quinnipiac poll 38 approve 55 disapprove.

still firmly in the honeymoon period.

WINNING

Doesn't stop you from being precedent though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Dude, if your understanding of racism doesn't extend beyond Websters dictionary, don't lecture us like you are the expert. You are using the most stringent and naive definition. It is not the only one. Prejudging people based on race, like assuming that a black reporter knows the black caucus members personally because they are all black, is obviously racial prejudice, which fits many definitions of racism, e.g. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism

But solar is supplying .6% of energy in the US versus 33% for coal and 33% for gas. So coal miners are way more efficient workers

Hue,

As always, we can never, ever, ever suggest racism as being a possibility unless every single other possible explanation has been ruled out conclusively.

ATC: Here's some clarification in case this isn't common knowledge among Europeans.

eurodp: Why I never -- just because a man has "euro" in his name, that doesn't mean anything. How dare you, sir!

*Hours Later*

eurodp: I am of course a citizen in Europe, hence my name.

:/

Clinton lost because liberals are calling Trump's remarks racist, when in fact the possibility exists that it was just a known racist simply using racial stereotypes. Keep it up and he'll win 2020. Got it.

There is a way to almost prove mathematically that racism was not the main motivating factor for more than half of trump voters. Because over 20% of minorities voted for him. Presumably the vast majority of them were persuaded by non racist factors even though they had a personal reason to worry about him. More would have voted for him if they weren't worried. Therefore it is reasonable to assume that at least 30% of white voters would have been persuaded by non racist Trump arguments. 30% is more than half of 58% which I believe is the white trump vote.

Whites overall 18-29: 43% HRC, 47% DT ….. 12% of voters
Whites overall 30-44: 37% HRC, 54% DT ….. 16% of voters
Whites overall, no degree: 29% HRC, 66% DT

We can figure that +/-52% of whites 18-49 voted for Trump, so the answer to your question for whites < 50 with no degree is probably between 58%-62%.

So in that case trump was being a bigot but he is also a racist.

But good job looking out for racism. It needs a safe place these days.

Speaking of Obamacare, From a Libertarian "friend" of mine.

I like how he concedes that maybe liberals were right about this one REALLY BIG thing...but he'll stick to his guns otherwise, thanks very much. Liberals may certainly be "wrong" about the balance of government/private industry but they sure as hell seem to be right about a lot in the end...

FYP

You have to be very careful with solar that your numbers aren't 3 years old or 2 years old or even 1 year old. Also, the .6% stat I believe is central station only and did not count commercial or residential production.



http://www.seia.org/research-resourc...-industry-data

In 2016 Solar was the #1 source of new power in the US

The cost of solar is now lower than coal in some places and it's good that it employs a lot of people to get there as opposed to fossil fuels. Many states are still openly hostile to solar, but in California in 2015 7.7% of the power generated was from solar and that still ignores commercial and residential systems which are impossible to track in many cases. And that's 2015 - with solar growing about 30% or more per year.

http://www.energy.ca.gov/almanac/ele...tem_power.html

Begin with a simple algebraic equation:
a + b = c

Now, replace each letter with 4 of that letter minus 3 of that letter:
4a - 3a + 4b - 3b = 4c - 3c

Rearrange, so that the 4s are on the left and the 3s on the right
4a + 4b - 4c = 3a + 3b - 3c

Simplify by factoring:
4(a + b - c) = 3(a + b - c)

Then divide each side by a+b-c:
4 = 3

fwiw some new research on racism in voting came out, not precisely on Trump:

Thank you for this info!!!

I'm wondering in the same categories how Obama did in '08 and '12.

It's not bigotry either.

It is prejudiced, if he was assuming that the reporter knew the CBC because she was black, and not simply because he thought she was asking the question on their behalf. But definitely not racism, definitely not bigotry.

Sorry that I use the dictionary to define words wookie, but words do have an agreed upon meaning, and dictionaries are generally the agreed upon place to find those meanings. Liberals trying to redefine racism to include things other than what it actually means just makes it a less powerful word. Please stop making racism a less powerful word? Please stop making Trump win?

And yeah, it probably isn't a terrible idea for you guys to rule out some other possibilities before jumping to the racism accusation, seeing how much you tend to over use it.

Hilarious & ironic the same people that reveled in the Tea Party are calling citizens at these GOP town halls paid protestors. #hypocrisy

Love the tears of all the little snowflakes here:

http://www.westernjournalism.com/oba...-02-22#respond

Is FoxNews actually trending toward being legitimate?

Herp a derp a deepity-doo.

Always so odd when their song changes the minute something they are against happens to them.

Not Ohio.

She lost Ohio by 8 points.

So, you concede racial prejudice, but now apparently subjecting people of a certain race to prejudices, but not reporters of other races, somehow doesn't meet the standard of treating people worse because of race? Is that because being prejudged is such a wonderful thing that black people should enjoy?

Do you actually use that site as a source often?