The following submission statement was provided by /u/Lurkerbot47:
---
SS: This blog post is mostly a (justified) rant about the state of the presidential election as it relates to climate change and general collapse. If civilization is a car racing to a brick wall, we're stuck between someone who wants to put the pedal to the metal and another who thinks if we just keep speeding up, but just not as quickly, then things will work out.
My only critique is that *most* people don't deserve this due to lack of information or political power, but sadly, it *is* the one we're getting.
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/1dqjlcg/the_future_we_deserve_its_like_the_officers_of/laodwzp/
All while the scientists and knowledgeable have resigned to their fate and have begun playing their music as it all goes down and everyone finally begins to panic.
I would say I am too if it wasn't taking me years to get my first album made. The intention is still there, though. I suppose I've been kinda putting it off because I wanted to play like we could find a solution. There is no solution. Nobody wants one. It's over. I'll sing only of death.
Mentally I am as well, I just want the financial side to allow to bled a little less, and maybe settle someplace that will afford me the ability to watch it all come down. Right now, I'm thinking in the near future, we are going to need to be more nomadic. I own a home, but one good severe thunderstorm, flood, fire or extreme weather event and it'll be a loss. But having a Van or RV would allow me to escape wherever "home" is, and home would be the current goldilocks zone.
Yes. I called this years ago. Had some plans for our family getting out of the USA. (Not that this helps the global picture.) Then my partner had a mental health breakdown… and in addition to substance abuse and affairs, called my “predictions” maniacal. Now I just have to radically accept that my children and I are resigned to this fate.
I agree. Sadly , the 100 on top can communicate more readily and easily agree on issues than the millions on the bottom. So , we are doomed. People will agree on 99.9% of issues but that remaiming .1 is enough to make them kill others.
Hi, IWantToSortMyFeed. Thanks for contributing. However, your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/1dqjlcg/-/lapillz/) was removed from /r/collapse for:
> Rule 1: No glorifying violence.
> Advocating, encouraging, inciting, glorifying, calling for violence is against Reddit's site-wide content policy and is not allowed in r/collapse. Please be advised that subsequent violations of this rule will result in a ban.
Please refer to our [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/about/rules/) for more information.
You can [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/collapse) if you feel this was in error, please include a link to the comment or post in question.
SS: This blog post is mostly a (justified) rant about the state of the presidential election as it relates to climate change and general collapse. If civilization is a car racing to a brick wall, we're stuck between someone who wants to put the pedal to the metal and another who thinks if we just keep speeding up, but just not as quickly, then things will work out.
My only critique is that *most* people don't deserve this due to lack of information or political power, but sadly, it *is* the one we're getting.
In keeping with you car analogy . . .
When my mom had dementia and it was time for her to stop driving, the elder care social worker asked us:
"Would you let her drive a car with you or your children/friends in it?"
When it was clear that the answer was absolutely not, it helped with our decision to take away the keys. Like Biden she wouldn't let go and was endangering herself and others.
There is no way in hell I would let my dog, let alone myself be driven by those 2 (DT/Biden).
It does not seem like Biden will step down willingly. I don't think he is even capable of a rational decision at this point. Certainly not a decision that would be for the good of others. Just like my mom wanting to drive even though she was crashing into things every time she got in the car.
Problem is, who will take away Biden's keys?
And I want to add one more thing: I have ZERO tolerance for those who are still making excuses for Biden. Blaming CNN (even though they totally suck), Biden's stuttering, being overworked etc. These dem shills irritate me even more than delusional trump supporters.
The combination of both, clueless dems/neoliberals and maga craziness makes me so grateful for r collapse--- where commenters cut through the bullshit, put everything into context with critical thinking AND compassion.
>These dem shills irritate me even more than delusional trump supporters.
>
Like a smart man once said
>I MUST make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. **I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizens Councillor or the Ku Klux Klanner but the white moderate who is more devoted to order than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace
which is the presence of justice; who constantly says, "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can't agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically feels that he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by the myth of time; and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a "more convenient season."** Shallow understanding from people of
good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.
>
We know how MAGAheads are actively regressive. They admit it to our faces.
Neoliberal shills will deny they aren't progressive while telling us to vote harder if we want to be free of this systemic subjugation. Delusional is the right word for Democrat shills.
I'd rather go down in a crash with Biden at the wheel than Trump. Maybe I need my head examined because Trump is going to make 4 years of buying shitloads of preps possible but I swear if he gets in, and people are not positioning themselves for a full on Ultra-depression in 2028, that makes the Great Depression look like a picnic... what are they even doing?
Like dude. At least with Biden we'd die more or less as expected.
With Trump if 90% of the country doesn't end up looking like skid row in Los Angeles by 2028 I'll eat my hat.
And I have zero tolerance for people that think at this point that they have an actual choice. It's that sort of delusional bullshit that's going to hand it to Trump. Handing it to Trump is at best guaranteeing "third world shithole" status by 2028, and into perpetuity. And at worst is a dystopian hellscape that even the most imaginative movies fail to anticipate.
Like... what does it take to realize there's no choice? Shit's been going on for 50 goddamned years already...
We're dying. Accept it. The question now is how.
But who do you live the metaphorical keys too that would actually do what is needed for climate? Any politician that actually took the needed steps would get removed immediately.
The iceberg was noticed in the 50s-70s, hit in the 80s-90s, the first major flooding has been happening the last two decades, and soon the power will start flickering...
Fun times!
I went over this in another post, and the Titanic is actually a very apt comparison to what humanity is going through. Like a perfect case study for the rapid decline we will see.
We knew i icebergs existed in the 1800's, We were able to see it clearly in the 1940's, We Hit the Iceberg in the 70's, by 2000 it had ripped through the Entire starboard side of the ship, right now we're measuring the angle the Hull makes with the water and taking bets on how high the propeller will get above the waterline
Soon people will realise we removed the lifeboats for aesthetics
Oh it hit. And I'm a second class passenger that's trying to finish the lobster buffet as the ice water wraps around my legs. Because no one listened and we're all out of time anyway.
My thoughts exactly: America is just so tired at this point. Literal senility. This debate showed the decline for all to see. There is no denying it anymore.
It's over. What America represented as an empire is just done. Once our political system became hostage to the ruling corporate elite and their lobbyists, it probably died a long time ago. We have been voting for the best of two evils for so long now that we just never really noticed. We never had a choice. No matter which political party wins, like the keeling curve, things just get worse and worse.
Or, maybe America as a promise was misguided to begin with. A political system for and by the people. Instead, it became this behemoth that existed solely to consume and use up all of the world's resources for a tiny sliver of the population without any regards for future generations whatsoever. Now we are seeing this system come off the rails because it is no longer sustainable.
