StrangeSox

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Apr 8, 2016 -> 03:03 PM) I don't believe his statements were dumb and I think he is not afraid to state that he thinks what they did was worth it and right. Why should I have any issue with him making that type of statement and being strong about it. It was rooted in his devote feelings and belief to something he thinks was an accomplishment, not a real issue, and he went at them point on. It is a reason a lot of people liked Bill when he was president (he was a pretty open shooter and wasn't afraid for speaking his mind from time to time). This isn't Trump being a blowhard speaking his mind, this is speaking your mind about something you feel strongly about and I am sure he can articulate the various facts for why he still believes it was the right thing. All that said, I don't know that Hillary would have wanted Bill to do this (as it really isn't a major issue in her campaign as she is generating 80%+ in the African american vote despite the concern from the black lives matter movement). Both Hillary and Bill have said that the 90's "tough on crime" stance and in particular the 1994 bill were a mistake, in hindsight. Hillary has campaigned against our incarceration rates. It's weird that he's choosing to defend it now. Her support started out very high, but I think it's been slipping somewhat lately as the primary drags on.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Apr 8, 2016 -> 02:58 PM) Bill can be both accurate in what he was saying and really dumb to have said it. The two are not mutually exclusive. He wasn't being accurate, though. Saying that opposing mass incarceration means you might think people who give crack to 13 year olds and have them commit murder are good citizens is a really terrible argument. Saying that BLM defends murders and 'black on black' crime is not accurate.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Apr 8, 2016 -> 02:55 PM) Go back and look at the violent crime statistics before and after that bill was passed. You can say there were some issues, but the statistics would say that it did plenty good in terms of reducing violent crime stats. No, it really didn't. Clinton himself has even renounced it in the past. We have the highest incarceration rate in the world. It's terrible.

"If you're against my bill that's helped expand mass incarceration of non-violent criminals, you support giving crack to 13 year olds and having them commit a murder!" --a good, coherent response to protesters.

Both his crime bill and his response to the protesters were s***.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 7, 2016 -> 03:48 PM) I figure 5 to 7 years is plenty for the tech to mature quite a bit. But even before then, ComEd allows Net Billing. So you can push surplus during the day and get a rate back (which is a little below the pull rate) on what you push, and then pull as needed at night. That will all be part of my math, when I get to it. Other solar-heavy states are running into problems with that, though. The way we pay for "the grid" is through taxes/fees on our electric bill that are tied to our kWh amounts. When you start having enough people feeding back into the grid rather than drawing from it, you start running short on funding routine maintenance and upgrades. Eventually, people without individual generation end up subsidizing the individual solar supplies ie a house with solar panels on it. Solar City left Nevada when Nevada changed their rules and started paying home owner suppliers less.

The Obama Administration's crackdown on "inversions" and megamergers This lead to the news earlier this week that the proposed $152B merger between Pfizer and Allergan was being called off

I've heard from some folks in the energy industry in California that the state is "overproducing" and that a lot of solar installations just really aren't profitable right now. Even natural gas units are getting shuttered due to lack of demand.

The final $20B settlement with BP over the 2010 Deep Water Horizon oil spill was approved earlier this week. http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/05/us-judge-ap...-oil-spill.html

Iirc the "aw shucks" is just an act and the guy has a reputation for being a monumental ahole

QUOTE (greg775 @ Apr 6, 2016 -> 06:11 PM) The man is on fire of late, has won six of seven primaries and gets no press. It's cause the media doesn't want New York to get any ideas and vote for him. I just don't understand why the media prefers one candidate so much, especially somebody as blah (at best, IMO) as Hillary Clinton. Our country can do so much better. At least be fair and give Bernie his props for kicking her ass of late in the primaries/caucuses. Asked about Bernie, Geraldo Rivera laughed and said, "He'll find out in New York what people think of him." It's just B.S. NBC nightly news lead off with a story about Bernie and Cruz Wisconsin wins. It's all over the media.

Donald Blankenship, former Massey Energy CEO who conspired to violate mine safety standards that lead to the death of 29 workers was sentenced to a year in jail. Should have been much, much more.

