So what's retarded about it? The idea that nitrogen and phosphorus runoff into the Chesapeake Bay watershed is a problem? (Look no further than the Lake Erie algae blooms and the Toledo water crisis last summer if you're curious about why runoff matters.) Or the specific method chosen for trying to fight it?
Not to mention the courts have essentially required the state to take action due to how poor the water quality had become. Some where Frontline has a piece of the Dying Chesapeake Bay.
It is a tragedy. But it's hard to stop development especially on desirable real estate. Hopefully they turn it around like they did The Great Lakes!
Hillary makes it official.. http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/12/politics/hillary-clinton-president-2016-election/index.html
Part of it is urban run off but most of it is from farms. The area has a lot of intensive chicken production and the Congress has actually legally prevented the EPA from doing anything to regulate agricultural run off as a give away to big ag lobbyists. Between farm and urban run off, the destruction of wetlands which used to help filter the water, the destruction of the natural oyster reefs due to over fishing and extreme sediment run off... Well, most of the bay is now a toxic dead zone. Algae blooms suck up all the oxygen and anything which can't quickly escape dies.
We should make it a condition of WF membership that if any user ever wins big on the lottery they have to provide just enough funds to get a Dayton presidential run kicked off. That diary thread would be the best.
Oh, there's no way I ever want to see Dayton actually have power. I just think it would be worth it for video of a candidate talking on stage about chicken coops and his plans for Star Trek.
Marco Rubio is in. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/14/us/politics/marco-rubio-2016-presidential-campaign.html?_r=0
So now that the usual suspects are out of the way, who's left? O'Malley Santorum Warren Huckabee. Anyone else?
538 says Rubio is the first GOP candidate with an actual shot of winning. http://www.saintpetersblog.com/archives/225534
Warren won't run unless Hillary implodes. And I don't mean her campaign, I mean her actual body collapsing in upon itself due to some freakish heretofore unencountered natural process.
That says more about Cruz and Paul than about Rubio. Being the first announced candidate whose insanity clocks in at under one Bachmann unit makes Rubio the first announced plausibly serious candidate.
The Clintons are trying to subvert the two-term limit rule and go for some extra time in power?! The hell you say!! They're such upstanding citizens with no ethical skeletons in their closet whatsoever!
Jim Webb might jump on for the dems while there are almost a dozen other Republicans with PACS who might jump in. I am hoping to really pack the clown car this year. http://www.politics1.com/p2016.htm
From your point of view, Bernie Sanders appears to be running for the Democratic nomination. Not that he expects to win, but he'd like to bring focus to issues he cares about and drag Clinton a bit to the left.
Not so far. It is unlikely one will run too as the Clintons supposedly have been playing hard ball trying to cajoule, bribe, threaten, and brow beat everyone else into not running. They also hired all of the big name campaign staffers just so other people couldn't hire them and lined up all the big party donors before they even officially started their campaign. The idea was to clear the field and make sure another outsider doesn't come along and give the people a chance to interfere with her corination like Obama did in 2008. Frankly, she is just a shitty candidate and a bad campaigner and everyone knows she is in the pocket of big lobbyists so if there was a decent alternative Hillary would quickly lose the primaries just like she did in 2008. The biggest chance for a Repugs to take back the white house is 5o run Hillary unopposed and then have her implode like she did in 2008. The party insiders are doing the party a grave disservice by trying to anoint Hillary without a real primary.
It's still early.Give it time. If she continues dropping in the polls she will lose her aura of inevitability and that will open the door for more serious democrats to jump in.
Polls show her beating everyone in the Republican field by 7.5-10.5 points. Any dropping in the polls you think you've seen is an illusion mostly brought on by people who'd never vote for her moving from indifference to disapproval as the 2016 election cycle kicks into gear. There isn't any other Democrat who's even close to being within sniffing distance of being a serious candidate right now. Every utterance of "Benghazi," "IRSgate" or similar imaginary scandal by lunatic Republicans only strengthens Clinton as a candidate. And it's fairly certain that there's no potential Democratic candidate better suited than Clinton to encouraging Republicans to make complete and utter fools of themselves, meaning that there's no other candidate more likely to bring "moderate" wishy-washy-know-nothing votes into the Democratic column for the general election. I'm afraid there's an overwhelming likelihood of President Clinton in 2017.