Ten oz

So you are aren't willing to answer the question? GDP is a measured thing we can look at, as if unemployment, inflation, average wage, graduation rate, home ownership percentage, and etc. You aren't answering the question. Rather you are just saying you felt things were better then.

How are you quantifying prosperity: GDP, unemployment, inflation, average wage, or what? This is the 3rd time I am asking.

You reference Bill Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky (definition of is) and then Ted Kennedy (Mary Jo Kopechne) before claiming Sexual predators blah blah blah. Both situations you reference were consensual ones. You are making a false equivalence. Additionally due diligence was done in both situations. Ken Star ran a thorough independent investigation in the Clinton Lewinksy affair and a grand jury invested the Chappaquiddick incident.

When was this 20yrs of prosperity and how are you quantifying it: GDP, unemployment, inflation, average wage, or what?

A lot of people believe positive thinking can transform reality. From Oprah to Trump many famous people have comment on the power of positive thinking. Like with anything though application and moderation is critical. Positive thinking in terms of confidence and aggressive pursuit of one's own beliefs can successfully help an individual to attain wealth. That is a uniquely individual goal (personal wealth) however and positive thoughts only anecdotally work. There are a lot of wealthy negative Nancy's out there. Ultimately more than confidence is required to solve problems.

Then there is the false equivalents where child molesters like Roy Moore who committed sexual acts on girls young as 14yrs old are Al Franken are discussed as equals. Ultimately all the Democrats can do is their own honest due diligence and hope enough people see the difference. I don't want to see a "if you can't beat them join them" attitude unfold.

Franken's Political career is rightfully in peril. Rather than being a black eye to Democrats I actually think it is something to celebrate. It shows a level of accountability which isn't present on the other side. Democrats are taking prompt action with regards to Rep. Convey and Sen. Franken; Conyers has stepped aside from the Judiciary Committee and Franken publicly acknowledging embarrassment. Stark contrast to a President who continues counter attack his own sexual harassment victims while endorsing a pedophile who is also a Republican. Some might attempt to fudge the context here an claim all this proves both sides are the same but that would be inaccurate. Clearly the Democratic party is holding their own members to a higher standard. I hope people are able to identify the distinction.

rangerx made statement of fact. Both WI's voting infrastructure and citizens were targeted. Do you have something to add or are you just trolling? "This afternoon, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security notified the Wisconsin Elections Commission for the first time that “Russian government cyber actors” unsuccessfully targeted the state’s voter registration system in 2016. WEC Administrator Michael Haas has informed WEC Chair Mark Thomsen, who directed Commission staff to investigate why election officials were not notified earlier and report to the Commission at its meeting Tuesday." http://elections.wi.gov/node/5253 A number of Russian-linked Facebook ads specifically targeted Michigan and Wisconsin, two states crucial to Donald Trump's victory last November, according to four sources with direct knowledge of the situation. http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/03/politics/russian-facebook-ads-michigan-wisconsin/index.html When was this and how can you quantify it? Unemployment numbers and GDP is the way I generally have seen health of the U.S. economy measured. What can you empirically tell us about this prosperous time you are referencing?

@ tar I asked you specific policy questions in a post above which you seem to have chosen to ignore. Instead you just continue to post about your feelings. If there is common ground to be had at some point we need to discuss actual policy. After all Trump and Congress are attempting to change policy: taxes, healthcare, NAFTA,TPP, and etc. Other than carrying on about supporting your president what actual policies do you support. What do you believe will be in the tax cut package coming out of the Senate?

I believe both the U.S. and Russia will eventually get rid their nuclear arsenals. I think the arsenals are redundant at this point. Without Nuclear weapons would Russia suddenly become an easy nation to invade; of course not. The U.S. can turn any nation on the planet into Swiss Cheese with nuclear weapons. Our (U.S.) stealth bombers can fly from domestically located bases and precision strike any targets anywhere on the planet; autonomously even. Having nuclear weapons isn't keeping the U.S. or Russia save in 2017. As for North Korea I also think they can be persuaded to give up nuclear weapons. As with the U.S. and Russia it isn't nuclear weapons keeping Kim in power. It is his massive artillery along the border and 6 million man military keeping Kim in power. The main reason the U.S. hasn't gone in and removed the nuclear material is that the size of North Korea's military insures a protracted war which would absolutely spill over into South Korea and Japan. I see the current state of nuclear weapons as analogous to having cable TV. When I was a kid having cable TV and to what extent (premium channels) said something about the economic status of your family. It was understood those with HBO had more than those without. As a result many people got it in their heads, as a status symbol and matter of culture) , that cable TV was a must. Today I don't have cable. I have Netflix and the internet but no cable. When discussing TV shows, sports, and what not with people younger than myself the fact that I do not have cable isn't an issue. When I am around people my own age or above the fact that I don't have cable is made an issue of. I have been called cheap, had family members ask if my finances were okay, and etc. To those that have it in their minds that cable is a must; it is a must. Just as people above the age of 60yrs old mostly all still have land lines in their homes. The generation raised during the cold war had it drummed into their heads that having nuclear weapons makes a country powerful and safe. That adversaries fear nuclear weapons so just having them is a necessary deterrent. That generation will never think it is a good idea to give up nuclear weapons just as my wife's 92yr old grandmother will never give her land line and cable TV. Future generations will feel differently. Those raise during a the war of terror where adversaries are nation less and fear of terrorist getting their hands on existing nuclear material is a greater concern than having nuclear weapons as a deterrent.