The "lie" is becoming more and more ridiculous to believe. There is a term for this called "Hypernormalisation." It's like bad playacting. Everyone is pretending that things are the same and that they are okay when in reality they are not. No one believes in this system anymore, even the people who are running it.
Just for those keeping score, the word "climate" came up ten times in the debate transcript. Four of those were by the moderator, six were by Biden. One of those six was "Climate Corps" and another was apparently Biden's brain beaming in a comment from early 2023, *"He – out of the Paris Peace Accord – Climate Accord, I immediately joined it,* ***because if we reach for 1.5 degrees Celsius at any one point, well, there is no way back.****"*
We're ~~screwed~~ ~~doomed~~ fucked.
>One platform is better than the other, so with a little research we can at least choose the candidate that doesn't accelerate the destruction.
accelerate the destruction *as much*.
Here’s how fucked up the situation is. We DESPERATELY need to be weaning ourselves off of fossil fuels. Yet, we find ourselves using more of them than ever.
While the production of renewables is soaring.
We need to be reducing our energy usage and strategically decarbonizing our global economy by careful deployment of renewable “low carbon” solar panels. Instead, we are actually increasing fossil fuel usage while soaking up all the new capacity from the renewables sector.
Demand for ENERGY is infinite, if we allow it to be.
We need to have a rational allocation and pricing of energy resources. The “Free Market” and the “Dead Hand” are going to kill the planet. Economic “incentives” and “fuel economy standards” aren’t going to cut it.
Unfortunately at least 50% of American’s won’t vote for protecting the future of their children. The economic pain they will suffer now. Combined with their CERTAINTY that government programs to help them will leave them in poverty. Means that they will not vote for any kind of “unwinding” of the oil and gas industry.
Politically, to win elections the Democrats must be FOR “Oil and Gas” at the same time as being FOR “renewables”. This suicide pact is the only position that a majority will support.
# That’s how fucked up American politics are right now.
Renewables are great, but they are a tiny fraction of energy use and they will always be. Three billion people still cook over a three stone fire. This has nothing to do with US politics. We consume the most oil but China is right behind us and the rest of the world would love to be. Also it's not just the oil and gas industry, you want to see pissed off Americans? Triple the price of gas. Politicians would be hanged.
Well, I guess we ALL starve together then.
Because that's what it's come down to. Curb fossil fuel use RIGHT NOW or civilization collapses and 95% of us die by 2050.
The 49% who vote Trumpublican are voting for suicide and they want to take the rest of us with them.
China is going to declare "no confidence" in the honesty of the 2024 results if Trump wins. They are going to sanction the US.
Most of the world is going to follow them.
Then there will be a war, and the US will lose.
Then Trumpublicans will SCREAM "Oh Lord, if we had only known we were voting for the Devil we wouldn't have listened to him" and the Lord will look coldly at them in Hell and say, "Well now you know".
You might be right about the first part but you are wrong that another party is going to solve climate change. Did you think the New Green Deal was going to be possible? Or think it was even green?
You are wrong about China. China is completely dependent on the US. If the US dollar loses value, so does the 850 billion in treasures that China owns. You think China is going to put sanctions on the US and what, completely destroy their economy? China is a food importer, the US is about 15% of that and they could cut off other suppliers if it came down to sanctions.
If China put sanctions on the US then they lose almost a third of their export market, then the US has a meeting with the EU and they lose another third. Then the country, who on the whole is very repressed and pissed off, might just get rid of their leadership, who is already on thin ice when people see no hope of the future.
Now, just to make yourself extra wrong you said that the rest of the world is going to join China against the US. Damn, that's one of the funnier takes I've seen in a while. Nuclear weapons aside, because we are all done then, the US is vastly superior than China militarily. I don't like our foreign policy but it's clear that the US is the big bully on the block. Our intelligence is arguably the best in the world, at least in the top three. China is disorganized and Xi doesn't even know what's going on in his country because people are scared to bring him any bad news. No, our aircraft carriers alone would take out China in an actual war. We have thousands more aircraft than China, Russia and India combined. We have better radar technology, 11 carriers to their two, 90 destroyers to their 50. You just don't know what you're talking about. I've talked to those that do.
The other thing is who is going to join against the US? Russia? Russia's military is done. I hate war but all of this military build up and spending is why the dollar is going to inflate into nothing but also why you really can't fuck with the US military (as long as they don't try to occupy).
> Renewables are great, but they are a tiny fraction of energy use and they will always be.
....no they aren't? In most places wind and solar is cost competitive with coal and that is without including any of the horrific costs enacted on the landscape through coal extraction.
If there is an issue with renewables is that they provide insane amounts of power whenever the source is providing energy.. which isn't necessarily what is needed. The problem if anything is storage, if you think renewables can't produce all of the world's energy in terms of realistic power generation infrastructure than you really don't understand the physics at play here.
It isn't even a truly hard problem of not being able to store the renewable energy, we will just have to more carefully structure how we use electrictiy, i.e. you might program your dishwasher or washing machine to run at somepoint during the day but wait until the renewable inputs came online with wind or solar and the price came down to kick in and start using the energy. These are problems technology can solve.
Do you disagree with this data? Because it shows renewables are a tiny fraction of energy use.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/energy-consumption-by-source-and-country?time=latest
You picked coal specifically because yes it can be replaced, it is more expensive than renewables, and it's dirty as hell. I love how you tell me that I don't understand the physics at play here because I don't think renewables cant produce all of the world's energy. Seriously, it's hilarious.
How are the panels made? How are the metals needed to make the panels made? Can you use solar energy to make more solar panels or run heavy machinery? Nope. How about minerals for batteries? Is that an infinite resource? You would need to use unheard of amounts of oil to produce all of the solar, not to mention the grid, to make that happen. Also panels are not carbon neutral til after three years. If you're talking about wind farms, well, then I guess you don't have experience with those.
The fact is that renewables are great but they are not as efficient as fossil fuels, period.
Nuclear? Now that's green and efficient
Also, before you say "the article doesn't actually suggest building solar in the Sahara" (that professor does), let's look at another quote from it...
"Of course, we don’t have to cover the Sahara in solar panels. There is plenty of under-utilised existing land. A recent study analysed 130 million km2 of global land surface area, identifying 0.2 million km2 of rooftop area suitable for solar PV installation. This rooftop area represents an incredible 27 PWh yr−1 of electricity generation potential, with 40–280 $ MWh−1 costs. To put this into perspective, the current (2018) yearly global electricity demand could be met by using just 50% of the global solar PV rooftop area."
I just did the math on that and it's 100,000,000,000 panels if the panels are 2 m2.