There's definitely been some pushback from various places about how Sanders really came across in that interview. http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/04/07/upsho...banks.html?_r=0 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bernie...4b0a506064d8df5

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Apr 6, 2016 -> 06:06 AM) It's just one person, but I have a very good friend who has never, ever voted for a Republican in an election. He can't stand Hillary. He's said he'll vote for Kasich if he is the Republican nominee, but will either begrudgingly vote for Hillary or maybe a 3rd party if Cruz or Trump is the nominee. I'm struggling to imagine what your political beliefs would have to be to vote straight ticket Democratic your entire life but be willing to vote for a guy who embraces the establishment GOP positions of the last 20 years.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Apr 5, 2016 -> 11:11 PM) National polls are so meaningless right now. I've said it over and over in this thread. Reagan never won a national poll til May yet won 44 states, Romney and McCain were winning in Mayish yet both got destroyed etc. But really these national polls are even more meaningless when they involve Kasich. People can be loud on hating on Trump all they want, that's fine. What they can't deny is the reality of him bringing out new voters in droves. Turnout is being absolutely shattered for the Republican party across the board in large thanks to Trump and in no part thanks to Kasich. So why does that matter for these national polls? They're done among likely voters in the election. The problem is they're being done at the same time as Trump vs Clinton, Sanders vs Cruz, Sanders vs Trump etc. Theres a massive fault in thinking that the general turnout will look even remotely the same across depending on who the nominee is. I think the only national polls that could be worthwhile right now would be Trump v Clinton since they're both so well-known nationally and have been for decades. There aren't a lot of people undecided about those two or unfamiliar with them. As far as turnout goes, historically primary turnout isn't an indicator of GE turnout/success, and a lot of people are turning out to vote against Trump.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Apr 5, 2016 -> 01:52 PM) Good thing they aren't a destination state or tourist state or place the NCAA or NFL or other sports like to go to. Those organizations would now boycott. North Carolina’s anti-LGBT law causes PayPal to cancel expansion

Mississippi just signed into law a measure allowing business and government workers to deny services based on religious beliefs i.e. refuse to hand out marriage licenses for same-sex couples.

re: the US, one of the principle people behind this said something like "just wait for what's next." Iceland's government might be dissolved over their President's undisclosed investments. Putin is dirty as hell but really nothing shocking there.

QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Apr 4, 2016 -> 07:44 PM) I completely disagree with Trumps politics regarding abortions, but the people who keep trying to push the narrative that Trump said he wants to punish all women who get abortions are ridiculous. He was asked "If abortions were illegal?" It was just a gotcha question by Anderson Cooper so the masses of people who get their news from Gawker have something to tell their friends. It wasn't a gotcha question. He was asked if abortions should be illegal, said yes, and was then asked if women should be punished. It's very clearly implied in that second question that abortions would be illegal in that scenario. It was also Chris Matthews. He said abortions should be illegal, volunteered that he's okay with that leading to back alley abortions, and that women who got abortions in that world should be criminally punished. He's since changed his mind four or five times, but it was a straight answer to a simple question.

The slogan for this primary is "nothing matters." the numbers may be interesting, but it wouldn't move the needle a micron one way or the other this year.

I didn't even know they were making a Tesla SUV until I saw a truck loaded up with them in California last week.

I don't know what it was prior to that, but the previous contract ran from 2012 until 2015, and they're typically four year contracts. edit looks like the previous one was 2007-2012.

QUOTE (JenksIsMyHero @ Apr 1, 2016 -> 10:25 AM) Am I the only one though? Honestly I never hear of non-CPS employed people that support the union. I don't know why Rahm/Rauner even deal with it. I'm sure they have to legally, but it's not like they'd lose the PR battle if they finally said, enough is enough. It's a s***ty system anyway, starting over isn't going to make it much worse than it is. Rahm and Rauner already seem to be losing every other battle, and if she doesn't come down with cancer shortly before the campaign there's a good chance the head of the ctu beats Rahm in the last primary. Plus yeah unilaterally disbanding a huge union firing everyone and breaking tens of thousands of contractual lvl obligations isn't actually legal, thankfully.

SCORCHING HOT TAKE

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 31, 2016 -> 04:52 PM) That isn't a realty anymore. Everyone has the ability to access care, and everyone has the right to have a pre-existing condition covered now. Not if anyone in the Republican party has their way. There are still millions without coverage and we still pay much more than every other country for that coverage.