This. I always laugh though when I read 'I vote the candidate and not the party.' You always vote the party because it is the wonks that write the words that animate the candidate.
The party has a lot to do with it. I'm not saying that the party will have no influence, or that the party should have NO influence. But a lot of Americans come in with the belief that they are going to vote for the Democratic candidate, whoever that is. Or the Republican candidate, no matter who it is. I think that's a mindset that props up those parties with little accountability to affect change.
Washington's position was flawed, however, since in his lifetime the structure of government did almost nothing to represent the people anyway. Still doesn't, but in his day was worse.
In Washington's time, the vision of the United States was that it was a loosely grouped cluster of 13 self-governing entities, with the federal government only doing the the things that individual states were incapable of doing themselves -- like settling interstate trade disputes and providing for national defense.
Elizabeth Warren decided not to run against Hillary. Joe Biden stepped aside for Hillary.
Biden vs Trump, what an election that would be. Maybe that could still be 2020. Tim Kaine isn't looking too bad, though I don't think he's president-material, not yet.
On the other hand, if he doesn't deliver on his promises, because he comes to his senses, what will all the angry people, whose anger he has stoked with his talk, how will they react? Are they going to take it stoically? Well, we will see, but I think we are in for a bumpy ride, and we will feel it no matter where we are.
Having seen this sort of thing over and over again... no, there's not going to be a reckoning. Because, like Trump did all throughout the primaries and general election, you can always blame someone else when you're wrong, and a sizable number of idiots will say you were right and it was someone else's fault.
So when Trump's policies fail, it will be the work of those shameful Democrats somehow.
Yes, but they aren't the be-all-end-all some think they are, as this year showed.
I disagree, if the voters had done their jobs in the primaries, we wouldn't have had the choice of the two worst candidates not only in this election, but in my lifetime.
Your party just won the White House, against all the mainstream beliefs that it was impossible. Why are you so angry?
It shouldn't be the party, or be about the party. It should be about the candidate. George Washington warned of the perils of political parties, but no one took his advice. Washington said, and this is a direct quote "Fuck the Democratic Party and Republican Party because someday they're going to push a cheetoh-colored monkey and a corrupt harpy for President, and somehow the harpy will win, and you'll just have to like it." I'm pretty sure he said that because he grew weed, but it was prophetic.
more BS about clockkid I see. I bet the first thing you ask rape victims is what they were wearing too.
If you pull apart a clock and make it look like a suitcase bomb, don't be surprised if the first reaction is that you're treated like someone who made a suitcase bomb.
He's seriously off the rails here, but I can sort of see why he felt the need to pipe up and say something. In hindsight it was obviously the wrong choice, and chances are he won't be in the post long regardless of who wins (definitely if Clinton wins, he's got Hatch Act written all over him).
That's for sure, he showed himself to be fairly rattled and bowing to political pressure (he was warned ahead of time that he shouldn't mention Weiner's laptop until the FBI had time to investigate it). I have a hard time believing that he'll stay, though any attempt of the next President to replace him would definitely have the appearance (though probably not reality) being a purely partisan move of retribution.
Europe should take some responsibility for itself. If pre WW2 Europe wanted America's help, it should have forged a treaty
Unbreakable treaties was EXACTLY what led to World War I in the first place. Everyone got drawn into the war because of mutual defense treaties until a pissing match between three nations spread into a conflict involving almost every major country in the world.
by leveraging her 9%-charitable foundation and the huge speaking fees
I haven't looked into the Clinton Foundation's numbers, but it sounds a lot like The United Way (and that isn't a compliment). But what is wrong with speaking fees? No, I'm serious, people keep bringing this up as if it was some major crime, but the fact of the matter is that many private organizations are willing to pay money for speakers to give a presentation. I don't get it. It's certainly not illegal, but is it even morally wrong to give a private speech for money?
The entire primary was a sham. Sanders never had a chance.
Of course he never had a chance. He's too far left for much of the Democratic Party, and the only reason he's in that party is that to get elected you must be in one of the big two. Not as bad of a problem as that was that he could never connect with minorities. He made some early gains up north, but he never had much support in South. He had decent support from white folks (like Trump does), yet very little outside of that demographic (though probably a bit more than Trump did). We've moved into a phase in our history where candidates now need more than just the white vote.
The fact that the Clintons are always 1 foot away from going to jail after all these scandals going back decades proves that they're completely honest, upright people.
