CDZ Keep this guy from agreeing with me! Trump caught The Al Gore Syndrome

[Toronado3800]

I haven't read the particulars of Donald's infrastructure plan. In general I feel national infrastructure is a great place to deficit spend and pump the economy or issue tax cuts/create "loopholes" for improvements as long as we admit deficit spending to pump the economy is the plan.

If we could only make Donald talk with Melania or someone maybe before he tweets life would be soo much better for him.

Most articles I read soon after the accident alluded to speed being the cause of the derailment and it became official today: Train in deadly Amtrak derailment was traveling at 80 mph in 30-mph zone

Why does this fool have to go out and weaken "our" argument for improved infrastructure by sounding like a fool: Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) | Twitter

"The train accident that just occurred in DuPont, WA shows more than ever why our soon to be submitted infrastructure plan must be approved quickly. Seven trillion dollars spent in the Middle East while our roads, bridges, tunnels, railways (and more) crumble! Not for long!"

If I make the people I'm talking to smoke pot I can probably then weave a thread claiming his tweet was an allusion to the need for positive train control to be implemented.

Mostly though I wonder if Trump has a case of AGS, the Al Gore Syndrome. When Gore gives a speech which agrees with me, I cringe. If the man launched a campaign to save puppies voters would go vote for a hunting season on puppies lol.

Gore has a more advanced case of AGS in my opinion yet somehow he got 48.4% of the vote (to W's 47.9%).

So I'll shake my head whenever the President and I agree. Maybe if Trump's AGS progresses he can do better than the 46.2% he won with! (Hillary had 48.2%)

 

[Pogo]

I'm lost. What's the point here? We seemed to start with Rump tweets, went through a train wreck and somehow ended up with Al Gore's election numbers 17 years ago.

It's kind of like a dream where you're walking in the woods, and then suddenly you're swimming in the ocean, and there was no transition.

 

[Toronado3800]

I'm lost. What's the point here? We seemed to start with Rump tweets, went through a train wreck and somehow ended up with Al Gore's election numbers 17 years ago.

It's kind of like a dream where you're walking in the woods, and then suddenly you're swimming in the ocean, and there was no transition.

lol. I hear you.

Trump's tweets got me thinking about how he has a unique ability to sound like a fool even when (I think) he is correct about the infrastructure situation.

When a politician sounds like a fool and turning off voters when he's right I instantly go to Al Gore.

While typing I had the idea its a miracle (good or bad) that Gore got as far as he did in life and the same for Trump. They both picked their parents well I suppose lol.

So that was my train of thought after I heard Trump flub an attempt to push his infrastructure plan.

 

[Pogo]

I'm lost. What's the point here? We seemed to start with Rump tweets, went through a train wreck and somehow ended up with Al Gore's election numbers 17 years ago.

It's kind of like a dream where you're walking in the woods, and then suddenly you're swimming in the ocean, and there was no transition.

lol. I hear you.

Trump's tweets got me thinking about how he has a unique ability to sound like a fool even when (I think) he is correct about the infrastructure situation.

When a politician sounds like a fool and turning off voters when he's right I instantly go to Al Gore.

While typing I had the idea its a miracle (good or bad) that Gore got as far as he did in life and the same for Trump. They both picked their parents well I suppose lol.

So that was my train of thought after I heard Trump flub an attempt to push his infrastructure plan.

Ah you post stream-of-consciousness. I do too but I do try to connect them somehow so that they lead to the same place.

Seems like disparate unrelated events trying to be compared. Gore got nominated and voted for on the basis of recognition, having just been VP for 8 years, which is a model that has worked, whether the subject won the office or not, for decades. Bush I, Mondale, Nixon, Truman to name four. Rump got his nomination and votes on the basis of in a way the same thing -- name recognition -- by way of having been a TV screen troll for decades (which all by itself says much about the level to which American values have plummeted), coupled with a perfect storm of razor-thin crucial EV states timed at exactly the crucial moment.