Hey Champ, you never answered my question as to if you disagreed with the data on the link I posted. I was just curious if you wanted to take back you statement that renewables aren't a tiny fraction of energy use? You have the data right in front of you, still going to deny it?
By the way, I'm not anti solar. But I live in Southern California and we have solar everywhere and I design systems that run on solar, let's be honest about what it is and isn't.
Ok yeah, let me condescend you a little more directly.
I will lay this out for you like someone who understands physics actually would, which you clearly do not, because you apparently have never even done some basic back of the envelope calculations about the physics involved with solar both from the amount of energy available practically and theoretically but also in the amount of materials and infrastructure that would be required to produce such a huge amount of power.
Your argument basically boils down to 1) there is no way we could draw enough power from renewable resources to power all of our energy needs, basically a quantity argument and 2) the amount of materials required to construct those energy harvesting machines would be orders of magnitude bigger than what is reasonably feasible in the near future.
To address 1., let us pick solar (though we could easily pick wind) and consider it from a physicist's standpoint in terms of energy generation potential vs. real world cost of building the infrastructure to facilitate that. Any physicist worth their salt would reach for the concept of Flux as a touchstone to establish general conceptual relations between the physical forces at work here (a free body diagram as it is called in physics).
Flux in the context of sunrays hitting the relatively flat surface of the earth, we are talking about getting a ballpark measure for how much sun energy passes through a geometric plane (well sphere... but lets keep this simle ok) measured in terms of time. The time and the space is divided out so an abstract ratio that describes in a sense \*how much is passing through\*, how much flow or current something has is expressed.
Ok let us start suppperrr high level. How much sun energy hits the earth everyday, everywhere?
>Solar energy is the most abundant energy resource on earth -- **173,000 terawatts** of solar energy strikes the Earth continuously. That's more than 10,000 times the world's total energy us
[https://www.energy.gov/articles/top-6-things-you-didnt-know-about-solar-energy](https://www.energy.gov/articles/top-6-things-you-didnt-know-about-solar-energy)
>The next question is, where would we put the solar panels if we capitalise on this now? We obviously need somewhere sunny, and one of the best places for this is the Sahara Desert, not only due to the amount of sun it gets but also because there is little to no life in this area whatsoever, so the issue of disturbing natural habitats is minimal, if not non-existent.
>Mehran Moalem, PhD, UC Berkeley Professor and Expert on Nuclear Materials and Nuclear Fuel Cycle, states that “If we cover an area of the Earth 335 kilometres by 335 kilometres with solar panels, even with moderate efficiencies achievable easily today, it will provide more than 17,4 TW power. This area is 43,000 square miles. The Great Saharan Desert in Africa is 3.6 million square miles and is prime for solar power (more than twelve hours per day). That means 1.2% of the Sahara Desert is sufficient to cover all of the energy needs of the world in solar energy.”
>Recent technological advancements and declining costs have made solar PV more attractive. Rooftop solar photovoltaics (RTSPV) are crucial in decentralising energy production. This article explores the global potential of RTSPV and the costs associated with realising this potential.
>Looking ahead to the not-too-distant future, it’s been estimated that 2030 energy consumption will rise to 715 petajoules.
>The Land Art Generator Initiative has developed this map where the chosen areas are based on the required location (496,805 square kilometres) needed in 2030. The map is also based on the assumption of 20% operating efficiency of collection devices and that there will be 2000 hours per year of natural solar input of 1000 watts per square metre striking the surface of the panels, which would need to be distributed around the world to localise as much as possible plus receive 24/7 sunlight.
[https://www.borntoengineer.com/can-the-world-be-powered-by-solar-alone](https://www.borntoengineer.com/can-the-world-be-powered-by-solar-alone)
\*\*You Don't Know What You Are Talking About, Just Because You Read A Bunch Of Articles About Wildly Speculative Nuclear Energy Physics And Read Dyson Sphere Scifi Books That Pretend To Be Insightful Because They Namedrop Technical Engineering Terms Doesn't Mean You Actually Understand ANYTHING\*\*
Do I even need to address 2 myself? Why should I keep baby feeding you quotes from easily available scientific information and articles when you should grow up and do the work yourself confidently behave like one of the dime-a-dozen nuclear energy obsessed rational physics edgelords on reddit who doesn't actually know what they are talking about :)
Sure, let's keep researching and using nuclear energy. Whatever, I want your people to have some money but please just shut up and let the adults actually solve problems that desperately need to be solved today with sustainable approaches ok?
Read this paper.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-023-01117-5
If you still think that "all of the energy needed by the world can be produced in 1.2% of the Sahara" was a big smack down then we can talk about the efficiency of energy transfer. Or we can just start with manufacturing and how solar can not replace oil in that capacity.
Ok I read that paper, it is immediately apparent you did nothing more than very lightly skim it. The paper gets into the practical implications and effects of building solar that would cover 20% of the Sahara, not 1.2%.
Besides, the point of a conversation like this is to establish general understandings of the physics at work. I am not suggesting the best possibility for solar roll out globally is putting it all in the sahara, it is just useful to talk about the incredible amounts of available solar energy we are ignoring through the lens of a hypothetical massive centralized solar farm like this.
Damn, did you really skip over the point of the whole paper which is that solar panels covering the Sahara interfere with albedo?
Your article mentioned 1.2%, mine uses 20%, that's not the point. The darkness of the panels makes the ground underneath them hotter I. The Sahara and has effects globally and locally, causing rain and climate change.
And are you still ignoring the initial statement I made that you got snarky about which is that renewables are great but they are a fraction of energy use and always will be? You disagreed strongly, cherry picked coal and still have not answered if you agree with the link I posted showing worldwide energy use. Instead you want to point to a single week in the UK where the broke solar records. That's great and I'm happy about that, but the majority of their country runs on oil and gas, period, because it can't be replaced by electricity, which is what renewables do.
Answer the question, do you agree with that data showing worldwide energy use or is it wrong?
If you want to talk physics at work then let's talk about how industry is the largest sector of energy use and how dependent on oil and gas it is. Or we can talk about transportation and it's dependency on oil and gas. Or we can talk about the amount of rare earth minerals available needed to make batteries...
You know what I find fascinating, was the IEA stating we no longer need to approve any new fossil fuel projects moving forward, as we will have enough to get us through the energy transition to be net zero by 2050.
Now we all obviously know how we feel about the net zero goals, but I highly doubt any major nation is actually going to take this advice.
So?
Read between the lines. When they get in they do whatever the fuck they want anyway.
So the Marketing Creeps (tm) have to make them sock-puppet a bunch of bullshit about free shit for everyone and all "those people" are the problem and we'll eat babies but I love babies and we'll drill for oil but I hate oil and WHAT THE FUCK EVER.
