All Things Environment

[Typical Lax Dad]

PB has revealed no science at all.

And a whole lot of resentment against educational attainment.

He thinks that when people move to surburbs or red states they have more children as a result.

Science or facts (whatever floats your boat), birth rates (as well as migration rates) say emphatically that red states are fast outstripping blue states. The only way for Dems to neutralize this field is by advocating for loose immigration and voting laws, such as they are doing every day and why it is such an emotionally-imbalanced issue (yet again) for them.

I should add that (since this thread is about 'climate change') climate change is similarly such an emotionally-disturbing issue for democrats. If they can convince the electorate to upend capitalism via sweeping tax and regulatory changes because we are all dying and the beaches will get swept away ten years back (as forecast... ), that is another example where Democrats play a shell game with otherwise sane Americans: to willingly allow bureaucrats to steal money from you, you must be made to feel like life is about to end (even in the face of all relevant facts to the contrary such as longer life expectancy, lower mortality rates, much lower poverty rates, etc...).

PB,
I have no doubt that there are knuckle heads, and greedy folks, and all sorts of reprobates to be found in the "climate alarmist" camp.

But I'd suggest that you aren't talking to any such here on these threads.

Indeed, I think the tone you take reveals all sorts of ideological spite, rather than rational, logical thought or discourse. The whole diatribe about capitalism is very revealing.

But let's just deal with your assertions about "red states" growing in population. That's true in quite a few, though not all cases.

The question, though, is the causal aspects and, thus, the ramifications in terms of political alignment, at least as the parties are currently constructed.

You seem to think that folks are having more babies because they live in red states and that the migration has been due to their political alignments.

Both assumptions are not based on what the data says.

The people in America having more children, earlier, tend to be people from Central and South America, (and Africa) both related to their Catholicism and related to their lower economic status. As status improves, educational attainment improves, birth rates go down (regardless of race, religious heritage). Women, in particular, have more options and control, and delay child rearing and reduce the numbers of children.

The GOP of today has decided to alienate themselves from this demographic. If we (I'm still a registered R) had followed the 2013 roadmap and broadened the party, perhaps we could see a path to incorporating a large % of these folks into the GOP. But the party took a hard turn away from that opportunity. So, Texas is quite likely to turn blue in another cycle or two. Arizona, New Mexico...headed that way.

We're also seeing baby boomer retirement growth southward, with people leaving their regions of prior employment to seek easier climates and in Florida's case, lower taxes. If you look at the demographics of that migration, though, this is mostly outside of child rearing ages. These voters bring with them their prior political leanings, whatever they may be.

Which isn't to say that there isn't also growth in the metro areas of these 'red' states with employment opportunities being attractive. But that's attracting people with strong mobility and economic aspirations, made possible by educational attainment...again, these groups are skewing more blue than red...in the Trump GOP era. This is urban/suburban growth, not rural, and these younger demographics are far more likely to be blue than the current Trumpist GOP red.

So, the demographic and political predictions that best fit the reality of these various dynamics is that many of the most populous of these 'red' states will be soon be turning blue, at least if the political alignment strategy being pursued by the GOP continues to harden in its current white, older, less educated, less traveled base.

That doesn't have to be the long term case, but the GOP is doomed if it maintains the current course.

All wrong. Once they move, these folks and there progeny change political party affiliation.

[MDlaxfan76]

PB has revealed no science at all.

And a whole lot of resentment against educational attainment.

He thinks that when people move to surburbs or red states they have more children as a result.

Science or facts (whatever floats your boat), birth rates (as well as migration rates) say emphatically that red states are fast outstripping blue states. The only way for Dems to neutralize this field is by advocating for loose immigration and voting laws, such as they are doing every day and why it is such an emotionally-imbalanced issue (yet again) for them.

I should add that (since this thread is about 'climate change') climate change is similarly such an emotionally-disturbing issue for democrats. If they can convince the electorate to upend capitalism via sweeping tax and regulatory changes because we are all dying and the beaches will get swept away ten years back (as forecast... ), that is another example where Democrats play a shell game with otherwise sane Americans: to willingly allow bureaucrats to steal money from you, you must be made to feel like life is about to end (even in the face of all relevant facts to the contrary such as longer life expectancy, lower mortality rates, much lower poverty rates, etc...).

PB,
I have no doubt that there are knuckle heads, and greedy folks, and all sorts of reprobates to be found in the "climate alarmist" camp.

But I'd suggest that you aren't talking to any such here on these threads.

