The whole "climate change isn't real" lobby was founded in 1992 and funded by the energy industries. It still is today, and it's been successful. Before then, most politicians agreed with scientists that climate change was real and was a real problem. The only exception to this was Ronald Reagan, who believed that "acid rain is caused by ducks" and that the climate change information was just "bad science". The logic behind climate change is simple. If you put salt into water you get salt water. If you put greenhouse gases into the atmosphere you increase the greenhouse gas effect. I don't really want to continue this climate change topic, but the science behind it isn't that difficult. The only industrial country governments that reject climate change are Canada and Australia, because they're run by conservatives. Even in the USA the mainstream Republicans accept climate change (but are worried about China's emissions more than America's own)
Trump has some dumb ideas (especially in foreign policy) but there's no other real front runner for the Republicans. But why is he popular? Trump's probably the most secular of all the Republican nominees. He doesn't go into all the "family/Christian values" rhetoric that Republicans usually get into. I can say I like that about him. I also like that he's passionate about what he talks about and also that he has a personality when he talks. I like a couple things about him, but he's wreck the USA if he ever took power. Either that, or nothing would get through congress due to the ideas being so radical. He's also easy pickings if anyone wants to run an attack ad on him. There's videos filled with dumb things he's said over the years.. Not sure if he can even make it past the primaries with the dirt that can be put on him.
You only get salt water if the salt is more in comparison than the water Climate change could possibly be real but when you mix bad data like a thermometer reading 128 degrees f because it is by a air conditioner and mulitple other bad reading that has a tendency to change the data by s whole lot those number would be considered an outlier Also the hole in the ozone layer above Antarctica is what scientist were looking at and studying it kept getting bigger they kept Saying global warming now that the ozone layer above Antarctica is actually shrinking and has been for a number of year what proof do scientist have to say that it is not just a natural event that the earth goes through Anyways I think we have derailed this thread enough now back to the election Trump will say what most People on the outside looking in are too scared to say I think the best candidate is dr Ben Carson because he is not a politician but in some ways being a dr you kinda have to be a politician
I just watched the first 10 mins of Carson's speech and I can say a few things already. Half of his speech was just rhetoric... No real ideas, just explaining his personal experiences. Right there I don't like him. I also don't like his religious talk during a political speech... Ever hear of separation of church and state? I don't like Ben Carson because he makes the assumption that if you give assistance to the lower class, the middle class will disappear and everyone will lose their jobs. I'd like to point out the disappearing middle class in the USA that's being caused by tax cuts to the wealthy and tax hikes to the average worker, as well as business deregulation and a low minimum wage. I'd also like to point out Scandinavia, which has more "socialist" laws in place, yet has more income equality and a larger middle class. Carson's logic is that when you give tax cuts to the rich and shift the burden onto the middle class, you will grow the middle class. His logic is that cancelling welfare to able-bodied people even during times of recession, where unemployment is high, will grow the middle class. What I find more interesting is when he says "it's time for people to take government back". OK. So voting for Carson, who will take money from the middle class, thereby growing the middle class, should be the one that people vote for, because he's obviously for the people. Another thing I want to add as well is that when you take people off welfare, they're gonna go bananas. Welfare is just enough for people to eat. Do you think people are comfortable with that lifestyle? How do you think they'll make money? Go out and apply for a job in a market when there are none? Probably. Then when there's no job they'll have to make money other ways. Drugs, prostitution, theft, etc. The list goes on. If welfare were cancelled, I suspect crime rates would skyrocket. How's a guy supposed to get by if there's no jobs? What happens if a company shuts down? Will a former employee have to lose their house? Their car? Where will they go when they miss their mortgage payments and default on their debt? Safety nets and securities have always been better than not having them. Sometimes you need a little more than motivation to get a job. There needs to also be an opening. If there's no opening, then that's what Employment Insurance is for. You receive enough to scrape by while you look for your next job.