It would be more convenient to go with a majority vote to bar him from office if it was that simple, but I don't think it really is. (In reality I think that's maybe not the best move, because if he can run and starts a new conservative party, it will guarantee a Democratic landslide because the liberal vote won't be cut in half)
No matter the method, it's imperative that calling for the overturn of a certified election by any means necessary, and sending a crowd to force trial by combat, instructing them to stop the congressional certification, don't let it happen (which is a a direct call for interference in government proceedings only possible by force) be punished not ignored or it begs for a repeat. It's far from just using the word fight, it's saying if you let them certify this election you lose your country, you've got to get rid of these representatives that won't go along with you, and fight hard, you can't let them install Biden, stop it, he's illegitimate and I won by a landslide but Biden stole it, do not let them certify him or you're country is gone they must elect me, I'll be there with you stopping the steal.

I seriously doubt the American people will see it that way, all polls show a majority agree with his policies over Trump's. The election reinforces that.

It's hard to imagine hurting the economy worse than Trump's disastrous pandemic response that continues to cause more damage today because the distribution part of his "plan" was 1/2 baked and 1/4 implemented. Hundreds of millions of vaccines are being shipped to Europe because he wouldn't commit to buying them when he could, even knowing he couldn't buy them later. Any misstep in the response cost lives and hurt the economy horrifically.
Then there's the 8-9 trillion added to the debt not including last year's unprecedented spending spree during a recession meaning the deficit his last year may be well over $4-5 trillion (I've seen estimates of $9 Trillion). The debt and deficit will be hard to screw up worse, but time will tell.

Let's be realistic that the majority of Americans never wanted Trump, so much they voted for Hillary the most despised politician at the time, 3 million more times...it took nothing but not ignoring swing states and not being the most hated candidate in living memory to flip the electoral vote. Trump becoming the most despised candidate in history helped.

It wasn't a few thousand, my recollection is it was hundreds of thousands in most critical states, only a few were even close, only Georgia was as close as 12000, still more than a few, and Biden won easily without it.

The green new deal, if implemented, should create tens of thousands of good paying jobs. Innovation almost always pays off....again, time will tell. I'm of the opinion that it's too late to avoid climate disaster, probably too late to avoid a near total extinction next century without a miracle, but any mitigation is worth trying if it works. I don't want to live on Venus....and don't want my grand nieces and nephews to either.

I'll agree to disagree about guns. I've heard the same fear my entire life, claims democrats will take guns away, I once believed it. It's never happened even when they had the house, Senate, and Whitehouse. I'm pro gun and pro regulation.....a well regulated militia is what the constitution says. I respect your position even if I disagree.

I am a stickler for not fudging terminology. It makes understanding another person's argument impossible if they use words that are just wrong just because other people are misusing them, and is often used intentionally as a means of escaping one's statements by saying they didn't mean what they said, but only when tightly cornered. That's not an accusation, just a peeve. Bob, to name one, insists Trump's never been impeached.

relevant XKCD: https://xkcd.com/2359/
"There is growing evidence that the atmosphere of venus contains... molecules"

Your video, Signs of extraterrestrial life found on Venus (MIT), has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Interesting suggestion.

I believe that with 1/10 the population, near today's per capita resource usage would be sustainable....although there would be a necessary time period with net zero or better emissions required to return the atmosphere to "normal" before runaway greenhouse effects and feedbacks turn earth into Venus 2.0. After that, there is an amount of emission the planet can absorb, so resource usage need not be curtailed excessively, but it wouldn't hurt.

I'm all for the lottery system if everyone draws straws, no exceptions except those willing to just move to the reservation voluntarily.
Even a lottery system simply for procreation would do wonders, but remembering the outrage at China for just allowing one child per couple, I doubt that would fly either. Also, it does leave the possibility that the lucky procreators might all be imbecilic morons incapable of following/continuing the plan...we don't want to become a species that is dumber than our pets....or do we?

I think the priorities should be reversed too, what's best for life on earth first, humanity second.

Your video, Venus flytrap catches yellow jackets, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Ha! Came to reply to you, only to find this was actually my long forgotten post! Thanks for the double promote.

In the competition, I say if we're going to fuck it up, go all in and shoot for Venus level warming.

*commercial
I want one of those!
https://www.dpreview.com/news/4607033795/venus-optics-launches-24mm-probe-lens-with-2x-life-size-macro

Your video, Basically how the first Venus fly trap happened, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 259 Badge!

Not so much if you actually read (and comprehend) it, or listened to the authors.
They've said clearly that even using their revised estimates of CO2's effects that to meet a 1.5 degree rise (the tipping point where we loose all ability to mitigate the run away greenhouse effect and start the irreversible march towards mirroring Venus) we have to start decreasing CO2 emissions today and be at zero by 2040. They've also said clearly that anyone misusing their paper to imply climate change is a myth is a liar, a moron, or both, because it says and implies no such thing.

What we are doing is raising the amount we emit while people like you who clearly don't grasp the science argue, ignoring that the effects of warming are already being seen far earlier than predicted....effects like melting methane hydrates that make up the difference in CO2 effects and then some, effects like 3-500 year floods in under 2 years in places, effects like reefs bleaching worldwide.
So much for the climate science denier BS.

It's like the doctors have given you second and third opinions and told you your liver is failing, you have to stop drinking or you'll die. You won't die the next time you have a beer, but every beer takes you farther over the edge. You can say the bartender who knows this is blameless for serving you, because others gave you the alcohol that destroyed your liver and it took longer than one night, or you can work from now and realize that he's intentionally killing you in hopes of a tip before you stumble outside and keel over.
Working from today, our planet's liver is failing, there no transplant, and Trump just reopened the bar and is serving everclear. Chances are he can't accelerate things so much that Florida submerges in the next 3 1/2 years, that doesn't mean he can't make things be far worse, beyond the point of possible mitigation.

