranky]

SNGX1275
captaincranky

the only problem with nuclear fuel is dealing with waste and spent rods and the possibility of a melt down

Oh matt1522, There's no reason to get all stating the obvious on me. Read back through all my posts in this thread and you'll see what I mean.

It takes quite a bit of time to design, build, and test a nuclear facility, ten years maybe. That's a bunch, but it's probably less time than it would take to imagine a solution, test it, make it commercially feasible, the design it, build it, and test it all over again. The mere act of saying "we can solve it", doesn't. That said, "with great risks come great rewards", and that holds particularly true in nuclear power. "Not in my backyard" isn't a solution either. The truth be told, we might be damned if we do, (resume nuclear power), and damned if we don't. I can just picture the Saudis coming to repo the state of California, when we can no longer pay our oil bills, can't you?

 

[CCT]

Reduce the worlds population by 90% and there's enough oil for EVER!

 

[mopar man]

CCT, very true, but then we would have enough people to kill for fun, meaning all of the lunatics will have to feed on us...

 

[captaincranky]

Dyson leads the way with vacuum technology......

Reduce the worlds population by 90% and there's enough oil for EVER!

Do you have any idea how it impacts a childs sense of self worth to be born with a coat hanger in it's ear?

The most useless and parasitic among us seem to be the individuals who reproduce the most. I guess it's because they have the most free time on their hands. An idle mind is the Devil's tool for procreation. Ah, who's kidding who, you can never bring enough new crack babies into the world.

I'm pretty sure my mandatory sterilization idea isn't going to gain any traction, since I've already been suggesting it for years.

Ah, pay me no mind, I've been fairly twisted since I read Huxley's "Brave New World". (Thrice)

CCT, very true, but then we would have enough people to kill for fun, meaning all of the lunatics will have to feed on us...

Well Mopar, once upon a time, the smartest friend I ever had said this to me, "we're federally subsidizing the breeding of an entire segment of the population we'd be better off without". Forty years later, it rings truer than ever. So, they're already feeding off us, in ways too numerous to mention.

Excuse me, I have to dash out to sell my foodstamps to buy drugs from the guy down the block, he doesn't work either, he lives with his "b****" who's collecting welfare and living in her free section 8 house. Yeah, this s*** happens everyday, everywhere. Look on the bright side, at least you can see your tax dollars at work.