But there's no plausible personality comparison between Rump and Gore that I can think of. The only thing they have in common at all is that they both ran for the same office. To return to the character traits you started with, Gore doesn't have the no-filter impulsivity of a Rump (and I'm hard pressed to think of anyone who does). Nor the morbidly shallow intellect, nor the abject narcissism, which again is incomparable.

I just don't see a bridge there at all to get from one to the other.

 

[Hossfly]

I'm lost. What's the point here? We seemed to start with Rump tweets, went through a train wreck and somehow ended up with Al Gore's election numbers 17 years ago.

It's kind of like a dream where you're walking in the woods, and then suddenly you're swimming in the ocean, and there was no transition.

lol. I hear you.

Trump's tweets got me thinking about how he has a unique ability to sound like a fool even when (I think) he is correct about the infrastructure situation.

When a politician sounds like a fool and turning off voters when he's right I instantly go to Al Gore.

While typing I had the idea its a miracle (good or bad) that Gore got as far as he did in life and the same for Trump. They both picked their parents well I suppose lol.

So that was my train of thought after I heard Trump flub an attempt to push his infrastructure plan.

You're right about infrastructure. There ain't no plan. Why, I drove from Charlotte to Ft Worth Sunday and Monday on I-85 and I-20 and the workers in the 7 states I came through had all the highway and bridges in such a mess that traffic would be backed up for miles. I can't imagine how many workers I saw standing around and leaning on shovels. If they don't get to working on infrastructure pretty soon I'm gonna fly or take the train.

 

[Pogo]

I'm lost. What's the point here? We seemed to start with Rump tweets, went through a train wreck and somehow ended up with Al Gore's election numbers 17 years ago.

It's kind of like a dream where you're walking in the woods, and then suddenly you're swimming in the ocean, and there was no transition.

lol. I hear you.

Trump's tweets got me thinking about how he has a unique ability to sound like a fool even when (I think) he is correct about the infrastructure situation.

When a politician sounds like a fool and turning off voters when he's right I instantly go to Al Gore.

While typing I had the idea its a miracle (good or bad) that Gore got as far as he did in life and the same for Trump. They both picked their parents well I suppose lol.

So that was my train of thought after I heard Trump flub an attempt to push his infrastructure plan.

You're right about infrastructure. There ain't no plan. Why, I drove from Charlotte to Ft Worth Sunday and Monday on I-85 and I-20 and the workers in the 7 states I came through had all the highway and bridges in such a mess that traffic would be backed up for miles. I can't imagine how many workers I saw standing around and leaning on shovels. If they don't get to working on infrastructure pretty soon I'm gonna fly or take the train.

I guess in Charlotte you can still do that. I had to get a ride all the way to Salisbury to access a train from here. A hundred miles or some shit.

 

[jwoodie]

I haven't read the particulars of Donald's infrastructure plan. In general I feel national infrastructure is a great place to deficit spend and pump the economy or issue tax cuts/create "loopholes" for improvements as long as we admit deficit spending to pump the economy is the plan.

If we could only make Donald talk with Melania or someone maybe before he tweets life would be soo much better for him.

Most articles I read soon after the accident alluded to speed being the cause of the derailment and it became official today: Train in deadly Amtrak derailment was traveling at 80 mph in 30-mph zone

Why does this fool have to go out and weaken "our" argument for improved infrastructure by sounding like a fool: Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) | Twitter

"The train accident that just occurred in DuPont, WA shows more than ever why our soon to be submitted infrastructure plan must be approved quickly. Seven trillion dollars spent in the Middle East while our roads, bridges, tunnels, railways (and more) crumble! Not for long!"

If I make the people I'm talking to smoke pot I can probably then weave a thread claiming his tweet was an allusion to the need for positive train control to be implemented.

Mostly though I wonder if Trump has a case of AGS, the Al Gore Syndrome. When Gore gives a speech which agrees with me, I cringe. If the man launched a campaign to save puppies voters would go vote for a hunting season on puppies lol.

Gore has a more advanced case of AGS in my opinion yet somehow he got 48.4% of the vote (to W's 47.9%).

So I'll shake my head whenever the President and I agree. Maybe if Trump's AGS progresses he can do better than the 46.2% he won with! (Hillary had 48.2%)

I agree that Trump is not very articulate, but is that more important than his actions?