I think it shows that when they have a line that they're not supposed to cross, they straddle it as best they can, getting away with violating the spirit of the law without necessarily violating the letter. It's why even those who don't think they've committed crimes think the Clintons show poor judgment, that they get away with exactly what they can get away with.
I don't think he is an idiot at all, I think this was all part of a plan to make sure Hillary appears exonerated for her email server, right before the election.
Then he botched the timing; most analysts right now are speculating that Clinton will be unable to make up the ground that she'd lost when the FBI announced that they'd reopened the investigation. That was quite a wallop, and makes Bernie supports and those on the fences even more apathetic and unlikely to vote.
If he actually wanted to make Hillary look exonerated, he would have waited until after the election to make the announcement, or else just waited until the FBI had actually looked through the emails. Hillary does not benefit from possible talks of investigation, even if it's open and closed again. It just brings back into public consciousness one of Hillary's bigger judgment lapses, something she can't afford. She was flying high at the time of the FBI's first announcement, and seemed to be pulling away from Trump.
This whole situation looks worse for Comey than it does for Clinton, and I thought that Hillary's situation would be hard to top.
Comey didn't think there was enough evidence for prosecution. Ok. Then he announces "We found Anthony Weiner's laptop! Maybe there's evidence here!" without knowing what was on the laptop, right before the election. Then he announces "shit, nothing here after all. Sorry for mentioning it."
Six Hundred, Fifty Thousand Emails [wsj.com] found on Weiner's laptop. It should have taken weeks to review [slate.com]
Maybe Slate didn't know what they were talking about? Most of the emails, having gone through government servers, were already available, and you don't need to inspect them by hand. Any sysadmin worth half of what he actually gets paid could write a script in a few hours that scanned through a list of messageids, compared them against a database of known messageids, and saved any that were sent to, or came from Clinton. This whole notion that Anthony Weiner (!!!) would have a bunch of classified stuff on his laptop from Hilary was a real desperation stretch in the first place.
But of course, like any great conspiracy theory like the moon landing hoax, 9/11 being orchestrated by Bush and Cheney, or that drug companies are hiding cures for cancer, lack of evidence is only evidence of an even greater coverup. A coverup that just grows and grows no matter how much your position is debunked.
I've been editing photos on PCs for 20 years. Started with PSP 3, moved to PSP 5, moved to GIMP. Have never needed Scrotoplop, ever.
What the fuck is Quicken and why do you think "everyone" needs it?
PROTIP: "everyone" is not a synonym of "me".
I don't need Quicken, and haven't used it since my high school days. But it is a frequent example I hear from people thinking of moving to Linux that I don't have a good substitute for.
And yes, most Photoshop users retch in horror when confronted with GIMP. It's not a substitute.
I'm not sure what the problem with that plug is, other than the space it takes up. Nice thing is, you'll have no problem figuring out how to plug it in (which end up) even in the dark.
The picture you linked is a combination cable which has AC and DC charging capabilities. The AC charging is the round plug on top, and the two smaller circles on the bottom are the DC charger. If you have a station which does not have DC fast charging capabilities, then they might elect for their charger to come without those two smaller circle connectors on the bottom. The J1772 wiki page has a graphic art representing both schemes. That's also known as the "Combined Charging Scheme."
The Nissan Leaf comes with a J1772 AC-only plug (most J1772 chargers are not the combo version) and a Chademo DC fast-charge.
Tesla's charger was patented, but Musk open sourced the patents two years ago. Now, that said, J1772 is a much older standard, in use for electric cars since 2001. The first Tesla roadster came out in 2008, and they decided to avoid the standard plug designs and make their own.
I've actually driven and used the J1772 plugs - they are freaking SLOW compared to supercharging even though the supercharger plug is simpler. Can someone explain this?
A Tesla supercharger is a very fast DC power, but the equipment is extremely expensive and you have to have a fairly beefy connection to the electrical grid. The Combo SAE and the Chademo fast charge can also both charge quicker than your AC-only J1772 which is a much lower power plug, usually running at 6.6kW or 11kW. You don't need to be able to draw as much as fast. An 11kW charger will give me around 11 miles of range in a half-hour charge. The DC fast charge will give me around 100 miles of range in a half-hour charge. That's a lot of electricity!
At work, we have a number of J1772 plugs for daytime charging. The typical charging station costs $1000-$2000 there. When our facilities manager looked into seeing if we could install a fast-charger, he found that the BASE model for this ran around $30k, and it would have required extensive electrical improvements as well. That's why the slower J1772s are more prevalent.
Except for a few outliers, people who live in metropolitan areas yet forego cars, the large majority of people without a car are poor -- low enough income that they won't be paying any federal taxes.