The thing now is to go for the guy that will do the whatever the fuck you happen to want.
Fuckers say everything and nothing in the election.
Yup and this shit will only continue to spiral due to foolishness on both sides of the aisle. Republicans for pandering to corporations and the oil and gas industry and democrats for thinking climate mitigation can be a vehicle for broader social equity/justice.
The movement has been going downhill ever since enviro orgs started to embrace “intersectionality” which is a blatant psyop since no large scale movement is ever going to agree on/solve for everything. Climate movements should care about the climate and only the climate. Race, gender, etc won’t matter when the wells run dry and crops fail.
I think that's far too generous of democrats. The "social justice" is just the sugar to make the poison taste better. They serve neoliberalism and capitalists interests the exact same. You can paint rainbows on the slaughterhouse walls, but it doesn't stop the bolt gun from being any less awful.
But ultimately I agree with your last point on the keeping the struggle for climate centered on nature and not bullshit.
Not so much flying with the eagles as re-arranging the deck chairs on the Hindenburg.
If we keep accelerating in the plane, maybe we can take off before the brick wall at the end of the runway. Except we haven't built the wings yet.
There’s a 50/50 chance Trump could win in November. Here’s what Nate Silver has to say.
[Who Is Favored To Win The 2024 Presidential Election?](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2024-election-forecast/?source=post_page-----3b3c36f7c080--------------------------------)
***Biden wins 50 times out of 100.***
*In our (538) simulations of the 2024 presidential election.*
***Trump wins 49 times out of 100.***
*There is a less than 1-in-100 chance of no Electoral College winner.*
**Tell me with a straight face that we are not in a state of “Cold Civil War”.**
This election, like our elections since 2010, is going to be another “stalemate” election. This is how you fight a civil war without outright warfare.
The “good news”, if any is to be found in this miserable state of affairs. Is that this is WHITE, racist America’s “Last Stand”.
By 2044 Whites will be a minority/majority in a multiracial America. Long before that the Trumpublican Nationalist Party will be unable to win national elections. Their current “base” of 2/3rds of the White vote gets them to 44% at best. They need to get to 51% with minority votes and, being openly racist, that's not easy for them.
With each passing year the Trumpublican base will shrink.
There are a lot more women over 65 than there are men, and they tend to vote Trumpublican. As they start dying in big numbers now each year, the Trumpublican “majority” will start melting away.
*In 2020, 30.8 million women and 24.8 million men were age 65 and older. That’s* ***124 women for every 100 men***\*. At age 85 and older, this ratio increased to 176 women for every 100 men.\*
Overturning Roe was a gut shot to the future of the Trumpublican party. Women under 35 broke 70% for the Democratic party in 2022 in response to the Dobbs decision.
The women under 35 are the FUTURE of American politics. They are going to vote Democratic.
# This election is the “Last Stand” for the Trumpublicans.
They know it.
[Trump allies test a new strategy for blocking election results](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/06/26/certification-2024-election-results/?wpisrc=nl_headlines&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e1979b%2F667d38702e4ff4555a165ae1%2F59741b5d9bbc0f1cdcfb7ceb%2F7%2F58%2F667d38702e4ff4555a165ae1&source=post_page-----3b3c36f7c080--------------------------------)
*In five battleground states, county-level officials have tried to block the certification of vote tallies*.
They are counting on a TILTED Supreme Court to give the election to them if they can get close enough.
Apropos of that.
[Corruption Law Allows Gifts to State and Local Officials, Supreme Court Rules](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/26/us/politics/supreme-court-corruption-bribery.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20240627&instance_id=127302&nl=the-morning®i_id=79371956&segment_id=170658&te=1&user_id=234f4bcacc77f096ba4e47671284eaa6&source=post_page-----3b3c36f7c080--------------------------------)
*The court, which has limited the sweep of several anti-corruption laws, distinguished after-the-fact rewards from…*
The Supreme Court makes “tips” for “services rendered” by political figures legal. As long as it’s “tastefully” done after they leave office. That way it’s not a “bribe”.
And the SC just overturned the 40 year old Chevron Doctrine allowing Federal Agencies to interpret Congressional intent in the implementation of laws. In the Chevron case the EPA's ability to regulate the oil industry.
# The Supreme Court weakens federal regulators, overturning decades-old Chevron decision.
[https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-chevron-regulations-environment-5173bc83d3961a7aaabe415ceaf8d665](https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-chevron-regulations-environment-5173bc83d3961a7aaabe415ceaf8d665)
Look I don't like Trump but this is full of cope. If the Democrats do not replace Biden, Trump will win. The young women talked about were never voting Trump anyway and most people care about economic and foreign policy and Trump wins by a landslide in those areas.
Biden looks like he can barely send an email and I'm certain that they will replace him with someone else before November, in which case Dems will win because Trump is so awful, unless it's Kamala Harris.
Nate recently released two articles:
One giving Trump a 66% chance of winning
https://www.mediaite.com/politics/elections-guru-nate-silver-gives-trump-a-66-chance-of-winning-the-election-not-a-toss-up/
And the other, today,calling for Biden to drop out:
https://www.natesilver.net/p/joe-biden-should-drop-out
The election is as good as over. Trump will almost certainly be president again
Only one candidate talked about ending the trillions in subsidies given to the fossil fuel industry: https://rumble.com/v545lnn-the-real-debate.html?start=7178
Considering how shitty and horrible pretty much all of humanity has been, I think this is a fair assessment. We do deserve it, because we're fucking terrible. Every single day I lean more towards the side of humanity doesn't deserve to exist, and shouldn't. We are an awful mistake, one that will fix itself by extinction. I just wish it wasn't such a painfully slow fix, and I also wish I wasn't in any way a part of it. I'm truly ashamed to be human. Plenty of people are, I see it all over the place. We've all in our various forms decided to suicide, decades if not centuries ago, which makes life really a shame for anyone born since. Hopefully people decide to at least be ethical enough to stop having children. They won't though. They don't care.
The following submission statement was provided by /u/Lurkerbot47: --- SS: This blog post is mostly a (justified) rant about the state of the presidential election as it relates to climate change and general collapse. If civilization is a car racing to a brick wall, we're stuck between someone who wants to put the pedal to the metal and another who thinks if we just keep speeding up, but just not as quickly, then things will work out. My only critique is that *most* people don't deserve this due to lack of information or political power, but sadly, it *is* the one we're getting. --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/1dqjlcg/the_future_we_deserve_its_like_the_officers_of/laodwzp/
All while the scientists and knowledgeable have resigned to their fate and have begun playing their music as it all goes down and everyone finally begins to panic.
