"Governor says California could take over PG&E after wildfires linked to utility" I have no doubt that the state could do just as well at running a huge electrical utility as it has done with the DMV computer system, freeway maintenance and high speed rail.
What needs to be done is to remove or replace houses in areas subject to wildfires that are not fire-resistant. I recall seeing photos and an article about a recently built home in or near Paradise that was built to the (established but non-mandatory) standard for the urban-forest interface. It wasn't damaged. It's like preventing earthquake damage; every time a significant one hits, it's the same sort of buildings that fail--generally speaking, any house built (in California) after WWII is OK. No school building in California has failed that was built after the Long Beach quake (1928?) inspired better school building standards. (The Long Beach quake hit on a Sunday, so the schools were closed; but the damage to school buildings was shocking.) I remember photos taken of a wealthy neighborhood along the California coast (in Santa Barbara?) that was burnt some years back--here and there were houses that appeared untouched--they all had stucco siding and tile (or concrete tile) roofs without open eaves. Others were burnt to the ground. It's like houses in areas subject to flooding--if the government and private insurance companies continue to pay to rebuild them, the same thing will keep happening.
In California, I figure that the low-lying areas around San Francisco Bay (where most people live and work), the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and quite possibly Sacramento are doomed by rising sea levels, but for political reasons they will probably be protected temporarily by dikes--a waste of money in the long run. Also much of Manhattan.
It's always all about the money. They won't pay to upgrade taking the gamble that the houses won't burn, until they do the math and they're losing more money by not upgrading. I think maybe we're just about there.
============================ From talkingpointsmemo.com:
It Was Manafort All Along Josh Marshall
“I am going to work my way through the docs, which are pretty voluminous. But they show what we’ve been saying for months and really years. The Trump/Ukraine and Trump/Russia story are the same story. And the “the real collusion was Ukraine and the DNC” storyline goes back to Paul Manafort (and his Russian intelligence associates) who has continued to provide back channel and guidance from prison to Giuliani and Trump.” ====================
====================================== How Large Is Trump’s Base? November 3, 2019 By Taegan Goddard
The new Fox News poll shows 41% of registered voters are against impeaching President Trump. Of those, 57% say no new evidence could cause them to change their minds. That would put Trump’s true base at around 23% of registered voters. ======================================
As for Susan Collins...too many years of saying the right thing then doing the wrong thing is catching up with her. At least she did sign on to the National Nurse Act this week. Of course, with 186 House members (from both sides of the aisle) and a bunch of Senators signed on as well, it's a pretty safe thing to do.
Looks like Kamala Harris may be the next one out the door. I copied this from Politico, couldn't copy the link. "Kamala Harris' top bundlers are sending out smoke signals that they are struggling to raise cash as she dips in the polls and her campaign makes cuts to staff. In some cases, financiers are telling the campaign they won't host events for her."
Every incumbent president in modern times who has run for election with less than 49% approval has lost. Trump’s approval seems stuck at about 42%. So far.
Polls show Trump losing to Biden, Sanders and Warren; tied with Butigieg.
Unprecedented: 49% of registered voters already favor impeaching trump and removing him from office. Yes/No on impeachment and removal is NBC/WSJ 49%-46%, Fox News 49%-45%, ABC/WaPo 49%-47%. And the public impeachment hearings have yet to begin, with only a year until election day.
IMO: What the Senate does is probably irrelevant. If the Senate fails to remove Trump from office, the voters probably will—together with a number of Republican Senators.
Naomi Oreskes: ‘Discrediting science is a political strategy’ [Click] I note that she will not be drawn into saying there is a “scientific method.” I have never heard any scientist use the term; mostly I remember grade school English teachers talking about it.