The problem is that no one knows what Trump thinks about most issues. It is impossible to find middle ground when wants and goals are mysterious. Trump campaigned that the govt would pay for healthcare and that everyone would be covered. Once elected he asked Republicans in Congress to figure something out; he didn't have a plan of his own. Congress repeatedly fail to come up with any that didn't raise costs while also causing millions to lose coverage. Trump's position became to just let the whole healthcare system fail and figure something out from there (his actual words). It is currently unclear if subsidies will be paid or which parts of the ACA are on the chopping block. Where is the middle ground; none of us even know what is happening. tar, you have been in this thread defending the current push for tax cuts but what can you definitively tell us about it: will it include changes to taxes for 401k's, will it include repeal of mandate for health insurance, will it limit state tax deductions, will it lower capital gains tax across the board, will it change or illuminate the estate tax, what will the corporate tax rat be, and as a resident of NJ do you believe you'll be paying more or less overall (local & federal) if passed?? What about Pay-As-You-Go Act (PayGo) will Congress include a waiver for it or allow the automatic cuts to things like medicare kick in? How can you and I find middle ground if neither of us know what is happening? You are complimenting the Presidents achievements based crowd reaction to a speech in China meanwhile Trump hasn't even passed a budget yet! We are still on continuation from Obama's last budget. Stop with the "everyone hates on my President" nonsense and start listing some facts and real policy. Start specifically explaining what Trump has done or is in the process of doing. You like how he has handled China, great,explain to me what Trump plans to do about the islands in the South China sea, negotiating a new trans-pacific partnership, labeling China a currency manipulator, and etc. What about NAFTA: is Trump re-negotiating it, pulling out, or is nothing changed? You like how Trump has handle Syria; is Assad an friend now or is it still the position of the U.S. that Assad goes? I bet between you and I there is tremendous middle ground on most issues. The problem is you have chosen to make defending Trump a priority over all else. You defend Trump despite having no clear understand of what his plans are. It is a nonstarter position if middle ground is desired. Arguing that what the President thinks doesn't matter and that it all comes down to what people do reads good but doesn't make any sense. Our government is us; we the people. Our government creates and manages the policies/laws that governs our lives. What our representatives think,what their intentions are, are paramount.

"letting", has the number of U.S. citizens being captured or killed aboard decreased under Trump? Lifestyles always change. My grandmother was born in a home in Nebraska that didn't have electricity. I was born in a full service hospital. 70yrs ago owning a car , any car, was an affluent thing. Our (U.S.) policy toward immigration use to be “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free”. Everything changes, lifestyles change, you do not live the way your grandparents lived. As that applies to energy and economics; you do not use the same amount of energy, eat the same diet, produce the same amount of waste, or etc as your grandparents did nor with your grand kids mirror you. In context it is inaccurate and purposely misleading. The size of the crowds doesn't matter. These are battles Trump chooses to take on by making claims which aren't true. You are basically saying that everyone should ignore it for the sake of unity and find middle ground between Trump's lies and the truth. That isn't where middle ground can exist; between fantasy and reality. What has he got done? North Korea has escalated their nuclear program since Trump has been in office. That is a fact.

As tar's contradictions apply to this thread His electoral win was 46th out 58. It was one of the closer electoral wins in history. Claiming it was "substantial"is just another lie. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/12/18/us/elections/donald-trump-electoral-college-popular-vote.html Nope, already linked you Trump and Spicer specifically arguing about the physical crowd size. Arguing about tv ratings and etc was the pivot. How convenient. You see a virtue of sorts to his lying. Examples? The Senate voted in an overwhelmingly bipartisan manner (98-2) to sanctions Russia for what they did during the election and Trump has been sitting on those sanctions and casting doubts about what actually happened. You approved of that? What has Trump accomplished with regards to Syria or ISIS? What is Trump's actually policy regarding North Korea? Trump's talk is loud but what is the actual policy? I am not impressed by Trump saying the U.S. will retaliate if North Korea attacks; no duh. Lifestyles change all the time. I use to have a hard line phone, VHS player, and a tower based computer. The average person use to never travel further than 20 miles from the place of there birth in a lifetime. Fear of change is useless and feeding on that fear to justify stagnation always leads to trouble.

tar posted the below illustration Jan 2016. It seems he was predicting his own future. democrat republican independent trump supporter http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/89809-what-is-americas-biggest-problem/?page=21&tab=comments#comment-902878

Nope! Trump and his people where talking about in person.

