Have you heard about...? (Politics edition)

[mbw]

I'm not so sure I want the country run by someone who only received perhaps a 3rd of the vote, unless of course it included my vote.

[runawayjimbo]

I'm not a two party absolutist. But I'm definitely not a libertarian. If Bernie were to run as a socialist third party candidate he'd get my vote. But my vote hardly counts in Texas so I can afford to vote my conscious.

No love for Dr. Jill Stein?

If you're in a swing state and don't vote for Hillary you are voting FOR RACISM because that is the candidate you risk helping in not voting for Hillary. Yes. It IS THAT SIMPLE.

Trump would be the worst president ever by factors of thousands.

Obvious exaggeration is obvious

One (possibly) unintended benefit of a Trump presidency is that Congress would suddenly remember their Constitutional duty to act as a check against executive power which has been grossly and continuously ramped up over the past couple decades. Maybe they would actually remember only Congress can authorize war? Maybe it would drive consensus and cooperation amongst lawmakers eager to cuckold Trump's veto power the way he's done to them through this election cycle? Who knows, maybe, just maybe, the country comes together and promises never to be so stupid again?

[Hicks]

One (possibly) unintended benefit of a Trump presidency is that Congress would suddenly remember their Constitutional duty to act as a check against executive power which has been grossly and continuously ramped up over the past couple decades. Maybe they would actually remember only Congress can authorize war? Maybe it would drive consensus and cooperation amongst lawmakers eager to cuckold Trump's veto power the way he's done to them through this election cycle? Who knows, maybe, just maybe, the country comes together and promises never to be so stupid again?

Lolz you libertarians with your freedom rainbows and idyllic bipartisan unicorns are so cute. 

None of that shit will ever happen, especially the not stupid part. 

[ytowndan]

If I didn't live in Ohio, I would be voting Green or maybe some even thirder third party (I liked that Rocky Anderson of the Justice Party in '12).  Fucking winner-take-all voting sucks.  You shouldn't be able to win an election with only a plurality of the vote.  The electoral college is also archaic.  But I digress.

Anyhow, in a swing state you can vote for Clinton or Trump.  And by that I mean, any vote that isn't for Clinton is a vote for Trump.  I'm not about to have an openly racist, xenophobic, authoritarian POTUS on my conscience because I wanted to vote for a candidate who couldn't have won under our dated system anyway.  So I'll hold my nose and vote for oligarchy over fascism.

[PIE-GUY]

If I didn't live in Ohio, I would be voting Green or maybe some even thirder third party (I liked that Rocky Anderson of the Justice Party in '12).  Fucking winner-take-all voting sucks.  You shouldn't be able to win an election with only a plurality of the vote.  The electoral college is also archaic.  But I digress.

Anyhow, in a swing state you can vote for Clinton or Trump.  And by that I mean, any vote that isn't for Clinton is a vote for Trump.  I'm not about to have an openly racist, xenophobic, authoritarian POTUS on my conscience because I wanted to vote for a candidate who couldn't have won under our dated system anyway.  So I'll hold my nose and vote for oligarchy over fascism.

Exactly.

[rowjimmy]

Since we managed to turn VA into a swing state a while back, I've got to vote to dismiss Trump. No question.
But I'm cool with it. Status quo is better than walking down fascist street.

[VDB]

Or you could just throw your votes down here:

Well, I live in South Carolina, so that's pretty much going to happen regardless.

One (possibly) unintended benefit of a Trump presidency is that Congress would suddenly remember their Constitutional duty to act as a check against executive power which has been grossly and continuously ramped up over the past couple decades. Maybe they would actually remember only Congress can authorize war? Maybe it would drive consensus and cooperation amongst lawmakers eager to cuckold Trump's veto power the way he's done to them through this election cycle? Who knows, maybe, just maybe, the country comes together and promises never to be so stupid again?

This has crossed my mind as well. Maybe not the Bipartisan Spring part, but at least the stop-letting-the-executive-do-whatever-the-hell-it-wants part.

I think people in swing states should do whatever it is they feel they ought to do. If that's casting a vote against Slightly More Loathed Candidate X, so be it. If that's casting a vote for a third party candidate in an election that desperately needs to see the two-party system repudiated like, perhaps, never before, so be it as well. Up to you. (Remember, there are lots of disgruntled Republicans to whom this would just as easily apply; it's not like everyone who opts not to play the GOP-Dem game is guaranteed to be bailing on Hillary.)

[pcr3]

RNC has been upgraded to shitshow:

https://www.statnews.com/2016/07/19/norovirus-republican-convention-cleveland/

[runawayjimbo]

RNC has been upgraded to shitshow:

https://www.statnews.com/2016/07/19/norovirus-republican-convention-cleveland/

I didn't realize the RNC was sponsored by Chipotle.

[sunrisevt]

So... I probably mentioned my old friend Zephyr Teachout a couple of years ago, back when she was a virtual unknown who gave Andrew "Dynasty" Cuomo a real fight for the democratic nom for NY governor.

Now, she's running for the US Congress.

She is the very picture of the real deal. This lady is the second of five kids raised by their parents--both law professors, mom now a VT Superior Court judge--on a hill farm contiguous to the communal farm where I grew up. They raised sheep and strong-minded humans. Zephyr and I rode the school bus together, ran cross country and track together, and spent hours in earnest discussion of issues both profound and mundane.

