If this is true why do the candidates concentrate their time and money on about 5 states. None of which are the small states that you are claiming that the electoral college forces candidates to go to,
Like some other things in the US the electoral college made sense when it was insituted but is no longer as relevant in the modern world.
Because reliably blue/red states are considered reliably blue/red for supposedly concrete reasons.
The battleground states are areas where the population mingles in such a manner that the above apparently doesn't apply.
That's part of the reason why people are saying this election is ground-breaking- the supposed base of the Democratic Party didn't seem to exist in the manner that they thought it did anymore.
How vicious were the complaints?
If they weren't that bad, this seems like an overreaction or a revealing of little support behind the original statement.
I suspect the complaints were quite bad though, they probably requested this to happen, which is too much on the complainer's part. Generic support for Trump is not some kind of radical hatespeech.
I'm not sure why it matters whether the complaints are vicious or not.
In any case, the article does provide some of the twitter responses to the press release.
As a general rule, throwing marginalized people under the bus for grant money is morally wrong, and encouraging demagogues in the hope of not being added to their list of enemies is cowardly.
Where did you pick up these information? I don't recall reading a motive behind their press release in the article.
The American Physical Society congratulated Trump for winning the Presidency. People criticized them so much that they publicly retracted the congratulations and apologized for any offense they caused.
Trump appears to be taking the commitments he made to the white lower/middle class voters seriously.
How so? He's not even in office yet. How can you make such a huge assumption? Not to mention he made a much bigger commitment to the upper class than anyone else.
He led the 100 day plan with this-
* FIRST, propose a Constitutional Amendment to impose term limits on all members of Congress;
Note how the predicted average temperature increase over the next century if business continues as usual is +6 degrees C. ~6 degrees is apocalyptic.
Actually not trying to be cute; just finding it difficult to believe that 4 years of business as usual will mean death. I think you're being overly dramatic.
I'll take you at your word that 6 degrees is apocalyptic. Science is not my forte and I can't even claim that I fully understand the entire research paper you posted.
Based on my understanding of the article and the summary, Earth is currently in its warm phase and so the temperature increase from CO2 may be worse than previously expected; further research needs to take this into account.
* FIFTH, I will lift the restrictions on the production of $50 trillion dollars' worth of job-producing American energy reserves, including shale, oil, natural gas and clean coal.
* SIXTH, lift the Obama-Clinton roadblocks and allow vital energy infrastructure projects, like the Keystone Pipeline, to move forward
* SEVENTH, cancel billions in payments to U.N. climate change programs and use the money to fix America's water and environmental infrastructure
G. that has clinical utility (for example, contributes to better conceptualization of diagnoses, or to better assessment and treatment)
Uhh... Maybe. Could therapy be developed to counter racism? Well, getting someone to accept that it is a problem might not be the easiest, but it certainly could be done.
Sounds awful lot like a response a generic conservative might give to gay therapy.
insulated within the Presidential office, being removed from the pressures of an election, I do believe he'll be more restrained.
His positions during the race have not been very far removed from his positions prior to joining it, and many of the attacks against him (as is the case with many presidential nominees) have been pointing at things he's done before the race began. If you think Trump's personality problems are the result of the stresses of the presidential race, I think you're fooling yourself.
The man supported abortion before he decided to run for office.
About the only thing we reasonably be sure of regarding Trump is-
1- The man has little to no ethics regarding business practices.
2- He's a sleazeball.
3- Given his actions this election run, he runs mostly on his pride.
As far as policy is concerned; we know next to nothing about his true intentions, since they go against a good bit of what he said previously in such a dramatic fashion. For all I know he's just trying to win over the conservatives by saying the right sound-bytes.
That's why I find it pretty amazing that conservatives can actually fool themselves into thinking that Trump is with them, and it seems self-evident to me that the mainstream conservatives are fighting on the basis of "never Clinton" moreso than "yay Trump".
When you think of American racists as just randomly evil, you're doing exactly the same thing as an Islamophobic conservative thinking of Muslim terrorists as just randomly evil. They are evil, but they're evil in ways that respond predictably to external stimuli: extremism is, by and large, an overreaction to sociopolitical setbacks.
Yeah, I agree with you about that, but in this case the sociopolitical setback largely isn't being poor, it's being racist, and being scared of living in a world that contains brown people.
He never mentioned a specific sociopolitical setback, so I don't know where the being poor comes from.
The dominating factor that motivates the Trump supporters appears to be that the U.S. is no longer the same, both demographically and socially, what it used to be just 20 years ago, and that they're no longer living in the country that they thought they were living in.
I feel that this is a legitimate fear to have, and to simply hand-wave them all off as racists is overly simplifying the issue.
Because reliably blue/red states are considered reliably blue/red for supposedly concrete reasons.
The battleground states are areas where the population mingles in such a manner that the above apparently doesn't apply.
That's part of the reason why people are saying this election is ground-breaking- the supposed base of the Democratic Party didn't seem to exist in the manner that they thought it did anymore.
I'm not sure why it matters whether the complaints are vicious or not.
In any case, the article does provide some of the twitter responses to the press release.
Where did you pick up these information? I don't recall reading a motive behind their press release in the article.
Summary-
The American Physical Society congratulated Trump for winning the Presidency. People criticized them so much that they publicly retracted the congratulations and apologized for any offense they caused.
Thoughts?
True.
But imagine if he led that plan with building the wall or the illegal immigrant part.
I do think that the order matters in terms of what Trump feels is actually relevant.
He led the 100 day plan with this-
* FIRST, propose a Constitutional Amendment to impose term limits on all members of Congress;
Actually not trying to be cute; just finding it difficult to believe that 4 years of business as usual will mean death. I think you're being overly dramatic.
I'll take you at your word that 6 degrees is apocalyptic. Science is not my forte and I can't even claim that I fully understand the entire research paper you posted.
Based on my understanding of the article and the summary, Earth is currently in its warm phase and so the temperature increase from CO2 may be worse than previously expected; further research needs to take this into account.
Is that about the gist of it?
Trump appears to be taking the commitments he made to the white lower/middle class voters seriously.
Let's see how well the actual Republicans play along with it, since I believe a good chunk of it goes against their current platforms.
Did I miss something?
Does climate change operate on "Day After Tomorrow" logic now?
Trump wins both the electoral college AND the popular vote.
Not yet.
The darkest timeline has always been the Civil War.
Time will tell whether this stays true.
Sounds awful lot like a response a generic conservative might give to gay therapy.
The man supported abortion before he decided to run for office.
About the only thing we reasonably be sure of regarding Trump is-
1- The man has little to no ethics regarding business practices.
2- He's a sleazeball.
3- Given his actions this election run, he runs mostly on his pride.
As far as policy is concerned; we know next to nothing about his true intentions, since they go against a good bit of what he said previously in such a dramatic fashion. For all I know he's just trying to win over the conservatives by saying the right sound-bytes.
I mean...
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/donald-trump-donations-democrats-hillary-clinton-119071
That's why I find it pretty amazing that conservatives can actually fool themselves into thinking that Trump is with them, and it seems self-evident to me that the mainstream conservatives are fighting on the basis of "never Clinton" moreso than "yay Trump".
He never mentioned a specific sociopolitical setback, so I don't know where the being poor comes from.
The dominating factor that motivates the Trump supporters appears to be that the U.S. is no longer the same, both demographically and socially, what it used to be just 20 years ago, and that they're no longer living in the country that they thought they were living in.
I feel that this is a legitimate fear to have, and to simply hand-wave them all off as racists is overly simplifying the issue.