Donald Trump 2016?

[preoccupied]

Another way coal could be cleaner is if they thermally depolymerize their coal before they burn it as fuel at a power plant. This would also make the coal burn hotter, so new equipment all around I guess.

[preoccupied]

Do you remember Ross Perot?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQ7kn2-GEmM

[eccentrically1]

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... ersion=NIV

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... -5491.html

19 days to go

[daanopperman]

Can't they just wash the coal .

[preoccupied]

daanopperman, I think that washing coal doesn't do anything. I mean some stuff might be drained off that might be hazardous when the coal is burned, but this is not without also giving off some pollutants in the process of cleaning the coal. Comparing coal cleaning to thermal depolymerization should be similar comparing cleaning a stain on the carpet with water compared to buying new carpet. Thermal depolymerization changes the coal into a new compound and if it can do this and separate itself from the other elements then it would be a pure form of burnable fuel. Thermal depolymerization should create a pure coal-like substance. If it does, then it could be cleanly used to burn off only CO2 emissions, and that can grow algae without other chemicals being in the mix. There are more than one method of thermal depolymerization, the one I'm referring to I no longer have a reference to. The biggest reason people don't do things the best possible way is because the capitalist doesn't think he needs to. If I were the capitalist I would seek out the best possible way to do things. Which is why I want to retrofit Little Caesars pizza with robots to make product quality more consistent.

[TGM]

I thought all of the crazy political stuff was on facebook? Guess I am wrong.

[Fcdriver]

The balance of power is key to our Constitution! The President is limited by law, to follow the congress, this is meant to be a slow process! Obama being our first black President allowed him to do things that the balance of power, would have stopped! We could not impeach the first black President!
Not following immigration law!
Not following the war powers act!
Not following FOIA!
Allowing the Secretary of State to micro manage a war! She was NOT Cammander In Chief!


Hillary to be the first female President, would cause a imbalance, in the same manner!
There is no way we could impeach the first female President!
She has already showed she will not follow rules or law!

Hillary is not the right female to be THE first female President!
Bill Clinton should not be our first, Firat Gentleman! This would insult all of the First Ladies of previous Presidents!

[preoccupied]

I think Bill Clinton will make an excellent first lady. When Bill Clinton was President and Hillary Clinton was the first lady, he had Hillary work on a national healthcare system. I think Bill Clinton will do a good job because he will be put to work by his wife. They will be very busy people after the election if Hillary Clinton become President. When I saw pictures of Bill Clinton during the 90's he was always reading or writing. I don't think he vacationed much. He might have been a workaholic. Hillary Clinton said that Bill Clinton would work on the economy and Bill Clinton during her campaign was talking about the economy. This is also how he talked when he ran for President before. Do you remember "it's the economy, stupid." saying? I saw on Fox News before with a girl protesting for free college and the Fox news guy said that taxing people wouldn't pay for anything because rich people only had 1 trillion dollars altogether. This is ignorant. I've learned that trillions of dollars are invested into the USA by the Saudi Royal family, and even though it's popularly reported that Bill Gates is one of the wealthiest men in the world, he simply isn't and there are a variety of super wealthy trillionaires that are not widely reported on. The property assets in the USA are over 100 trillion dollars, and this can be found on a national debt calculation chart that I've seen online. If the USA wanted to print money because it felt desperate for any reason for government revenue, it would take hundreds of trillions of dollars being printed to realistically justify doubling the price of everything in our country.

[ME]

Election question:

When you don't agree with both major choices, for whatever reason, then what's the best voting 'strategy'?
1. Make a protest vote against the worst option -- thus not actually voting in favor;
2. Don't vote at all, or invalidate the ballot -- but it wouldn't count anyway;
3. Vote for option 3 (or 4). -- a binary-wise useless option, but lowers the win-percentage?;

I hear about option 1 and 2, but what about option 3? - they seem to have lost even before it all starts.

Another election-question:
Why do you have to register to vote when you're already registered as citizen anyway?
Why doesn't everyone automatically get something on the doormat implying: "You (may) vote here or there in this time-frame".

(asked from a country with a multi-party system with probably its own quirks, so it may all be alien to me and probably wouldn't understand the answer)

[eccentrically1]

1 isn't really a protest vote. You've still voted in favor of one of them. So I guess it's a kind of strategy, at least in your own mind.
2 is a poor strategy, you've given up your voice in the process, and even more importantly, not given your opinion on the future of your country.
3 is what some consider a protest vote since neither have a chance, and it does affect the percentage of the major candidates. I'm not sure if both major candidates lose an equal percentage or if one loses more than the other. A neutral strategy, maybe?
You have to register to vote mainly to prove you are an eligible voter.
Most people know where and when to vote, if they don't, that info is on their cyber doormat like a .gov website.

[Furcurequs]

My philosophy is that if I only have a bunch of losers to choose from, I'm certainly not going to choose the loser that wins.

I've been of voting age since 1981, and I've yet to vote for a winning presidential candidate! ...woohoo!

That means you can't blame this mess on me!

I did once vote for one of the independent candidates, I think, but I didn't even bother to get out for the last presidential election. Were it not for my health problems, maybe I would have tried, but it just didn't seem worth the effort.

You must choose a turd!

No, I don't want to!

It's your patriotic duty! You must let your voice be heard!

...but it's a secret ballot filled out in silence behind a curtain! Who will hear that "voice?" Can you not hear me now?! No more turds!

[eccentrically1]

If you don't want to vote for the loser that wins, vote for the loser that loses, you seem to be good at picking them :)
The " can't blame this mess on me " is the real turd.

[Furcurequs]

I once considered voting for the candidate who wanted world peace, but unfortunately I found out she was just running for Miss America.

[Jim Williams]

Furcurequs:

Congratulations! That's funny!

Jim W.

[WaltzCee]

I have no vote in this, so I wish you all the very best wisdom to choose who's the best, brightest and most capable to represent you all.
Good luck.

We're so screwed. None of those options (best, brightest, etc) are on the ballot.