May I please just rant for a few? Every day I open my email to 200 or 300 emails *all* asking for money. The Democratic ones come through this group called Blue State Digital and apparently raising anxiety is their marketing tool of choice. I wrote down some of the subject lines to give you a better idea of what I'm talking about. Pack up, go home, we're done Let me explain We don't write this email lightly Breaking: Mark could LOSE I'm struggling (help me) We're behind Unfortunate news Very difficult news Ominous news
I just unsubscribe from anyone in a state I'm not working for. I only give small dollar donations, but I guess word gets around. Mostly I just let emails marinate overnight and then make copious use of the "delete" function. I am donating to Bernie, and to Amy McGrath because I hate Mitch McConnell, and Sara Gideon because I hate Susan Collins, and everybody in The Squad because I hate trump. Voted absentee in the Nov. 5th General Election, but every single candidate had NO opponent, so they're all going to win no matter what I do. I voted for *one* so they'd know I looked at the ballot, but so what.
Your problem, as I see it, Susan, is that you live in that swing state. I get ZERO requests for money, because as soon as one appears, I unsubscribe. In fact, I unsubscribed from the Dems about 5 years ago. I have EVEN unsubscribed from Bernie's mailings. Yet I find I can still keep informed and can send in donations from time to time.
My next project is to get off the mailing list of as many marketing magazines as possible.
Looking for the date of the Nevada primary, I found this Wikipedia article [Click] that seems to have EVERYTHING about the Democratic primaries. Here’s something that caught my eye (emphasis added):
”The number of states holding caucuses decreased from 14 in the 2016 nomination process to only three in 2020.”
Headline:
ReplyDelete"Governor says California could take over PG&E after wildfires linked to utility"
I have no doubt that the state could do just as well at running a huge electrical utility as it has done with the DMV computer system, freeway maintenance and high speed rail.
Somebody had better do something!
DeleteWhat needs to be done is to remove or replace houses in areas subject to wildfires that are not fire-resistant. I recall seeing photos and an article about a recently built home in or near Paradise that was built to the (established but non-mandatory) standard for the urban-forest interface. It wasn't damaged. It's like preventing earthquake damage; every time a significant one hits, it's the same sort of buildings that fail--generally speaking, any house built (in California) after WWII is OK. No school building in California has failed that was built after the Long Beach quake (1928?) inspired better school building standards. (The Long Beach quake hit on a Sunday, so the schools were closed; but the damage to school buildings was shocking.) I remember photos taken of a wealthy neighborhood along the California coast (in Santa Barbara?) that was burnt some years back--here and there were houses that appeared untouched--they all had stucco siding and tile (or concrete tile) roofs without open eaves. Others were burnt to the ground. It's like houses in areas subject to flooding--if the government and private insurance companies continue to pay to rebuild them, the same thing will keep happening.
DeleteIn California, I figure that the low-lying areas around San Francisco Bay (where most people live and work), the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and quite possibly Sacramento are doomed by rising sea levels, but for political reasons they will probably be protected temporarily by dikes--a waste of money in the long run. Also much of Manhattan.
DeleteIt's always all about the money. They won't pay to upgrade taking the gamble that the houses won't burn, until they do the math and they're losing more money by not upgrading. I think maybe we're just about there.
DeleteNew ABC/WAPO poll on Impeachment:
ReplyDelete49% say Should / 47% say Should Not
https://www.langerresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/1208a2Impeachment.pdf
In Iowa, only 5 percent of Biden supporters are younger than 45 [Click] As memory serves me, his support in South Carolina is dropping, too. At this rate it probably won’t matter if he has a PAC or not.
ReplyDeleteDepartment of Justice releases Mueller documents to BuzzFeed News [Click]
============================
From talkingpointsmemo.com:
It Was Manafort All Along
Josh Marshall
“I am going to work my way through the docs, which are pretty voluminous. But they show what we’ve been saying for months and really years. The Trump/Ukraine and Trump/Russia story are the same story. And the “the real collusion was Ukraine and the DNC” storyline goes back to Paul Manafort (and his Russian intelligence associates) who has continued to provide back channel and guidance from prison to Giuliani and Trump.”
====================
Politico: Inside Beto O’Rourke’s collapse [Click]
ReplyDeleteTrump administration to pay California $846,000 after failed census citizenship fight [Click] And that's just California...
ReplyDeleteCartoon: Gavin Newsom’s Halowe’en. [Click]
Whistleblower Willing to Answer GOP Questions Directly in Writing [Click]
ReplyDelete======================================
How Large Is Trump’s Base?