There is a very strange dichotomy at play between what people honestly understand vs what they honestly want. For example: David Duke is an American white supremacist, white nationalist, and former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan yet denies being racist "I don't consider myself a racist, I don't hate other peoples, but I certainly want to preserve my own. And I think that's true of all people." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Duke David Duke understand that being racist is wrong so he denies that he is. I see this behavior all the time. People saying obviously racist things they insist they are not racist. In the case of what we see in this thread: Trump clearly denying climate change and tar claiming he didn't. There is a natural course correction which happens when one concedes they are doing something they shouldn't. In today's political environment many seem to be avoiding course correction by refusing to concede to obvious truths.

Realities of life isn't this thread's topic. This thread is about the lack of truth/facts in Political discussion. Swansont ask you for a citation to support a position you were asserting fact. Death and taxes isn't an appropriate response.

@ tar, nothing in your response to Swansont addresses your previous assertions. Swansont asked for citations from you to support your claims; not your philosophical views of government.

The Acting Attorney General Sally Yates questioned the legality of the travel ban. Trump fired her for it. Courts then proved her right by blocking the ban. Trump's administration then sent the ban through a few rewrites before it was able to temporarily go into effect. I don't see that as an example of a "deep state" conspiracy. The travel ban as initially conceived was unconstitutional. Yates had provided Trump good counsel.

Tar, you are in this thread posting about unsupported conspiracies. I have linked supporting info to every thing I have state. Start you own deep state thread. This isn't the place for it.

Negative 1, you are citing a conspiracy for which you have no evidence. More over the Senate, Republican (Trump's party) controlled Senate, voted 98-2 to sanction Russia for their actions against us during the 2016 Election. This isn't even a partisan issue. As for the transfer of power Republicans controlled the house and Senate during the Obama administration and currently control every branch.

My understanding (I do not work with solar) is that the intensity of light and duration of exposure are calculated. Some locations receive more direct light in the morning vs the afternoon and etc. Ideally panels should be located where light at its most powerful during the day is maximized. Solar panels are located where they will get the highest intensity for the longest duration of time and not merely where they will get light in general for the longest duration of time. Ultimately I think developing better storage is required. Using solar in real time isn't practical as using it via a battery.

Trump clearly says that temperature will go up and will go down as it has done for millions of years;" it is called weather". The remark is totally dismissive of man made climate change. There is also the tweet where Trump says China created it and there are Trump's own Press Sec unwilling to clarify. You are dishonestly playing with Trump own words. This is the sort of behavior this thread is about. You can't even admit Trump says what he in fact says. That is the state of politics today. You want me to accept your personal understand of what Trump meant to say rather than what Trump clearly says. It is a nonstarter. Trump knowingly denies, casts doubts, or ignores (Trump seldom answers the same question the same way twice) climate change so not to burden the economic side of his argument. Is that when Mueller is investing, a joke? Paul Manafort wasn't indicted for a joke. Papadopolous isn't indicted for a joke. Don Trump Jr wasn't communicating with wikileaks about a joke and didn't meet with Russians to discuss a joke. Jared Kushner didn't exclude a joke from his security clearance application and exclude a joke from the emails he turned over to the senate intelligence committee. A joke isn't why the Attorney General recused himself from investigations relating to Russia.

Those who can afford to do what is right should. As for the price the more alternatives are used better technologies and processes will be discovered and prices will fall. When flight was first developed only the wealthy could afford it. Same goes for everything from home computers to home A/C units. There was a time when only wealthy people could afford glass windows. Price points change rapidly. Lying about the downside to various technologies and processes is not useful to anyone. It doesn't help that billions of dollars have been invested to purposely confuse people. Those are billions of dollars which could have been invested in R&D or used to offset some of the extra cost so many fear are associated with alternative energy. You have worked with electronics and power distribution; as have I. We both know, I think, that enormous amounts of power is wasted. It is an aspect of this topic which is often overlooked. So often people get stuck debating the best ways to produce ever increasing amounts of energy to the exclusion of best practices for using energy. Which way a windows face in house or whether or not there are trees in a yard creating shade can make a big difference in how much heating or cooling a home needs. Location of windows and the types of surfaces in a home can greatly impact how much lighting is needed. There are many dimensions that can be discussed regarding the best way to use our resources while managing our economy.

You are posting your own feelings about what you choose to accept. Trump has denied that human caused climate change and his spokes people refuse to clarify. His pivot is to discuss the economy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGEzFbRl-g8 At the one minute mark O'Reilly asks Trump specifically if he believes if humans impact climate. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uJCrYuZ7yI The WH's Press Sec won't say whether or not Trump believes human impact climate. So you are basically saying that is order to find middle ground I must accept your denials and deflections? Trump has denied climate and has denied Russia hacking in his own words many times. I could spend the day copying you links. Your refusal to acknowledge what is so plainly and painfully true is a major barrier to middle ground.