Indeed, I think the tone you take reveals all sorts of ideological spite, rather than rational, logical thought or discourse. The whole diatribe about capitalism is very revealing.

But let's just deal with your assertions about "red states" growing in population. That's true in quite a few, though not all cases.

The question, though, is the causal aspects and, thus, the ramifications in terms of political alignment, at least as the parties are currently constructed.

You seem to think that folks are having more babies because they live in red states and that the migration has been due to their political alignments.

Both assumptions are not based on what the data says.

The people in America having more children, earlier, tend to be people from Central and South America, (and Africa) both related to their Catholicism and related to their lower economic status. As status improves, educational attainment improves, birth rates go down (regardless of race, religious heritage). Women, in particular, have more options and control, and delay child rearing and reduce the numbers of children.

The GOP of today has decided to alienate themselves from this demographic. If we (I'm still a registered R) had followed the 2013 roadmap and broadened the party, perhaps we could see a path to incorporating a large % of these folks into the GOP. But the party took a hard turn away from that opportunity. So, Texas is quite likely to turn blue in another cycle or two. Arizona, New Mexico...headed that way.

We're also seeing baby boomer retirement growth southward, with people leaving their regions of prior employment to seek easier climates and in Florida's case, lower taxes. If you look at the demographics of that migration, though, this is mostly outside of child rearing ages. These voters bring with them their prior political leanings, whatever they may be.

Which isn't to say that there isn't also growth in the metro areas of these 'red' states with employment opportunities being attractive. But that's attracting people with strong mobility and economic aspirations, made possible by educational attainment...again, these groups are skewing more blue than red...in the Trump GOP era. This is urban/suburban growth, not rural, and these younger demographics are far more likely to be blue than the current Trumpist GOP red.

So, the demographic and political predictions that best fit the reality of these various dynamics is that many of the most populous of these 'red' states will be soon be turning blue, at least if the political alignment strategy being pursued by the GOP continues to harden in its current white, older, less educated, less traveled base.

That doesn't have to be the long term case, but the GOP is doomed if it maintains the current course.

All wrong. Once they move, these folks and there progeny change political party affiliation.

[holmes435]

And no mention of how Americans have been mass-migrating to cities in red and blue states for the past half century and more? Cities that are solidly blue in even the reddest states? All those supposed exploding rural red state kiddos are just going to move to cities with more economic opportunities and get brainwashed by those terrible liberals and have liberal kids. It's simple science.

[Typical Lax Dad]

And no mention of how Americans have been mass-migrating to cities in red and blue states for the past half century and more? Cities that are solidly blue in even the reddest states? All those supposed exploding rural red state kiddos are just going to move to cities with more economic opportunities and get brainwashed by those terrible liberals and have liberal kids. It's simple science.

You sure PB ain’t Jimmy The Greek!

[Kismet]

Cradle and his minions will LOVE Patti Smith's "updated" AfterThe Gold Rush performance in tribute to Neil Young (climate warrior) on the Tonight Show this past week.



Back to the 70s!!!!!!!!!!

Only Love Can Break Your Heart, after all.

[cradleandshoot]

Ahhh TLD, some folks have trouble making those logic connections.

I will make the same wager with you MD. We will have to wait 10 years but I bet you 500 for my charity against yours. If you feel even more confident... take the author up on his 5000 dollar wager. You could also debate the author why his findings on this glacier are incorrect. Correct me if I am wrong but glaciers should not shrink and then regain mass if the planet is getting warmer. Is there some logic there for you to chew on?

cradle, I bet a max of a buck on a game of gin, maybe a beer on a squash game.
That's the limit to my betting.
I get plenty of endorphins just from the competition.

I don't even bet when in LV on business trips.
Pretty sure that doesn't make me chicken, just smart.

I'd have no difficulty mopping the floor on this topic with most non-scientists, including you.

Now, trying to do so versus a scientist would require far more research than I'm prepared to devote.
But I'd put a whole host of scientists up against any you seem to think are brilliant.
You really wanna make that bet? For charity? Let's start a kickstarter...

TLD simply said that if you want to do the debating against a scientist, go for it.

On the glaciers, as I understand the dynamics, glaciers do gain mass when weather patterns change. Likewise they lose mass.
As they are not all in the same place, some are growing as some are shrinking.
When we look at climate effects, we need to look at aggregate ice formation or loss over years.

If I'm not mistaken, there is great concern that aggregate loss is accelerating over the most recent decades as global temperatures have risen.

Exceptions to this are not representative of the aggregate.

