Election 2022 Results

[GreatLakes4Ever]

Manipulating elections in that way would seem to undermine Democracy. Wouldn't you agree?

By running ads for their preferred candidate? That’s how it is in America. Anyone can run an ad for any candidate they want. By making funding strictly public would end this.

I answered your question, I would appreciate an answer to mine: why did Republicans nominate Trump endorsees?

 

[Bradskii]

It seems that you still haven't finished reading the post that you responded to.

Here is the preamble to my question, and the question.

I'm simply looking for an answer to my question. If you are having difficulty providing an answer; there's no pressure for you to give an irrelevant answer, nor change the subject.

You said it was perplexing. It took me a few seconds to find that Washington and California are second and third to Texas. What on earth is so perplexing about that? https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/slideshows/these-states-use-the-most-renewable-energy

And bear in mind that Washington has about 3% of the population of Texas yet produces 75% of Texas' renewables. They are streets ahead.

So now, do you think this is the right direction to head? Do you support the states that are doing their best to increase renewables?

 

[HARK!]

By running ads for their preferred candidate?

Do you really expect me to believe that the Democrats prefer Trump endorsees? Let's get real.

I answered your question, I would appreciate an answer to mine: why did Republicans nominate Trump endorsees?

I don't know. I suppose that there were numerous individual reasons.

 

[Bradskii]

It seems that you still haven't finished reading the post that you responded to.

Here is the preamble to my question, and the question.

And check this site: https://www.energymonitor.ai/tech/renewables/americas-red-states-lead-wind-and-solar-power-surge

Many graphs and lots of info on many states and how well they are doing. Including many red states. But...this:

'In many of these conservative red states, state policy is not driving the growth in renewables. Instead, federal tax credits, now being phased out, and the abundant wind energy resources found across the Great Plains have produced some of the most favourable conditions in the US for the development of cheap, utility-scale renewable energy projects.'

 

[Bradskii]

Do you really expect me to believe that the Democrats prefer Trump endorsees?

It appears so, as you asked why Dems were funding them:

Perhaps you can explain why Democrats were funding Trump endorsees.

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

Do you really expect me to believe that the Democrats prefer Trump endorsees? Let's get real.

To go against in a general election they do. I thought it was an extremely wasteful (Republicans would never nominate someone unelectable) dangerous (what if that unelectable person won the general) and stupid (you’ll end up with a worse person in that seat if you had done nothing) strategy but it did work.

I don't know. I suppose that there were numerous individual reasons.

Republicans using their own intelligence and free will chose their candidates. Some of them were really bad and it cost them seats they should have been able to win.

 

[HARK!]

It took me a few seconds to find that Washington and California are second and third to Texas.

Why can't CA catch up with Texas? Why can't they manage their own affairs, instead of trying to push their pipe dreams on everyone else, at the expense of others?

And bear in mind that Washington has about 3% of the population of Texas yet produces 75% of Texas' renewables. They are streets ahead.

Wow! 75% of what TX produces with only 3% of the population? So do they have a surplus of renewable energy? If so, why do they continue to buy fossil fuels?

 

[HARK!]

It appears so, as you asked why Dems were funding them:

If the Democrats preferred Trump endorsees, those endorsees would have won.

Let's call this what it is. Those Democrats set out to undermine the Democratic process.

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

If the Democrats preferred Trump endorsees, those endorsees would have won.

Let's call this what it is. Those Democrats set out to undermine the Democratic process.

And the Republicans were too pathetic and weak to not nominate the bad candidate? Republicans could have snuffed out this plan real quick. Why didn’t they?

 

[HARK!]

Republicans using their own intelligence and free will chose their candidates. Some of them were really bad and it cost them seats they should have been able to win.

So you would be OK with Republicans using money to flood the Democratic Party with weak candidates?

 

[HARK!]

And the Republicans were too pathetic and weak to not nominate the bad candidate? Republicans could have snuffed out this plan real quick. Why didn’t they?

They were conned.

Do you blame the victims of con artists ?

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

So you would be OK with Republicans using money to flood the Democratic Party with weak candidates?

I’d tell them the Republicans it was a wasteful strategy because Democrats wouldn’t vote for a nominee that is unelectable like the Republicans did.

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

They were conned.

Do you blame the victims of con artists ?

How were they conned? Those were Republican nominees that had the Trump stamp of approval and Republicans voted for them. It wasn’t like these were Democrats posing as Republicans.

 

[Bradskii]

Why can't CA catch up with Texas? Why can't they manage their own affairs, instead of trying to push their pipe dreams on everyone else, at the expense of others?

Wow! 75% of what TX produces with only 3% of the population? So do they have a surplus of renewable energy? If so, why do they continue to buy fossil fuels?

Because Texan renewables only account for 28% of their need. Washington produces a lot more per capita but uses a lot more per head.

So again, do you support the direction these states are heading? Do you want them to invest more, on a state basis and on a federal basis to increase renewables? Do you actually want California to catch up with Texas?

Tell us what your position is.

 

[Bradskii]

If the Democrats preferred Trump endorsees, those endorsees would have won.

Why? The party backed them to lose. And were in most part successful.

 

[HARK!]

I’d tell them the Republicans it was a wasteful strategy because Democrats wouldn’t vote for a nominee that is unelectable like the Republicans did.

Let's get real.

I've seen who Democrats will nominate. They put Walter Mondale up against Reagan's landslide victory.

 

[HARK!]

Because Texan renewables only account for 28% of their need. Washington produces a lot more per capita but uses a lot more per head.

So again, do you support the direction these states are heading? Do you want them to invest more, on a state basis and on a federal basis to increase renewables? Do you actually want California to catch up with Texas?

Tell us what your position is.

I say let supply and demand dictate the market.

I doubt that CA will catch up with TX. Like I said, TX has a fast growing solar industry, and we're already miles ahead with wind power.

 

[HARK!]

Why? The party backed them to lose. And were in most part successful.

These same people seek to censor the 1st amendment rights of American's, with their fear mongering about the Russians influencing our elections; while they do exactly what they use as an excuse to undermine our liberty.

They've been exposed.

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

These same people seek to censor the 1st amendment rights of American's, with their fear mongering about the Russians influencing our elections; while they do exactly what they use as an excuse to undermine our liberty.

They've been exposed.

That actually happened Russia's Prigozhin admits interfering in U.S. elections

 

[Aldebaran]

That actually happened Russia's Prigozhin admits interfering in U.S. elections

No proof of anything happening. Just a Russian guy making a claim.