 

[Hossfly]

I'm lost. What's the point here? We seemed to start with Rump tweets, went through a train wreck and somehow ended up with Al Gore's election numbers 17 years ago.

It's kind of like a dream where you're walking in the woods, and then suddenly you're swimming in the ocean, and there was no transition.

lol. I hear you.

Trump's tweets got me thinking about how he has a unique ability to sound like a fool even when (I think) he is correct about the infrastructure situation.

When a politician sounds like a fool and turning off voters when he's right I instantly go to Al Gore.

While typing I had the idea its a miracle (good or bad) that Gore got as far as he did in life and the same for Trump. They both picked their parents well I suppose lol.

So that was my train of thought after I heard Trump flub an attempt to push his infrastructure plan.

You're right about infrastructure. There ain't no plan. Why, I drove from Charlotte to Ft Worth Sunday and Monday on I-85 and I-20 and the workers in the 7 states I came through had all the highway and bridges in such a mess that traffic would be backed up for miles. I can't imagine how many workers I saw standing around and leaning on shovels. If they don't get to working on infrastructure pretty soon I'm gonna fly or take the train.

I guess in Charlotte you can still do that. I had to get a ride all the way to Salisbury to access a train from here. A hundred miles or some shit.

I was being facetious. Roads and bridges everywhere are being worked on.

 

[Pogo]

I'm lost. What's the point here? We seemed to start with Rump tweets, went through a train wreck and somehow ended up with Al Gore's election numbers 17 years ago.

It's kind of like a dream where you're walking in the woods, and then suddenly you're swimming in the ocean, and there was no transition.

lol. I hear you.

Trump's tweets got me thinking about how he has a unique ability to sound like a fool even when (I think) he is correct about the infrastructure situation.

When a politician sounds like a fool and turning off voters when he's right I instantly go to Al Gore.

While typing I had the idea its a miracle (good or bad) that Gore got as far as he did in life and the same for Trump. They both picked their parents well I suppose lol.

So that was my train of thought after I heard Trump flub an attempt to push his infrastructure plan.

You're right about infrastructure. There ain't no plan. Why, I drove from Charlotte to Ft Worth Sunday and Monday on I-85 and I-20 and the workers in the 7 states I came through had all the highway and bridges in such a mess that traffic would be backed up for miles. I can't imagine how many workers I saw standing around and leaning on shovels. If they don't get to working on infrastructure pretty soon I'm gonna fly or take the train.

I guess in Charlotte you can still do that. I had to get a ride all the way to Salisbury to access a train from here. A hundred miles or some shit.

I was being facetious. Roads and bridges everywhere are being worked on.

I know you were. I just took the opportunity to rant about how far I have to go to get a train.

 

[usmbguest5318]

I haven't read the particulars of Donald's infrastructure plan.

Are "particulars" in it? Is what he's presented what anyone in the "real world" where plans are routinely conceived and implemented in fact a plan?

 

[usmbguest5318]

I haven't read the particulars of Donald's infrastructure plan. In general I feel national infrastructure is a great place to deficit spend and pump the economy or issue tax cuts/create "loopholes" for improvements as long as we admit deficit spending to pump the economy is the plan.

If we could only make Donald talk with Melania or someone maybe before he tweets life would be soo much better for him.

Most articles I read soon after the accident alluded to speed being the cause of the derailment and it became official today: Train in deadly Amtrak derailment was traveling at 80 mph in 30-mph zone

Why does this fool have to go out and weaken "our" argument for improved infrastructure by sounding like a fool: Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) | Twitter

"The train accident that just occurred in DuPont, WA shows more than ever why our soon to be submitted infrastructure plan must be approved quickly. Seven trillion dollars spent in the Middle East while our roads, bridges, tunnels, railways (and more) crumble! Not for long!"

If I make the people I'm talking to smoke pot I can probably then weave a thread claiming his tweet was an allusion to the need for positive train control to be implemented.