Any NY-19 voters on the 'paug? Check her out! The rest of you--watch for her on Maddow, etc. She's great.

http://www.zephyrteachoutforcongress.com/

[Buffalo Budd]

WashPost Makes History: First Paper to Call for Prosecution of Its Own Source (After Accepting Pulitzer)

https://theintercept.com/2016/09/18/washpost-makes-history-first-paper-to-call-for-prosecution-of-its-own-source-after-accepting-pulitzer/

[VDB]

WashPost Makes History: First Paper to Call for Prosecution of Its Own Source (After Accepting Pulitzer)

https://theintercept.com/2016/09/18/washpost-makes-history-first-paper-to-call-for-prosecution-of-its-own-source-after-accepting-pulitzer/

Jesus Christ.

[runawayjimbo]

Not sure where to put this but here you go.

Good news, you guys, the science is settled: GMOs are good for humanity AND the environment.

(obligatory disclosure at the bottom)

http://www.wsj.com/articles/gmos-are-a-necessityfor-farmers-and-the-environment-1475537025

GMOs Are a Necessity—for Farmers and the Environment
After 20 years, the data are in: Genetic modification boosts crop yields by 21% and cuts pesticides by 37%

Genetically modified crops, which have generated both controversy and widespread adoption, are hitting 20-year milestones. Perhaps the anniversary slipped your mind, but 1997 was a dark one for the European corn worm. That was the year Bt corn, the first to bear its own protection against the larvae of the rapacious corn worm, was commercially introduced.

The European corn worm had long ago invaded the U.S. and by the mid-1990s was causing more than $1 billion in annual damage. But now no insecticide was needed, thank you, because Bt corn had been genetically modified to pack its own. It produced a protein toxic to the corn worm and some of its fellow travelers, while benign to most other insects.

The first genetically modified row crops of any kind—herbicide-resistant soybeans and cotton protected against the bollworm and other pests—were introduced only in 1995. Twenty years on, these crops have proved their worth: Last year GMOs were planted on 444 million acres, an area larger than Alaska. That's 12% of all global cropland.

What have been the effects of this technology? In May a committee convened by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine completed a two-year review, "Genetically Engineered Crops: Experiences and Prospects." The committee, which examined about 900 studies, painted a highly positive picture.

The academies' report found "no differences that would implicate a higher risk to human health from eating GE foods than from eating their non-GE counterparts." It also "found little evidence to connect GE crops and their associated technologies with adverse agronomic or environmental problems." In some cases, the review said, "planting Bt crops has tended to result in higher insect biodiversity," by reducing pesticide use.

The report supported genetic modification in a fundamental way: It called for "strategic public investment in emerging genetic-engineering technologies and other approaches to address food security and other challenges."

These conclusions could not have surprised anyone who follows the issue. They're consistent with the findings of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Medical Association, the World Health Organization and other highly respected groups. Thousands of independent researchers have consistently found that GMOs benefit not only farmers and the public, but also biodiversity, soil quality, water quality, carbon sequestration—in short, the environment.

In 2014, for example, two German researchers at the University of Göttingen, Wilhelm Klumper and Matin Qaim, consolidated the findings of 147 studies dating to 1996. They found that GMOs increased crop yields by an average of 21% world-wide and reduced the use of pesticides by 37%. Farmers who adopted GMOs increased their profits by 69% on average, with the gains going disproportionately to the developing world.

This year Peter Barfoot and Graham Brookes, two British researchers at PG Economics, an agricultural consulting firm, calculated the environmental benefit from not having to run tractors to spray pesticides on GMO crops. The effect in 2014, they wrote, was "equivalent to removing nearly 10 million cars from the roads." That amounts to about 4% of the passenger vehicles in the U.S.

Then there are the benefits when high yields from GMOs curtail the conversion of forest or grassland to agriculture. To keep current production without the gains from GMO crops, more than 97,000 additional square miles—an area larger than Ohio and Indiana combined—would have to be cultivated globally. Instead the carbon in all that land, which would be released to the air during tilling, stayed in the dirt.

The industry could have listened better to the public's concerns about GMOs and addressed them. But even if resistance to the technology continues, which I hope will not be the case, here's what I see happening in the next 20 years:

Genetic modification will be extended to many more crops. It will be used to enhance the nutritional value of rice—such as with Golden Rice, which is fortified to provide vitamin A—as well as cassava, two major staples. Insect resistance will be conferred on more crops and widened to protect against more pests, reducing food waste and spoilage, especially in the developing world. The strides that GMO crops have already made against drought and heat stress will accelerate. Yields and yield stability will increase for plantation crops like palm, coffee, cocoa and trees for paper.

Exciting gains are also on the horizon against plant diseases caused by fungi, bacteria and nematodes, the microscopic worms that feed on roots. One result will be bigger yields. Another will be less use of chemical fungicides. The fungus that now threatens bananas will be foiled as well.

The rapidly growing global population and warming climate will make agricultural innovations a necessity, not a luxury. In my view, the next two decades will bring even more innovations than the past two.

Mr. Fraley is executive vice president and chief technology officer of Monsanto. ::insert DUN-DUN-DUUUUUUUUUNNNNNNN sound effect::

[Hicks]

tl;dr and fuck that guy. 

[ytowndan]

Glad I jumped to the bottom before wasting my time on that.