November 3, 2019 By Taegan Goddard
The new Fox News poll shows 41% of registered voters are against impeaching President Trump. Of those, 57% say no new evidence could cause them to change their minds.
That would put Trump’s true base at around 23% of registered voters.
======================================
Impeachment Bears Down on Susan Collins [Click] Between a rock and a hard place?
23% sounds good.
DeleteAs for Susan Collins...too many years of saying the right thing then doing the wrong thing is catching up with her. At least she did sign on to the National Nurse Act this week. Of course, with 186 House members (from both sides of the aisle) and a bunch of Senators signed on as well, it's a pretty safe thing to do.
Looks like Kamala Harris may be the next one out the door. I copied this from Politico, couldn't copy the link. "Kamala Harris' top bundlers are sending out smoke signals that they are struggling to raise cash as she dips in the polls and her campaign makes cuts to staff. In some cases, financiers are telling the campaign they won't host events for her."
ReplyDeleteGleanings from the web…
ReplyDeleteEvery incumbent president in modern times who has run for election with less than 49% approval has lost. Trump’s approval seems stuck at about 42%. So far.
Polls show Trump losing to Biden, Sanders and Warren; tied with Butigieg.
Unprecedented: 49% of registered voters already favor impeaching trump and removing him from office. Yes/No on impeachment and removal is NBC/WSJ 49%-46%, Fox News 49%-45%, ABC/WaPo 49%-47%. And the public impeachment hearings have yet to begin, with only a year until election day.
IMO: What the Senate does is probably irrelevant. If the Senate fails to remove Trump from office, the voters probably will—together with a number of Republican Senators.
Antibiotic price drop could stop millions from developing tuberculosis [Click]
ReplyDeleteNaomi Oreskes: ‘Discrediting science is a political strategy’ [Click] I note that she will not be drawn into saying there is a “scientific method.” I have never heard any scientist use the term; mostly I remember grade school English teachers talking about it.
May I please just rant for a few? Every day I open my email to 200 or 300 emails *all* asking for money. The Democratic ones come through this group called Blue State Digital and apparently raising anxiety is their marketing tool of choice. I wrote down some of the subject lines to give you a better idea of what I'm talking about.
ReplyDeletePack up, go home, we're done
Let me explain
We don't write this email lightly
Breaking: Mark could LOSE
I'm struggling (help me)
We're behind
Unfortunate news
Very difficult news
Ominous news
See what I mean?
That is WAY too many, Susan.
DeleteI wonder if a spam blocker would help with the problem.
DeleteI just unsubscribe from anyone in a state I'm not working for. I only give small dollar donations, but I guess word gets around. Mostly I just let emails marinate overnight and then make copious use of the "delete" function. I am donating to Bernie, and to Amy McGrath because I hate Mitch McConnell, and Sara Gideon because I hate Susan Collins, and everybody in The Squad because I hate trump. Voted absentee in the Nov. 5th General Election, but every single candidate had NO opponent, so they're all going to win no matter what I do. I voted for *one* so they'd know I looked at the ballot, but so what.
DeleteYour problem, as I see it, Susan, is that you live in that swing state. I get ZERO requests for money, because as soon as one appears, I unsubscribe. In fact, I unsubscribed from the Dems about 5 years ago. I have EVEN unsubscribed from Bernie's mailings. Yet I find I can still keep informed and can send in donations from time to time.
DeleteMy next project is to get off the mailing list of as many marketing magazines as possible.
Looking for the date of the Nevada primary, I found this Wikipedia article [Click] that seems to have EVERYTHING about the Democratic primaries. Here’s something that caught my eye (emphasis added):
ReplyDelete”The number of states holding caucuses decreased from 14 in the 2016 nomination process to only three in 2020.”
I should have given the three caucus states: Iowa, Nevada, and Wyoming.
Deletehttps://www.liberalexaminer.com/2019/10/31/19-reasons-trump-wont-be-president-in-2020/?fbclid=IwAR36L--evt6m44oBvt6txU8Fi5MEPDOiEwACQ8J_3Z8PwS4noOk0MZgaCdI
ReplyDeleteYep. But I had to scroll past more NRA ads than I have ever seen. Boy, were they barking up the wrong tree!
Delete