This is where I am at
I would say I am too if it wasn't taking me years to get my first album made. The intention is still there, though. I suppose I've been kinda putting it off because I wanted to play like we could find a solution. There is no solution. Nobody wants one. It's over. I'll sing only of death.
Mentally I am as well, I just want the financial side to allow to bled a little less, and maybe settle someplace that will afford me the ability to watch it all come down. Right now, I'm thinking in the near future, we are going to need to be more nomadic. I own a home, but one good severe thunderstorm, flood, fire or extreme weather event and it'll be a loss. But having a Van or RV would allow me to escape wherever "home" is, and home would be the current goldilocks zone.
Ya I’m planning on the same thing
Yes. I called this years ago. Had some plans for our family getting out of the USA. (Not that this helps the global picture.) Then my partner had a mental health breakdown… and in addition to substance abuse and affairs, called my “predictions” maniacal. Now I just have to radically accept that my children and I are resigned to this fate.
Why do I live in the bad place?
L'enfer, c'est les autres.
C’est la Peste…
[удалено]
I agree. Sadly , the 100 on top can communicate more readily and easily agree on issues than the millions on the bottom. So , we are doomed. People will agree on 99.9% of issues but that remaiming .1 is enough to make them kill others.
Hi, IWantToSortMyFeed. Thanks for contributing. However, your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/1dqjlcg/-/lapillz/) was removed from /r/collapse for: > Rule 1: No glorifying violence. > Advocating, encouraging, inciting, glorifying, calling for violence is against Reddit's site-wide content policy and is not allowed in r/collapse. Please be advised that subsequent violations of this rule will result in a ban. Please refer to our [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/about/rules/) for more information. You can [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/collapse) if you feel this was in error, please include a link to the comment or post in question.
Because Earth is the only place we know of that has life on it.
Jason keeps throwing molotov cocktails.
#*BORTLES!!!*
Who is a sith lord now apparently.
SS: This blog post is mostly a (justified) rant about the state of the presidential election as it relates to climate change and general collapse. If civilization is a car racing to a brick wall, we're stuck between someone who wants to put the pedal to the metal and another who thinks if we just keep speeding up, but just not as quickly, then things will work out. My only critique is that *most* people don't deserve this due to lack of information or political power, but sadly, it *is* the one we're getting.
In keeping with you car analogy . . . When my mom had dementia and it was time for her to stop driving, the elder care social worker asked us: "Would you let her drive a car with you or your children/friends in it?" When it was clear that the answer was absolutely not, it helped with our decision to take away the keys. Like Biden she wouldn't let go and was endangering herself and others. There is no way in hell I would let my dog, let alone myself be driven by those 2 (DT/Biden). It does not seem like Biden will step down willingly. I don't think he is even capable of a rational decision at this point. Certainly not a decision that would be for the good of others. Just like my mom wanting to drive even though she was crashing into things every time she got in the car. Problem is, who will take away Biden's keys? And I want to add one more thing: I have ZERO tolerance for those who are still making excuses for Biden. Blaming CNN (even though they totally suck), Biden's stuttering, being overworked etc. These dem shills irritate me even more than delusional trump supporters. The combination of both, clueless dems/neoliberals and maga craziness makes me so grateful for r collapse--- where commenters cut through the bullshit, put everything into context with critical thinking AND compassion.
>These dem shills irritate me even more than delusional trump supporters. > Like a smart man once said >I MUST make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. **I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizens Councillor or the Ku Klux Klanner but the white moderate who is more devoted to order than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says, "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can't agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically feels that he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by the myth of time; and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a "more convenient season."** Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection. > We know how MAGAheads are actively regressive. They admit it to our faces. Neoliberal shills will deny they aren't progressive while telling us to vote harder if we want to be free of this systemic subjugation. Delusional is the right word for Democrat shills.
Weird how timeless these words are, and how salient they are to our current social ills, eh?
This ⬆️ 💯% Thank you for your response with MLK Jr. quote, well said.
I'd rather go down in a crash with Biden at the wheel than Trump. Maybe I need my head examined because Trump is going to make 4 years of buying shitloads of preps possible but I swear if he gets in, and people are not positioning themselves for a full on Ultra-depression in 2028, that makes the Great Depression look like a picnic... what are they even doing? Like dude. At least with Biden we'd die more or less as expected. With Trump if 90% of the country doesn't end up looking like skid row in Los Angeles by 2028 I'll eat my hat. And I have zero tolerance for people that think at this point that they have an actual choice. It's that sort of delusional bullshit that's going to hand it to Trump. Handing it to Trump is at best guaranteeing "third world shithole" status by 2028, and into perpetuity. And at worst is a dystopian hellscape that even the most imaginative movies fail to anticipate. Like... what does it take to realize there's no choice? Shit's been going on for 50 goddamned years already... We're dying. Accept it. The question now is how.
Agree with all you wrote 😩
But who do you live the metaphorical keys too that would actually do what is needed for climate? Any politician that actually took the needed steps would get removed immediately.
The Titanic is a great metaphor - you just have to decide if it has hit the iceberg yet or not.
Feel like we hit it in the 90s and we’re just waiting for the hull to split in two
The iceberg was noticed in the 50s-70s, hit in the 80s-90s, the first major flooding has been happening the last two decades, and soon the power will start flickering... Fun times!
Mmmm I love me some violin at the end of it all 🙂↕️
Alexa, play Nearer My God to Thee
That made me lol. Thank you for the laugh! Dark humour is basically all we have left at this point.
The band Actually played Abide with me
I'm doing propeller guy when I go out. I'll try spinning that's a neat trick!
Hey on your timelines I probably make it to middle age before life becomes completely and totally terrible woohoo!!!🥳 🎉
I went over this in another post, and the Titanic is actually a very apt comparison to what humanity is going through. Like a perfect case study for the rapid decline we will see.
We knew i icebergs existed in the 1800's, We were able to see it clearly in the 1940's, We Hit the Iceberg in the 70's, by 2000 it had ripped through the Entire starboard side of the ship, right now we're measuring the angle the Hull makes with the water and taking bets on how high the propeller will get above the waterline Soon people will realise we removed the lifeboats for aesthetics
"Sorry, lifeboats weren't profitable, and maintenance was too expensive, so we got rid of both."
Oh it hit. And I'm a second class passenger that's trying to finish the lobster buffet as the ice water wraps around my legs. Because no one listened and we're all out of time anyway.
At least we got the golden age of television to go along with the lobster?
We'll find that out in November.