Come on MD.... I am not talking about a wager for either of our personal gain. I am talking about a wager for CHARITY. You do know what charity is all about? My charity would be rescued treasures. They are a no kill shelter that does incredible work to find new forever homes for dogs and cats. The woman that runs it gave my wife and I our beloved yellow lab Jenna that we had to put down last week. They could use your money to save countless pets that need a new home. I know you are a Republican but I know somewhere inside you there is a compassionate heart beating. These folks need your money and you would be well advised to pay in advance.
http://www.rescued-treasures.com/

You can look up Syukuro Manabe in the school directory unless you are chicken chit.... Let us know what he says...... I admit it... I am too chicken chit to debate Roy Spencer. But you can have at it with Dr. Manabe...... let me know... worse case scenario you make a chartable contribution.

Simple solution here skippy… Manabe debates Spencer. Experts both debating on a level playing field. That make sense to you?

[cradleandshoot]

You can look up Syukuro Manabe in the school directory unless you are chicken chit.... Let us know what he says...... I admit it... I am too chicken chit to debate Roy Spencer. But you can have at it with Dr. Manabe...... let me know... worse case scenario you make a chartable contribution.

I'd love to see him and Joe Bastardi have a sit down on PBS or something....it would be an enthralling conversation.

Is Joe Bastardi an accountant?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Bastardi

It was “sarcasm” Waiting for Cradle to put his money where HIS mouth is unless he is too chicken chit. Bastardi is another fool.

You should really stop judging people so much....do you know Joe?

I know Joe knows more about climate change than TLD will ever know in his lifetime. It is simply referred to as an inferiority complex. That is something TLD understands very well.

[cradleandshoot]

You can look up Syukuro Manabe in the school directory unless you are chicken chit.... Let us know what he says...... I admit it... I am too chicken chit to debate Roy Spencer. But you can have at it with Dr. Manabe...... let me know... worse case scenario you make a chartable contribution.

I'd love to see him and Joe Bastardi have a sit down on PBS or something....it would be an enthralling conversation.

Is Joe Bastardi an accountant?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Bastardi

It was “sarcasm” Waiting for Cradle to put his money where HIS mouth is unless he is too chicken chit. Bastardi is another fool.

FTR just to help you out there TLD from further embarrassment on your part... FLP folks don't do sarcasm, it is not in your DNA to even understand the concept.

[MDlaxfan76]

TLD is "FLP"???

[Peter Brown]

Trying to answer too many posts above I’ll just post one.

The Democratic Party needs to be put down and salted in the earth. It is incompatible with America. You guys will nominate Bernie Sanders soon (watch), which will be the predictable exegesis of a party who has always flirted if not outright made out with socialism.

The recent histrionics over (name the issue du jour) abortion, global warming, impeachment, transsexual rights, sexism, Kavanaugh, Stephen Miller, Army cadet hand signals, Covington Catholic phony videos, whatever, is emblematic of a Party which is no longer representative of what is good about our country.

I have operations in several red and several blue states. The difference in optimism, freedom, and vitality could not be any more stark. Our red state customers are vibrant, and our blue state customers are defeated.

Trump isn’t Caesar’s wife, that’s for sure. But he was elected as a bulwark against the blue state policies hollowing out those societies. He will beat Bernie like Reagan took out Dukakis.

[MDlaxfan76]

Trying to answer too many posts above I’ll just post one.

The Democratic Party needs to be put down and salted in the earth. It is incompatible with America. You guys will nominate Bernie Sanders soon (watch), which will be the predictable exegesis of a party who has always flirted if not outright made out with socialism.

The recent histrionics over (name the issue du jour) abortion, global warming, impeachment, transsexual rights, sexism, Kavanaugh, Stephen Miller, Army cadet hand signals, Covington Catholic phony videos, whatever, is emblematic of a Party which is no longer representative of what is good about our country.

I have operations in several red and several blue states. The difference in optimism, freedom, and vitality could not be any more stark. Our red state customers are vibrant, and our blue state customers are defeated.

Trump isn’t Caesar’s wife, that’s for sure. But he was elected as a bulwark against the blue state policies hollowing out those societies. He will beat Bernie like Reagan took out Dukakis.

Yup, the Dems are so evil and dangerous that Trump "will beat Bernie like Reagan took out Dukakis."

Never mind that Bush defeated Dukakis.

The better analogue might by Nixon and McGovern in '72.
Pretty sure the Dems recovered from that defeat.

I'm an R who wants to see Trumpism ignominiously defeated such that we can indeed get back to conservative principles without the hate and fear and bigotry. Else it's very clear that the GOP is going to be an increasingly minority party for a generation or two.

