J.C.MacSwell

as you suspected: https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/09/politics/tom-steyer-presidential-campaign/index.html

Still closed...but not an isolated system. Conservation of momentum applies to all systems, but closed systems can be accelerated.

Presumably. It depends on how strictly you define universe.

Wow. Look at those Republicans, 4 or 5 times further from the median than the Dems...in whatever metric that was chosen... ...looks like the Dems leaders can certainly move everybody further left...what a great time to be a Democrat strategist! Try not to trample Bernie in the rush...

Is this a "but Trump is worse"? Let's not condemn Harris in the least because Trump is worse? There are 25 candidates. Almost all are better than Trump in most respects...but as a pack...not so much. I still have some faith in the average Democrat...when the candidates (almost) all run lemming like off the far left cliff...hopefully they vote for one still at the top of it.

The answer is probably yes. There's over 7 billion people in the World after all...there has to be someone out there...

Some of it is, without a doubt, and for good reason (she's playing identity politics)...and some of it is no doubt for bad reason (straight up racism) I like to think the former vastly exceeds the latter...

I have no idea what was intended...but what I think is funny is that it really shouldn't matter...though the way some talk it probably does. Maybe Harris can take a page out of the Warren playbook...get herself a DNA test and go from there...

You literally claimed justifiable discrimination can't exist. An ambiguous statement with regard to whether it can be fair doesn't qualify that claim, regardless of context.

So you believe discrimination is never justified? Hardly a straw man. I'm not making an argument for or against anything. Reread what I wrote more objectively. Nothing I stated was untrue. What's missing, for you, is a clear statement of bias that you would agree with.

Discrimination is discrimination. But that doesn't mean justifiable discrimination can't exist. Discriminating against those who may drop out, permanently or temporarily, to bear children would have the similar statistical justification as discriminating based on advanced age, where a shorter career could be expected. The difference is political, based on what people will accept as fair.

Kind of feel bad for you Americans...or is candidate Castro going overboard? https://www.cbsnews.com/news/castro-says-he-was-glad-to-see-nike-pull-betsy-ross-flag-shoes/ Heres one that also served during times where slavery was legal... It also served during the war that lead to ending slavery in America...so maybe it gets a pass? How about the current flag, unchanged since July 4 1960? Any hint of racism during that time? On topic, does Castro (not the only candidate espousing this view) get a passing grade on this? Or is he shooting himself in the foot...and worse potentially dragging any Democrats that agree with him down with him? (not to mention loading Trumps gun and handing it to him...) Should they not just stick to graciously accepting the Whitehouse in 2021, rather than insisting Trump stays in the game? The Betsy Ross Flag could become the next MAGA hat...hopefully it represents anti-identity politics and not anti-minority or anti immigration...but I would be very surprised, shocked in fact, if the GOP doesn't take advantage of this.

It depends somewhat on the size of the spacecraft and that of the blackhole, which effects the tidal effect between the near and far wall of the spacecraft.

You can't change the centre of mass and energy of an isolated system with respect to it's reference frame...even temporarily. It's as simple as that.

It's an analogy. It might not be a great one...but it's certainly not OT.

Even if you could assume that incorrect statement was true, why would one start sprinting mid race?

The first primary vote is seven months away. He's polling around seventh in a field of 25. Any rumours of Yang's demise are premature. He may have missed an opportunity to get four times the minutes to speak, to maybe suggest Biden or others might be somewhat racist to get a bump in the polls...but he never planned to do that anyway...it's not his style. It's a marathon not a sprint.

Still clearly movement in the right direction, especially given the fact that he had the least speaking time (though that may partially explain the strength of his numbers on the second day after..."who was the guy they wouldn't let speak?")

Sanders aside, I did not. I suggested they were further left than that of their party, and that that would make it more difficult to beat Trump. Sanders was the only one I consider to be "far left", though others seemed pulled in that direction and held some what I would consider far left positions or further left than necessary positions. Which I disagree with. I think they tend to fall somewhere in between, not just left of centre, but left of the average Democrat overall. Biden would be a bit of an exception being left of centre but right of the average Democrat. Clearly Yang is left of where I suggest he should be on some issues to beat Trump, but he is well outside the box with regard to thinking and style. Though I have some concerns with UBI, I'm for it. I believe in it as not just a balance to capitalism, but a potentially key component of capitalism that works more fairly for everyone, in a trickle up economy. Yang is for medical care for all, but not against private insurance, so pretty much mainstream on that even if slightly left. His stance on abortion is certainly left of centre like most candidates. He has other left of centre positions, some I am for and some not, and some I would advise and some not. (I wouldn't advise including everything I agree with e.g. allowing those incarcerated to vote) Probably the things I like most about Yang include his rejection of identity politics, focus on solutions, and he seems to want to include everyone, not just those on the left. He hasn't managed to give up on (almost) half of Americans. Your chart is for how much each candidate gain from immediately before each debated, to the following afternoon. This was issued about 2 days after the second debate. If both are correct, Yang must have picked up about 40,000 followers one day and over 60,000 the next.

Despite having the least speaking time, Andrew Yang seems to have picked up the most twitter followers since the debates...both in terms of percent and absolute numbers, and by very significant margins. https://nypost.com/2019/06/29/andrew-yang-scored-over-100k-new-twitter-followers-after-dem-debate/ #LetYangSpeak

Most of these reactionless drives are the equivalent to raising yourself up into the air by tugging on your own bootstraps. It all works out very nicely until you recognize all the forces at work at all times. Keep track of the centre of mass and energy of your complete system. If you think you have found a point where it can change it's position in it's own frame of reference, even temporarily, look there and you will find an error. If you can't find a point like that...you already know by definition that it does not work.

Plastics can have a significant effect on ecosystems, and any change in ecosystems can have further effects. Any changes are more likely to have detrimental than positive effects on higher organisms that evolved very slowly over long periods of time. I'm not aware of any connection between plastics in the ocean and the expected rate of climate change, but climate change is not the only potential negative effect on an ecosystem. You of course would know that...but your comments don't reflect it.

Great...we'll dump it off at your house

Stating something more accurately makes him a smartass?

So reduce the risk of thievery and vandalism by instituting caning?