Mostly though I wonder if Trump has a case of AGS, the Al Gore Syndrome. When Gore gives a speech which agrees with me, I cringe. If the man launched a campaign to save puppies voters would go vote for a hunting season on puppies lol.

Gore has a more advanced case of AGS in my opinion yet somehow he got 48.4% of the vote (to W's 47.9%).

So I'll shake my head whenever the President and I agree. Maybe if Trump's AGS progresses he can do better than the 46.2% he won with! (Hillary had 48.2%)

Most articles I read soon after the accident alluded to speed being the cause of the derailment and it became official today: Train in deadly Amtrak derailment was traveling at 80 mph in 30-mph zone

Though that the train was travelling at 80mph in a 30mph zone is ample reason to posit that the train's speed was the cause of the accident, that being so is not a foregone conclusion. There are plenty of waterways, air routes, road and rail sections whereat "posted" speed limits are a function not of what the road, rail, water or air can sustain but rather because of environmental and/or situational factors having nothing to do with the medium by which vehicles are transported.

For instance, on roads, congestion and the potential presence of careless-enough road-crossers is often enough a reason for a relatively low speed limit. Another reason for comparatively low speed limits in places is that freight trains may safe to travel on that track corridor at 30mph and passenger trains safe at 80mph, but the speed limit is yet set at 30mph. Yet another reason for "posted" speed limits being comparatively low can have to do with what's far ahead along the transitway or what one has just passed. We routinely observe that sort of thing when entering and exiting cities and towns and in many cases the the lower speed limit has nothing to do with whether the road/rail can handle vehicles travelling at faster speeds than are stipulated.

Accordingly, absent some obstruction on the track or weakness in the trestle (bridge?), it's entirely possible that the track is more than capable of handling a passenger train (as compared to a freight train) travelling at 80mph.

Does that mean the train's speed isn't the cause of the accident? No. It means that concluding that speed was the cause constitutes jumping to conclusions. For the train's speed of travel to have been the cause, the train would have had to have been travelling faster than the track -- both its structure and layout -- could sustain without trains routinely jumping the track.

The train accident that just occurred in DuPont, WA shows more than ever why our soon to be submitted infrastructure plan must be approved quickly.

I doubt that anyone thinks infrastructure upgrades, refurbishments and new installations are not overdue. Too, I cannot imagine many people oppose seeing their tax dollars used to that end. I suspect there is, however, a whole lot of disagreement about the prioritization of the upgrades, refurbishments and new installations. To be sure, for example, the airline industry wants to see nothing resembling major upgrades in rail infrastructure. Indeed, the airline industry would, I suspect, become all but apoplectic were we to implement a national maglev rail infrastructure for it would,in all likelihood effect the end of regional commercial passenger airline travel. [1] (See also: Japan's maglev train goes 374 mph, sets world record - CNN Video)

Note:

1. Were regional airline flights supplanted by regional train travel, I, for one wouldn't miss traveling by regional passenger jet. No planes are less comfortable and less safe to be on and passengers get no greater airport or other conveniences/advantages for travelling on the damn things. There're a bunch of reasons people take the Acela between between Boston and NYC and D.C. and NYC.
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   Maglev speed trains between those cities would result in nobody flying between them on commercial passenger planes. I doubt many folks would even take charter flights for those trips.

 

[usmbguest5318]

I haven't read the particulars of Donald's infrastructure plan. In general I feel national infrastructure is a great place to deficit spend and pump the economy or issue tax cuts/create "loopholes" for improvements as long as we admit deficit spending to pump the economy is the plan.

If we could only make Donald talk with Melania or someone maybe before he tweets life would be soo much better for him.

Most articles I read soon after the accident alluded to speed being the cause of the derailment and it became official today: Train in deadly Amtrak derailment was traveling at 80 mph in 30-mph zone

Why does this fool have to go out and weaken "our" argument for improved infrastructure by sounding like a fool: Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) | Twitter

"The train accident that just occurred in DuPont, WA shows more than ever why our soon to be submitted infrastructure plan must be approved quickly. Seven trillion dollars spent in the Middle East while our roads, bridges, tunnels, railways (and more) crumble! Not for long!"