The 2012 Camry LE has a 17 gallon gas tank and EPA mileage rating of 25 - 35 mpg, which means it can travel 425 to 595 miles on a single "charge". The Leaf can travel 107 miles on a single charge, and is a smaller car to start with. It would be more fair to compare vehicles similar in size, range and luxuriousness.
My 2016 Leaf is certainly a lot more comfortable and luxurious than any Camry I've ever been in. They're about the same size -- the camry is 15 inches longer, though they have equivalent passenger room. Range... well, of course the camry is going to beat the Leaf on range. Most gas cars will beat nearly all electric cars when it comes to range. There's really no point in trying to compare cars of similar ranges right now. I'd even say doing so is comparing apples and oranges. I mean that because I've found you do have to treat the electric car differently -- it will be a mistake to think it's a drop-in replacement for the ICE car. It's not just a regular car that plug in instead of filled.
I love driving my electric car, but I'm aware of its limitations. Long trips are something I will rarely do with the electric, and doing so will make that trip longer, but it's superior is almost every other case.
I'll do your homework for you when you start to pay me. I gave the argument and someone else easily gave the same exact point. How about YOU do YOUR OWN work and tell us what the benefit is. Dipshits like you are the ones running around demanding everyone do what you say, without facts to back your bullshit claims. GIVE US THE FACTS, or STFU and go sit back in your playpen.
|
Most Slashdotters aren't lazy fucks who shy away from crunching the numbers. Or at least, they didn't used to be.
Then again, we've also seen this trend over and over again in various forums on topics like these. Someone shouting "do the numbers for me." Then someone steps in and does. And then the cry is "your numbers are bullshit" because you don't WANT to believe what you're shown.
After seeing this cycle over and over again, it gets old, and we stop wasting our time.
Slashdot Mirror
This. I always laugh though when I read 'I vote the candidate and not the party.' You always vote the party because it is the wonks that write the words that animate the candidate.
The party has a lot to do with it. I'm not saying that the party will have no influence, or that the party should have NO influence.
But a lot of Americans come in with the belief that they are going to vote for the Democratic candidate, whoever that is. Or the Republican candidate, no matter who it is. I think that's a mindset that props up those parties with little accountability to affect change.
Washington's position was flawed, however, since in his lifetime the structure of government did almost nothing to represent the people anyway. Still doesn't, but in his day was worse.
In Washington's time, the vision of the United States was that it was a loosely grouped cluster of 13 self-governing entities, with the federal government only doing the the things that individual states were incapable of doing themselves -- like settling interstate trade disputes and providing for national defense.
Elizabeth Warren decided not to run against Hillary.
Joe Biden stepped aside for Hillary.
Biden vs Trump, what an election that would be. Maybe that could still be 2020.
Tim Kaine isn't looking too bad, though I don't think he's president-material, not yet.
On the other hand, if he doesn't deliver on his promises, because he comes to his senses, what will all the angry people, whose anger he has stoked with his talk, how will they react? Are they going to take it stoically? Well, we will see, but I think we are in for a bumpy ride, and we will feel it no matter where we are.
Having seen this sort of thing over and over again... no, there's not going to be a reckoning. Because, like Trump did all throughout the primaries and general election, you can always blame someone else when you're wrong, and a sizable number of idiots will say you were right and it was someone else's fault.
So when Trump's policies fail, it will be the work of those shameful Democrats somehow.
PARTICIPATING IN PRIMARIES,
Yes, but they aren't the be-all-end-all some think they are, as this year showed.
I disagree, if the voters had done their jobs in the primaries, we wouldn't have had the choice of the two worst candidates not only in this election, but in my lifetime.
Whoops, Except it was the monkey who won. Like everyone else, he figured the harpy would win but wasn't excited about it.
Speaking as a Republican, FUCK YOU.
Your party just won the White House, against all the mainstream beliefs that it was impossible. Why are you so angry?
It shouldn't be the party, or be about the party. It should be about the candidate. George Washington warned of the perils of political parties, but no one took his advice. Washington said, and this is a direct quote "Fuck the Democratic Party and Republican Party because someday they're going to push a cheetoh-colored monkey and a corrupt harpy for President, and somehow the harpy will win, and you'll just have to like it." I'm pretty sure he said that because he grew weed, but it was prophetic.
more BS about clockkid I see.
I bet the first thing you ask rape victims is what they were wearing too.
If you pull apart a clock and make it look like a suitcase bomb, don't be surprised if the first reaction is that you're treated like someone who made a suitcase bomb.