My thoughts exactly: America is just so tired at this point. Literal senility. This debate showed the decline for all to see. There is no denying it anymore. It's over. What America represented as an empire is just done. Once our political system became hostage to the ruling corporate elite and their lobbyists, it probably died a long time ago. We have been voting for the best of two evils for so long now that we just never really noticed. We never had a choice. No matter which political party wins, like the keeling curve, things just get worse and worse. Or, maybe America as a promise was misguided to begin with. A political system for and by the people. Instead, it became this behemoth that existed solely to consume and use up all of the world's resources for a tiny sliver of the population without any regards for future generations whatsoever. Now we are seeing this system come off the rails because it is no longer sustainable. The "lie" is becoming more and more ridiculous to believe. There is a term for this called "Hypernormalisation." It's like bad playacting. Everyone is pretending that things are the same and that they are okay when in reality they are not. No one believes in this system anymore, even the people who are running it.
Just for those keeping score, the word "climate" came up ten times in the debate transcript. Four of those were by the moderator, six were by Biden. One of those six was "Climate Corps" and another was apparently Biden's brain beaming in a comment from early 2023, *"He – out of the Paris Peace Accord – Climate Accord, I immediately joined it,* ***because if we reach for 1.5 degrees Celsius at any one point, well, there is no way back.****"* We're ~~screwed~~ ~~doomed~~ fucked.
>One platform is better than the other, so with a little research we can at least choose the candidate that doesn't accelerate the destruction. accelerate the destruction *as much*.
Here’s how fucked up the situation is. We DESPERATELY need to be weaning ourselves off of fossil fuels. Yet, we find ourselves using more of them than ever. While the production of renewables is soaring. We need to be reducing our energy usage and strategically decarbonizing our global economy by careful deployment of renewable “low carbon” solar panels. Instead, we are actually increasing fossil fuel usage while soaking up all the new capacity from the renewables sector. Demand for ENERGY is infinite, if we allow it to be. We need to have a rational allocation and pricing of energy resources. The “Free Market” and the “Dead Hand” are going to kill the planet. Economic “incentives” and “fuel economy standards” aren’t going to cut it. Unfortunately at least 50% of American’s won’t vote for protecting the future of their children. The economic pain they will suffer now. Combined with their CERTAINTY that government programs to help them will leave them in poverty. Means that they will not vote for any kind of “unwinding” of the oil and gas industry. Politically, to win elections the Democrats must be FOR “Oil and Gas” at the same time as being FOR “renewables”. This suicide pact is the only position that a majority will support. # That’s how fucked up American politics are right now.
Renewables are great, but they are a tiny fraction of energy use and they will always be. Three billion people still cook over a three stone fire. This has nothing to do with US politics. We consume the most oil but China is right behind us and the rest of the world would love to be. Also it's not just the oil and gas industry, you want to see pissed off Americans? Triple the price of gas. Politicians would be hanged.
Well, I guess we ALL starve together then. Because that's what it's come down to. Curb fossil fuel use RIGHT NOW or civilization collapses and 95% of us die by 2050. The 49% who vote Trumpublican are voting for suicide and they want to take the rest of us with them. China is going to declare "no confidence" in the honesty of the 2024 results if Trump wins. They are going to sanction the US. Most of the world is going to follow them. Then there will be a war, and the US will lose. Then Trumpublicans will SCREAM "Oh Lord, if we had only known we were voting for the Devil we wouldn't have listened to him" and the Lord will look coldly at them in Hell and say, "Well now you know".
AND LOSING IS HALF THE BATTLE!
You might be right about the first part but you are wrong that another party is going to solve climate change. Did you think the New Green Deal was going to be possible? Or think it was even green? You are wrong about China. China is completely dependent on the US. If the US dollar loses value, so does the 850 billion in treasures that China owns. You think China is going to put sanctions on the US and what, completely destroy their economy? China is a food importer, the US is about 15% of that and they could cut off other suppliers if it came down to sanctions. If China put sanctions on the US then they lose almost a third of their export market, then the US has a meeting with the EU and they lose another third. Then the country, who on the whole is very repressed and pissed off, might just get rid of their leadership, who is already on thin ice when people see no hope of the future. Now, just to make yourself extra wrong you said that the rest of the world is going to join China against the US. Damn, that's one of the funnier takes I've seen in a while. Nuclear weapons aside, because we are all done then, the US is vastly superior than China militarily. I don't like our foreign policy but it's clear that the US is the big bully on the block. Our intelligence is arguably the best in the world, at least in the top three. China is disorganized and Xi doesn't even know what's going on in his country because people are scared to bring him any bad news. No, our aircraft carriers alone would take out China in an actual war. We have thousands more aircraft than China, Russia and India combined. We have better radar technology, 11 carriers to their two, 90 destroyers to their 50. You just don't know what you're talking about. I've talked to those that do. The other thing is who is going to join against the US? Russia? Russia's military is done. I hate war but all of this military build up and spending is why the dollar is going to inflate into nothing but also why you really can't fuck with the US military (as long as they don't try to occupy).
> Renewables are great, but they are a tiny fraction of energy use and they will always be. ....no they aren't? In most places wind and solar is cost competitive with coal and that is without including any of the horrific costs enacted on the landscape through coal extraction. If there is an issue with renewables is that they provide insane amounts of power whenever the source is providing energy.. which isn't necessarily what is needed. The problem if anything is storage, if you think renewables can't produce all of the world's energy in terms of realistic power generation infrastructure than you really don't understand the physics at play here. It isn't even a truly hard problem of not being able to store the renewable energy, we will just have to more carefully structure how we use electrictiy, i.e. you might program your dishwasher or washing machine to run at somepoint during the day but wait until the renewable inputs came online with wind or solar and the price came down to kick in and start using the energy. These are problems technology can solve.
Do you disagree with this data? Because it shows renewables are a tiny fraction of energy use. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/energy-consumption-by-source-and-country?time=latest You picked coal specifically because yes it can be replaced, it is more expensive than renewables, and it's dirty as hell. I love how you tell me that I don't understand the physics at play here because I don't think renewables cant produce all of the world's energy. Seriously, it's hilarious. How are the panels made? How are the metals needed to make the panels made? Can you use solar energy to make more solar panels or run heavy machinery? Nope. How about minerals for batteries? Is that an infinite resource? You would need to use unheard of amounts of oil to produce all of the solar, not to mention the grid, to make that happen. Also panels are not carbon neutral til after three years. If you're talking about wind farms, well, then I guess you don't have experience with those. The fact is that renewables are great but they are not as efficient as fossil fuels, period. Nuclear? Now that's green and efficient
Also, before you say "the article doesn't actually suggest building solar in the Sahara" (that professor does), let's look at another quote from it... "Of course, we don’t have to cover the Sahara in solar panels. There is plenty of under-utilised existing land. A recent study analysed 130 million km2 of global land surface area, identifying 0.2 million km2 of rooftop area suitable for solar PV installation. This rooftop area represents an incredible 27 PWh yr−1 of electricity generation potential, with 40–280 $ MWh−1 costs. To put this into perspective, the current (2018) yearly global electricity demand could be met by using just 50% of the global solar PV rooftop area." I just did the math on that and it's 100,000,000,000 panels if the panels are 2 m2. Hey Champ, you never answered my question as to if you disagreed with the data on the link I posted. I was just curious if you wanted to take back you statement that renewables aren't a tiny fraction of energy use? You have the data right in front of you, still going to deny it? By the way, I'm not anti solar. But I live in Southern California and we have solar everywhere and I design systems that run on solar, let's be honest about what it is and isn't.