[Peter Brown]

Trying to answer too many posts above I’ll just post one.

The Democratic Party needs to be put down and salted in the earth. It is incompatible with America. You guys will nominate Bernie Sanders soon (watch), which will be the predictable exegesis of a party who has always flirted if not outright made out with socialism.

The recent histrionics over (name the issue du jour) abortion, global warming, impeachment, transsexual rights, sexism, Kavanaugh, Stephen Miller, Army cadet hand signals, Covington Catholic phony videos, whatever, is emblematic of a Party which is no longer representative of what is good about our country.

I have operations in several red and several blue states. The difference in optimism, freedom, and vitality could not be any more stark. Our red state customers are vibrant, and our blue state customers are defeated.

Trump isn’t Caesar’s wife, that’s for sure. But he was elected as a bulwark against the blue state policies hollowing out those societies. He will beat Bernie like Reagan took out Dukakis.

Yup, the Dems are so evil and dangerous that Trump "will beat Bernie like Reagan took out Dukakis."

Never mind that Bush defeated Dukakis.

The better analogue might by Nixon and McGovern in '72.
Pretty sure the Dems recovered from that defeat.

I'm an R who wants to see Trumpism ignominiously defeated such that we can indeed get back to conservative principles without the hate and fear and bigotry. Else it's very clear that the GOP is going to be an increasingly minority party for a generation or two.

You're on the wrong side of history here, MDLax. You're infanticized by Trump's woeful character, losing sight of what's actually occurring underneath the showroom floor. The Democratic Party has fast become what America has stood against all these many years. David Brooks called you out the other day: The anti-Trump echo chamber is becoming a mirror image of Trump himself — overwrought, uncalibrated and incapable of having an intelligent conversation about any complex policy problem

Trump is a clown to you, and we get that. But your hatred of him causes you to lose focus on what's real and what's a show. The Democratic Party must be permanently exiled to a forgotten piece of history, much of the media too. Bernie will be your torch bearer soon; the only way he will energize his base is not by swinging back to the center, but rather by going as far out on the curve as he can, as he wants to.

You will be rooting for socialism because orange man bad. Meanwhile our country has never been more prosperous in every respect. But Orange Man Bad...you may wish to take a walk and clear your head.

[holmes435]

I have operations in several red and several blue states. The difference in optimism, freedom, and vitality could not be any more stark. Our red state customers are vibrant, and our blue state customers are defeated.

Weird, I sell our products all over the country and don't see any of this.

In fact my own state just switched from red to blue at the state government level because of Trump.

[holmes435]

The Democratic Party must be permanently exiled to a forgotten piece of history, much of the media too.

Careful, your Bandito is showing. The D party and the media must be exiled to a forgotten piece of history? Do you know just how crazy and totalitarian that sounds?

[Typical Lax Dad]

You can look up Syukuro Manabe in the school directory unless you are chicken chit.... Let us know what he says...... I admit it... I am too chicken chit to debate Roy Spencer. But you can have at it with Dr. Manabe...... let me know... worse case scenario you make a chartable contribution.

I'd love to see him and Joe Bastardi have a sit down on PBS or something....it would be an enthralling conversation.

Is Joe Bastardi an accountant?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Bastardi

It was “sarcasm” Waiting for Cradle to put his money where HIS mouth is unless he is too chicken chit. Bastardi is another fool.

You should really stop judging people so much....do you know Joe?

I know Joe knows more about climate change than TLD will ever know in his lifetime. It is simply referred to as an inferiority complex. That is something TLD understands very well.

Put your money where your mouth is or are you too chicken chit also? I admitted I am too chicken chit to debate Roy Spencer. I can get you the email address if you want it.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Ahhh TLD, some folks have trouble making those logic connections.

I will make the same wager with you MD. We will have to wait 10 years but I bet you 500 for my charity against yours. If you feel even more confident... take the author up on his 5000 dollar wager. You could also debate the author why his findings on this glacier are incorrect. Correct me if I am wrong but glaciers should not shrink and then regain mass if the planet is getting warmer. Is there some logic there for you to chew on?

cradle, I bet a max of a buck on a game of gin, maybe a beer on a squash game.
That's the limit to my betting.
I get plenty of endorphins just from the competition.

I don't even bet when in LV on business trips.
Pretty sure that doesn't make me chicken, just smart.

I'd have no difficulty mopping the floor on this topic with most non-scientists, including you.

Now, trying to do so versus a scientist would require far more research than I'm prepared to devote.
But I'd put a whole host of scientists up against any you seem to think are brilliant.
You really wanna make that bet? For charity? Let's start a kickstarter...