He's seriously off the rails here, but I can sort of see why he felt the need to pipe up and say something. In hindsight it was obviously the wrong choice, and chances are he won't be in the post long regardless of who wins (definitely if Clinton wins, he's got Hatch Act written all over him).
That's for sure, he showed himself to be fairly rattled and bowing to political pressure (he was warned ahead of time that he shouldn't mention Weiner's laptop until the FBI had time to investigate it). I have a hard time believing that he'll stay, though any attempt of the next President to replace him would definitely have the appearance (though probably not reality) being a purely partisan move of retribution.
Europe should take some responsibility for itself. If pre WW2 Europe wanted America's help, it should have forged a treaty
Unbreakable treaties was EXACTLY what led to World War I in the first place. Everyone got drawn into the war because of mutual defense treaties until a pissing match between three nations spread into a conflict involving almost every major country in the world.
Oh! I just got a BINGO on my government conspiracy scorecard!
Health issues could also arise with her again. Perhaps Kaine would be a better President anyway.
No matter who wins on Tuesday, we will all lose.
Hillary Clinton having to step down might be the best (only?) reason to vote for her, yet I'm not willing to take that outside chance anyway.
by leveraging her 9%-charitable foundation and the huge speaking fees
I haven't looked into the Clinton Foundation's numbers, but it sounds a lot like The United Way (and that isn't a compliment).
But what is wrong with speaking fees? No, I'm serious, people keep bringing this up as if it was some major crime, but the fact of the matter is that many private organizations are willing to pay money for speakers to give a presentation. I don't get it. It's certainly not illegal, but is it even morally wrong to give a private speech for money?
The entire primary was a sham. Sanders never had a chance.
Of course he never had a chance. He's too far left for much of the Democratic Party, and the only reason he's in that party is that to get elected you must be in one of the big two. Not as bad of a problem as that was that he could never connect with minorities. He made some early gains up north, but he never had much support in South. He had decent support from white folks (like Trump does), yet very little outside of that demographic (though probably a bit more than Trump did). We've moved into a phase in our history where candidates now need more than just the white vote.
The fact that the Clintons are always 1 foot away from going to jail after all these scandals going back decades proves that they're completely honest, upright people.
I think it shows that when they have a line that they're not supposed to cross, they straddle it as best they can, getting away with violating the spirit of the law without necessarily violating the letter. It's why even those who don't think they've committed crimes think the Clintons show poor judgment, that they get away with exactly what they can get away with.
and yet she gets a free pass for things we're putting the likes of General Petraeus away for.
Petraeus has been doing analysis for ABC News, and I don't see him wearing a prison jumpsuit.
I thought many of the conservatives who support Donald would favor federal gridlock over federal action any day.
I don't think he is an idiot at all, I think this was all part of a plan to make sure Hillary appears exonerated for her email server, right before the election.
Then he botched the timing; most analysts right now are speculating that Clinton will be unable to make up the ground that she'd lost when the FBI announced that they'd reopened the investigation. That was quite a wallop, and makes Bernie supports and those on the fences even more apathetic and unlikely to vote.
If he actually wanted to make Hillary look exonerated, he would have waited until after the election to make the announcement, or else just waited until the FBI had actually looked through the emails. Hillary does not benefit from possible talks of investigation, even if it's open and closed again. It just brings back into public consciousness one of Hillary's bigger judgment lapses, something she can't afford. She was flying high at the time of the FBI's first announcement, and seemed to be pulling away from Trump.
This whole situation looks worse for Comey than it does for Clinton, and I thought that Hillary's situation would be hard to top.
Comey didn't think there was enough evidence for prosecution. Ok.
Then he announces "We found Anthony Weiner's laptop! Maybe there's evidence here!" without knowing what was on the laptop, right before the election.
Then he announces "shit, nothing here after all. Sorry for mentioning it."
Uuuuuggggh.
Six Hundred, Fifty Thousand Emails [wsj.com] found on Weiner's laptop. It should have taken weeks to review [slate.com]
Maybe Slate didn't know what they were talking about? Most of the emails, having gone through government servers, were already available, and you don't need to inspect them by hand. Any sysadmin worth half of what he actually gets paid could write a script in a few hours that scanned through a list of messageids, compared them against a database of known messageids, and saved any that were sent to, or came from Clinton. This whole notion that Anthony Weiner (!!!) would have a bunch of classified stuff on his laptop from Hilary was a real desperation stretch in the first place.