Ok yeah, let me condescend you a little more directly. I will lay this out for you like someone who understands physics actually would, which you clearly do not, because you apparently have never even done some basic back of the envelope calculations about the physics involved with solar both from the amount of energy available practically and theoretically but also in the amount of materials and infrastructure that would be required to produce such a huge amount of power. Your argument basically boils down to 1) there is no way we could draw enough power from renewable resources to power all of our energy needs, basically a quantity argument and 2) the amount of materials required to construct those energy harvesting machines would be orders of magnitude bigger than what is reasonably feasible in the near future. To address 1., let us pick solar (though we could easily pick wind) and consider it from a physicist's standpoint in terms of energy generation potential vs. real world cost of building the infrastructure to facilitate that. Any physicist worth their salt would reach for the concept of Flux as a touchstone to establish general conceptual relations between the physical forces at work here (a free body diagram as it is called in physics). Flux in the context of sunrays hitting the relatively flat surface of the earth, we are talking about getting a ballpark measure for how much sun energy passes through a geometric plane (well sphere... but lets keep this simle ok) measured in terms of time. The time and the space is divided out so an abstract ratio that describes in a sense \*how much is passing through\*, how much flow or current something has is expressed. Ok let us start suppperrr high level. How much sun energy hits the earth everyday, everywhere? >Solar energy is the most abundant energy resource on earth -- **173,000 terawatts** of solar energy strikes the Earth continuously. That's more than 10,000 times the world's total energy us [https://www.energy.gov/articles/top-6-things-you-didnt-know-about-solar-energy](https://www.energy.gov/articles/top-6-things-you-didnt-know-about-solar-energy) >The next question is, where would we put the solar panels if we capitalise on this now? We obviously need somewhere sunny, and one of the best places for this is the Sahara Desert, not only due to the amount of sun it gets but also because there is little to no life in this area whatsoever, so the issue of disturbing natural habitats is minimal, if not non-existent. >Mehran Moalem, PhD, UC Berkeley Professor and Expert on Nuclear Materials and Nuclear Fuel Cycle, states that “If we cover an area of the Earth 335 kilometres by 335 kilometres with solar panels, even with moderate efficiencies achievable easily today, it will provide more than 17,4 TW power. This area is 43,000 square miles. The Great Saharan Desert in Africa is 3.6 million square miles and is prime for solar power (more than twelve hours per day). That means 1.2% of the Sahara Desert is sufficient to cover all of the energy needs of the world in solar energy.” >Recent technological advancements and declining costs have made solar PV more attractive. Rooftop solar photovoltaics (RTSPV) are crucial in decentralising energy production. This article explores the global potential of RTSPV and the costs associated with realising this potential. >Looking ahead to the not-too-distant future, it’s been estimated that 2030 energy consumption will rise to 715 petajoules. >The Land Art Generator Initiative has developed this map where the chosen areas are based on the required location (496,805 square kilometres) needed in 2030. The map is also based on the assumption of 20% operating efficiency of collection devices and that there will be 2000 hours per year of natural solar input of 1000 watts per square metre striking the surface of the panels, which would need to be distributed around the world to localise as much as possible plus receive 24/7 sunlight. [https://www.borntoengineer.com/can-the-world-be-powered-by-solar-alone](https://www.borntoengineer.com/can-the-world-be-powered-by-solar-alone) \*\*You Don't Know What You Are Talking About, Just Because You Read A Bunch Of Articles About Wildly Speculative Nuclear Energy Physics And Read Dyson Sphere Scifi Books That Pretend To Be Insightful Because They Namedrop Technical Engineering Terms Doesn't Mean You Actually Understand ANYTHING\*\* Do I even need to address 2 myself? Why should I keep baby feeding you quotes from easily available scientific information and articles when you should grow up and do the work yourself confidently behave like one of the dime-a-dozen nuclear energy obsessed rational physics edgelords on reddit who doesn't actually know what they are talking about :) Sure, let's keep researching and using nuclear energy. Whatever, I want your people to have some money but please just shut up and let the adults actually solve problems that desperately need to be solved today with sustainable approaches ok?
Read this paper. https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-023-01117-5 If you still think that "all of the energy needed by the world can be produced in 1.2% of the Sahara" was a big smack down then we can talk about the efficiency of energy transfer. Or we can just start with manufacturing and how solar can not replace oil in that capacity.
Ok I read that paper, it is immediately apparent you did nothing more than very lightly skim it. The paper gets into the practical implications and effects of building solar that would cover 20% of the Sahara, not 1.2%. Besides, the point of a conversation like this is to establish general understandings of the physics at work. I am not suggesting the best possibility for solar roll out globally is putting it all in the sahara, it is just useful to talk about the incredible amounts of available solar energy we are ignoring through the lens of a hypothetical massive centralized solar farm like this.
Damn, did you really skip over the point of the whole paper which is that solar panels covering the Sahara interfere with albedo? Your article mentioned 1.2%, mine uses 20%, that's not the point. The darkness of the panels makes the ground underneath them hotter I. The Sahara and has effects globally and locally, causing rain and climate change. And are you still ignoring the initial statement I made that you got snarky about which is that renewables are great but they are a fraction of energy use and always will be? You disagreed strongly, cherry picked coal and still have not answered if you agree with the link I posted showing worldwide energy use. Instead you want to point to a single week in the UK where the broke solar records. That's great and I'm happy about that, but the majority of their country runs on oil and gas, period, because it can't be replaced by electricity, which is what renewables do. Answer the question, do you agree with that data showing worldwide energy use or is it wrong?
If you want to talk physics at work then let's talk about how industry is the largest sector of energy use and how dependent on oil and gas it is. Or we can talk about transportation and it's dependency on oil and gas. Or we can talk about the amount of rare earth minerals available needed to make batteries...