TLD simply said that if you want to do the debating against a scientist, go for it.

On the glaciers, as I understand the dynamics, glaciers do gain mass when weather patterns change. Likewise they lose mass.
As they are not all in the same place, some are growing as some are shrinking.
When we look at climate effects, we need to look at aggregate ice formation or loss over years.

If I'm not mistaken, there is great concern that aggregate loss is accelerating over the most recent decades as global temperatures have risen.

Exceptions to this are not representative of the aggregate.

Come on MD.... I am not talking about a wager for either of our personal gain. I am talking about a wager for CHARITY. You do know what charity is all about? My charity would be rescued treasures. They are a no kill shelter that does incredible work to find new forever homes for dogs and cats. The woman that runs it gave my wife and I our beloved yellow lab Jenna that we had to put down last week. They could use your money to save countless pets that need a new home. I know you are a Republican but I know somewhere inside you there is a compassionate heart beating. These folks need your money and you would be well advised to pay in advance.
http://www.rescued-treasures.com/

You can look up Syukuro Manabe in the school directory unless you are chicken chit.... Let us know what he says...... I admit it... I am too chicken chit to debate Roy Spencer. But you can have at it with Dr. Manabe...... let me know... worse case scenario you make a chartable contribution.

Simple solution here skippy… Manabe debates Spencer. Experts both debating on a level playing field. That make sense to you?

Now YOU sound like a dick weed chick chit!

[MDlaxfan76]

Though this was indeed started by cradle, how about we declare a truce on the "chicken chit" stuff for all?
cool, cradle?

[MDlaxfan76]

The Democratic Party must be permanently exiled to a forgotten piece of history, much of the media too.

Careful, your Bandito is showing. The D party and the media must be exiled to a forgotten piece of history? Do you know just how crazy and totalitarian that sounds?

No, he doesn't.

[MDlaxfan76]

Trying to answer too many posts above I’ll just post one.

The Democratic Party needs to be put down and salted in the earth. It is incompatible with America. You guys will nominate Bernie Sanders soon (watch), which will be the predictable exegesis of a party who has always flirted if not outright made out with socialism.

The recent histrionics over (name the issue du jour) abortion, global warming, impeachment, transsexual rights, sexism, Kavanaugh, Stephen Miller, Army cadet hand signals, Covington Catholic phony videos, whatever, is emblematic of a Party which is no longer representative of what is good about our country.

I have operations in several red and several blue states. The difference in optimism, freedom, and vitality could not be any more stark. Our red state customers are vibrant, and our blue state customers are defeated.

Trump isn’t Caesar’s wife, that’s for sure. But he was elected as a bulwark against the blue state policies hollowing out those societies. He will beat Bernie like Reagan took out Dukakis.

Yup, the Dems are so evil and dangerous that Trump "will beat Bernie like Reagan took out Dukakis."

Never mind that Bush defeated Dukakis.

The better analogue might by Nixon and McGovern in '72.
Pretty sure the Dems recovered from that defeat.

I'm an R who wants to see Trumpism ignominiously defeated such that we can indeed get back to conservative principles without the hate and fear and bigotry. Else it's very clear that the GOP is going to be an increasingly minority party for a generation or two.

You're on the wrong side of history here, MDLax. You're infanticized by Trump's woeful character, losing sight of what's actually occurring underneath the showroom floor. The Democratic Party has fast become what America has stood against all these many years. David Brooks called you out the other day: The anti-Trump echo chamber is becoming a mirror image of Trump himself — overwrought, uncalibrated and incapable of having an intelligent conversation about any complex policy problem

Trump is a clown to you, and we get that. But your hatred of him causes you to lose focus on what's real and what's a show. The Democratic Party must be permanently exiled to a forgotten piece of history, much of the media too. Bernie will be your torch bearer soon; the only way he will energize his base is not by swinging back to the center, but rather by going as far out on the curve as he can, as he wants to.

You will be rooting for socialism because orange man bad. Meanwhile our country has never been more prosperous in every respect. But Orange Man Bad...you may wish to take a walk and clear your head.

PB, you're way off the rails, but you're at least consistently so.

Bernie will never be my "torch bearer", though I'd vote for a piece of wood over Trump.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Though this was indeed started by cradle, how about we declare a truce on the "chicken chit" stuff for all?
cool, cradle?

Exactly. Hopefully when the shoe is on the other foot he sees how ridiculous it is. Hopefully everyone being FLP goes away too.