But of course, like any great conspiracy theory like the moon landing hoax, 9/11 being orchestrated by Bush and Cheney, or that drug companies are hiding cures for cancer, lack of evidence is only evidence of an even greater coverup. A coverup that just grows and grows no matter how much your position is debunked.
What the shuddering fuck are you talking about?
I've been editing photos on PCs for 20 years. Started with PSP 3, moved to PSP 5, moved to GIMP. Have never needed Scrotoplop, ever.
What the fuck is Quicken and why do you think "everyone" needs it?
PROTIP: "everyone" is not a synonym of "me".
I don't need Quicken, and haven't used it since my high school days. But it is a frequent example I hear from people thinking of moving to Linux that I don't have a good substitute for.
And yes, most Photoshop users retch in horror when confronted with GIMP. It's not a substitute.
I'm not sure what the problem with that plug is, other than the space it takes up. Nice thing is, you'll have no problem figuring out how to plug it in (which end up) even in the dark.
The picture you linked is a combination cable which has AC and DC charging capabilities. The AC charging is the round plug on top, and the two smaller circles on the bottom are the DC charger. If you have a station which does not have DC fast charging capabilities, then they might elect for their charger to come without those two smaller circle connectors on the bottom. The J1772 wiki page has a graphic art representing both schemes. That's also known as the "Combined Charging Scheme."
The Nissan Leaf comes with a J1772 AC-only plug (most J1772 chargers are not the combo version) and a Chademo DC fast-charge.
Tesla's charger was patented, but Musk open sourced the patents two years ago. Now, that said, J1772 is a much older standard, in use for electric cars since 2001. The first Tesla roadster came out in 2008, and they decided to avoid the standard plug designs and make their own.
I've actually driven and used the J1772 plugs - they are freaking SLOW compared to supercharging even though the supercharger plug is simpler. Can someone explain this?
A Tesla supercharger is a very fast DC power, but the equipment is extremely expensive and you have to have a fairly beefy connection to the electrical grid. The Combo SAE and the Chademo fast charge can also both charge quicker than your AC-only J1772 which is a much lower power plug, usually running at 6.6kW or 11kW. You don't need to be able to draw as much as fast. An 11kW charger will give me around 11 miles of range in a half-hour charge. The DC fast charge will give me around 100 miles of range in a half-hour charge. That's a lot of electricity!
At work, we have a number of J1772 plugs for daytime charging. The typical charging station costs $1000-$2000 there. When our facilities manager looked into seeing if we could install a fast-charger, he found that the BASE model for this ran around $30k, and it would have required extensive electrical improvements as well. That's why the slower J1772s are more prevalent.
Except for a few outliers, people who live in metropolitan areas yet forego cars, the large majority of people without a car are poor -- low enough income that they won't be paying any federal taxes.
The 2012 Camry LE has a 17 gallon gas tank and EPA mileage rating of 25 - 35 mpg, which means it can travel 425 to 595 miles on a single "charge". The Leaf can travel 107 miles on a single charge, and is a smaller car to start with. It would be more fair to compare vehicles similar in size, range and luxuriousness.
My 2016 Leaf is certainly a lot more comfortable and luxurious than any Camry I've ever been in. They're about the same size -- the camry is 15 inches longer, though they have equivalent passenger room. Range... well, of course the camry is going to beat the Leaf on range. Most gas cars will beat nearly all electric cars when it comes to range. There's really no point in trying to compare cars of similar ranges right now. I'd even say doing so is comparing apples and oranges. I mean that because I've found you do have to treat the electric car differently -- it will be a mistake to think it's a drop-in replacement for the ICE car. It's not just a regular car that plug in instead of filled.
I love driving my electric car, but I'm aware of its limitations. Long trips are something I will rarely do with the electric, and doing so will make that trip longer, but it's superior is almost every other case.
I'll do your homework for you when you start to pay me. I gave the argument and someone else easily gave the same exact point. How about YOU do YOUR OWN work and tell us what the benefit is. Dipshits like you are the ones running around demanding everyone do what you say, without facts to back your bullshit claims. GIVE US THE FACTS, or STFU and go sit back in your playpen.
|
Most Slashdotters aren't lazy fucks who shy away from crunching the numbers. Or at least, they didn't used to be.
Then again, we've also seen this trend over and over again in various forums on topics like these. Someone shouting "do the numbers for me." Then someone steps in and does. And then the cry is "your numbers are bullshit" because you don't WANT to believe what you're shown.
After seeing this cycle over and over again, it gets old, and we stop wasting our time.