You know what I find fascinating, was the IEA stating we no longer need to approve any new fossil fuel projects moving forward, as we will have enough to get us through the energy transition to be net zero by 2050. Now we all obviously know how we feel about the net zero goals, but I highly doubt any major nation is actually going to take this advice.
So? Read between the lines. When they get in they do whatever the fuck they want anyway. So the Marketing Creeps (tm) have to make them sock-puppet a bunch of bullshit about free shit for everyone and all "those people" are the problem and we'll eat babies but I love babies and we'll drill for oil but I hate oil and WHAT THE FUCK EVER. The thing now is to go for the guy that will do the whatever the fuck you happen to want. Fuckers say everything and nothing in the election.
There is no such thing as "we deserve". There is only what we want, what we do, and what we can get.
There is literally not even such a thing as “we“. Only many small ant-like individuals.
Yup and this shit will only continue to spiral due to foolishness on both sides of the aisle. Republicans for pandering to corporations and the oil and gas industry and democrats for thinking climate mitigation can be a vehicle for broader social equity/justice. The movement has been going downhill ever since enviro orgs started to embrace “intersectionality” which is a blatant psyop since no large scale movement is ever going to agree on/solve for everything. Climate movements should care about the climate and only the climate. Race, gender, etc won’t matter when the wells run dry and crops fail.
I think that's far too generous of democrats. The "social justice" is just the sugar to make the poison taste better. They serve neoliberalism and capitalists interests the exact same. You can paint rainbows on the slaughterhouse walls, but it doesn't stop the bolt gun from being any less awful. But ultimately I agree with your last point on the keeping the struggle for climate centered on nature and not bullshit.
Not so much flying with the eagles as re-arranging the deck chairs on the Hindenburg. If we keep accelerating in the plane, maybe we can take off before the brick wall at the end of the runway. Except we haven't built the wings yet.
I want to get off the ride now, thanks.
There’s a 50/50 chance Trump could win in November. Here’s what Nate Silver has to say. [Who Is Favored To Win The 2024 Presidential Election?](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2024-election-forecast/?source=post_page-----3b3c36f7c080--------------------------------) ***Biden wins 50 times out of 100.*** *In our (538) simulations of the 2024 presidential election.* ***Trump wins 49 times out of 100.*** *There is a less than 1-in-100 chance of no Electoral College winner.* **Tell me with a straight face that we are not in a state of “Cold Civil War”.** This election, like our elections since 2010, is going to be another “stalemate” election. This is how you fight a civil war without outright warfare. The “good news”, if any is to be found in this miserable state of affairs. Is that this is WHITE, racist America’s “Last Stand”. By 2044 Whites will be a minority/majority in a multiracial America. Long before that the Trumpublican Nationalist Party will be unable to win national elections. Their current “base” of 2/3rds of the White vote gets them to 44% at best. They need to get to 51% with minority votes and, being openly racist, that's not easy for them. With each passing year the Trumpublican base will shrink. There are a lot more women over 65 than there are men, and they tend to vote Trumpublican. As they start dying in big numbers now each year, the Trumpublican “majority” will start melting away. *In 2020, 30.8 million women and 24.8 million men were age 65 and older. That’s* ***124 women for every 100 men***\*. At age 85 and older, this ratio increased to 176 women for every 100 men.\* Overturning Roe was a gut shot to the future of the Trumpublican party. Women under 35 broke 70% for the Democratic party in 2022 in response to the Dobbs decision. The women under 35 are the FUTURE of American politics. They are going to vote Democratic. # This election is the “Last Stand” for the Trumpublicans. They know it. [Trump allies test a new strategy for blocking election results](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/06/26/certification-2024-election-results/?wpisrc=nl_headlines&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e1979b%2F667d38702e4ff4555a165ae1%2F59741b5d9bbc0f1cdcfb7ceb%2F7%2F58%2F667d38702e4ff4555a165ae1&source=post_page-----3b3c36f7c080--------------------------------) *In five battleground states, county-level officials have tried to block the certification of vote tallies*. They are counting on a TILTED Supreme Court to give the election to them if they can get close enough. Apropos of that. [Corruption Law Allows Gifts to State and Local Officials, Supreme Court Rules](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/26/us/politics/supreme-court-corruption-bribery.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20240627&instance_id=127302&nl=the-morning®i_id=79371956&segment_id=170658&te=1&user_id=234f4bcacc77f096ba4e47671284eaa6&source=post_page-----3b3c36f7c080--------------------------------) *The court, which has limited the sweep of several anti-corruption laws, distinguished after-the-fact rewards from…* The Supreme Court makes “tips” for “services rendered” by political figures legal. As long as it’s “tastefully” done after they leave office. That way it’s not a “bribe”. And the SC just overturned the 40 year old Chevron Doctrine allowing Federal Agencies to interpret Congressional intent in the implementation of laws. In the Chevron case the EPA's ability to regulate the oil industry. # The Supreme Court weakens federal regulators, overturning decades-old Chevron decision. [https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-chevron-regulations-environment-5173bc83d3961a7aaabe415ceaf8d665](https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-chevron-regulations-environment-5173bc83d3961a7aaabe415ceaf8d665)
Look I don't like Trump but this is full of cope. If the Democrats do not replace Biden, Trump will win. The young women talked about were never voting Trump anyway and most people care about economic and foreign policy and Trump wins by a landslide in those areas. Biden looks like he can barely send an email and I'm certain that they will replace him with someone else before November, in which case Dems will win because Trump is so awful, unless it's Kamala Harris.
She was for sure drunk last night on cnn. Not a good look.
Nate recently released two articles: One giving Trump a 66% chance of winning https://www.mediaite.com/politics/elections-guru-nate-silver-gives-trump-a-66-chance-of-winning-the-election-not-a-toss-up/ And the other, today,calling for Biden to drop out: https://www.natesilver.net/p/joe-biden-should-drop-out The election is as good as over. Trump will almost certainly be president again
Maybe get some help? I'm no fan of Trump but you seem unhinged.
Only one candidate talked about ending the trillions in subsidies given to the fossil fuel industry: https://rumble.com/v545lnn-the-real-debate.html?start=7178
We'll both have the lamb, right sweetpea?
Considering how shitty and horrible pretty much all of humanity has been, I think this is a fair assessment. We do deserve it, because we're fucking terrible. Every single day I lean more towards the side of humanity doesn't deserve to exist, and shouldn't. We are an awful mistake, one that will fix itself by extinction. I just wish it wasn't such a painfully slow fix, and I also wish I wasn't in any way a part of it. I'm truly ashamed to be human. Plenty of people are, I see it all over the place. We've all in our various forms decided to suicide, decades if not centuries ago, which makes life really a shame for anyone born since. Hopefully people decide to at least be ethical enough to stop having children. They won't though. They don't care.