You may hold that theory, but climatologists disagree. We are past, but still near the tipping point, and every ton of CO2 takes us farther from a survivable rise. It's ridiculous to think that we're already past holding at 3.5 degrees global rise (edit: the maximum assumed to be survivable by civilization), so we might as well make it 5 degrees.

Island nations, people who live South of New Orleans, and millions of others are already being displaced. It only takes one high tide (edit: or one extended drought) to wipe out low lying farmland permanently, and erosion has become an unstoppable force.

Trump is moving towards raising the level of multiple greenhouse gases we produce, Obama had us lowering those levels. Time can only tell what that actually means in tonnage, but 180 degree turnaround is awful enough. I agree, we also didn't do enough under Obama.

? Reversible means it can be reversed, not that it's easy. I don't know where you get that idea. Irreversible in this context means sending the temperature trend the other way before civilization becomes unsustainable. Eventually the planet should normalize unless we really follow Trump's lead wholeheartedly, then we might go full Venus. There WAS a magic bullet, being responsible with our atmosphere, but we argued over climate change until it was useless.

If, before it reverses (which it may not do at all, btw) the planet becomes inhospitable to humans, then for humans, it's irreversible. In 4 years we can do enough damage to 1) make the effects longer and harsher enough to make long term survivability impossible and or 2) go beyond the next tipping point where feedback loops reinforce each other, leading to a Venus like runaway greenhouse effect. We're damn close to massive methane releases (already happening) and if we don't avoid that, nothing will save civilization.
All that said, Clinton probably wouldn't do enough to avoid disaster either, but at least she accepted the science and agreed we should make efforts to mitigate the coming damages.

I'm definitely a pessimist, mostly because I understand the systems and human nature, and so I think we're totally hosed as a species.

No magnetosphere. That means along with no water or air, you have to live in a microwave on 'thaw'. Sounds pretty harsh to me.
Maybe we would be better off reversing global warming on Venus and terraforming it.

But....we already do that.
Pollution; soot, sulfur, etc, already cause global dimming, which is exactly what you're describing, blocking 10% or more of sunlight and mitigating as much as 5%, but averaging 2-3% of warming already. I have said repeatedly that instantly switching to real clean energy would actually accelerate global warming exponentially because of this little known effect. That makes most plans to do something actually worse than doing nothing in the short term, and now in the long term too because that rapid temperature rise would absolutely accelerate methane releases (among other cycles) which starts feedback loops, possibly turning us into Venus.
Sadly, because of the size of the areas where the methane is escaping, there's no way possible to capture it. You would have to cover about 1/5 of earth with a sealed plastic sheet or something. It's not possible to tap the deposits and siphon them off, they are not centralized gas pockets for the most part.

Making choices of a higher morality and ethical value definitely makes anyone superior. You yourself are more superior than anyone that has made the choice to beat a woman, are you not? You are physically capable of it, perhaps there might even be a life threatening or survival situation where it's necessary, but you don't do it simply because "you can" or because it makes you feel good. That is what makes you superior.
You're also superior to anyone that has decided to drive drunk too. You are superior to people who take slaves, you are superior to people that run or knowingly buy from sweatshops, etc etc.

Churches and cults are different story because they are based on flawed traditions instead of logical and consequence based choices, and demonstrable fact. Becoming vegan is a rational decision (funnily enough "spiritual" people are the ones that tend to be most aggressive when approached about veganism).

Even non vegans like Sam Harris will agree that it's the ethically superior thing to do.

Three year olds aren't necessarily self-aware either, and I hear that with a bit of south-west sauce they cook up real nice. But wait, you know that's wrong, because being self-aware isn't the only thing we measure this situation by. There are a lot of factors that go into this and in our current time and state of civilization we know it's wrong, however there have been cannibals in the past after all. Sentient or not we know that animals feel pain, they get sad, they can be happy etc. Yet we inflict pain onto them for our pleasure, that is wrong. When you see a street dog all messed up you feel sad for it. Compassion is built into us.

Well yelling at a stranger without provocation is a pretty shitty thing to do. Like I said vegans are a varied group of people, so naturally some of them are rude c***ts that forget that they weren't always vegan lol. I make no excuses for them. But as with any demographic unfortunately the obnoxious ones are the ones that get noticed. To give you an example of nice vegans, there is always someone like John Venus on youtube or the Light Twins.

Maybe for the same reason they show the earth as about 32000 miles away from the sun, and Venus about 24000 miles away? Maybe for the same reason they show the Sun as about twice the diameter of Earth?
Just about everything about this video seems terribly wrong, including the insanely oversimplified, perfectly round orbits. The only thing even close to correct here is that Venus is about 2/3 the distance from the sun that Earth is.

It's pretty, but just SOOOO wrong in every way scientifically. I hate that. If they showed this in my science class, the rest of the day would be a discussion of all the falsehoods involved, and a severe lambasting of the teacher for presenting something so antithetical to teaching real science. This kind of 'fudging' of reality bothers me immensely, because I know many people don't know better and think it presents an honest, factual representation of reality, so it works to make them MORE ignorant.
Presenting lies or fantasy as scientific fact should be a crime, IMO, because it hurts us all in many ways every time it happens.

I'm not sure which tag this deserves....fail, debunked, lies, scifi, terrible, or WTF. It needs one of those though.

I'm tempted to downvote on principle alone.

Why, consciously, go out of one's way to show Venus as significantly smaller than Earth? #leanin