If I make the people I'm talking to smoke pot I can probably then weave a thread claiming his tweet was an allusion to the need for positive train control to be implemented.

Mostly though I wonder if Trump has a case of AGS, the Al Gore Syndrome. When Gore gives a speech which agrees with me, I cringe. If the man launched a campaign to save puppies voters would go vote for a hunting season on puppies lol.

Gore has a more advanced case of AGS in my opinion yet somehow he got 48.4% of the vote (to W's 47.9%).

So I'll shake my head whenever the President and I agree. Maybe if Trump's AGS progresses he can do better than the 46.2% he won with! (Hillary had 48.2%)

Most articles I read soon after the accident alluded to speed being the cause of the derailment and it became official today: Train in deadly Amtrak derailment was traveling at 80 mph in 30-mph zone

Though that the train was travelling at 80mph in a 30mph zone is ample reason to posit that the train's speed was the cause of the accident, that being so is not a foregone conclusion. There are plenty of waterways, air routes, road and rail sections whereat "posted" speed limits are a function not of what the road, rail, water or air can sustain but rather because of environmental and/or situational factors having nothing to do with the medium by which vehicles are transported.

For instance, on roads, congestion and the potential presence of careless-enough road-crossers is often enough a reason for a relatively low speed limit. Another reason for comparatively low speed limits in places is that freight trains may safe to travel on that track corridor at 30mph and passenger trains safe at 80mph, but the speed limit is yet set at 30mph. Yet another reason for "posted" speed limits being comparatively low can have to do with what's far ahead along the transitway or what one has just passed. We routinely observe that sort of thing when entering and exiting cities and towns and in many cases the the lower speed limit has nothing to do with whether the road/rail can handle vehicles travelling at faster speeds than are stipulated.

Accordingly, absent some obstruction on the track or weakness in the trestle (bridge?), it's entirely possible that the track is more than capable of handling a passenger train (as compared to a freight train) travelling at 80mph.

Does that mean the train's speed isn't the cause of the accident? No. It means that concluding that speed was the cause constitutes jumping to conclusions. For the train's speed of travel to have been the cause, the train would have had to have been travelling faster than the track -- both its structure and layout -- could sustain without trains routinely jumping the track.

The train accident that just occurred in DuPont, WA shows more than ever why our soon to be submitted infrastructure plan must be approved quickly.

I doubt that anyone thinks infrastructure upgrades, refurbishments and new installations are not overdue. Too, I cannot imagine many people oppose seeing their tax dollars used to that end. I suspect there is, however, a whole lot of disagreement about the prioritization of the upgrades, refurbishments and new installations. To be sure, for example, the airline industry wants to see nothing resembling major upgrades in rail infrastructure. Indeed, the airline industry would, I suspect, become all but apoplectic were we to implement a national maglev rail infrastructure for it would,in all likelihood effect the end of regional commercial passenger airline travel. [1] (See also: Japan's maglev train goes 374 mph, sets world record - CNN Video)

Note:

1. Were regional airline flights supplanted by regional train travel, I, for one wouldn't miss traveling by regional passenger jet. No planes are less comfortable and less safe to be on and passengers get no greater airport or other conveniences/advantages for travelling on the damn things. There're a bunch of reasons people take the Acela between between Boston and NYC and D.C. and NYC.
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   Maglev speed trains between those cities would result in nobody flying between them on commercial passenger planes. I doubt many folks would even take charter flights for those trips.

Update:

I think I may have just heard that the train crashed while going around a curve. I tuned to a news report partway through and they were talking about the automated systems that were supposed to have sufficiently slowed the train to get it safely through the place where it derailed. That piece of information militates markedly more strongly for speed being the reason for the crash.​

 

[Toronado3800]

I haven't read the particulars of Donald's infrastructure plan. In general I feel national infrastructure is a great place to deficit spend and pump the economy or issue tax cuts/create "loopholes" for improvements as long as we admit deficit spending to pump the economy is the plan.

If we could only make Donald talk with Melania or someone maybe before he tweets life would be soo much better for him.

Most articles I read soon after the accident alluded to speed being the cause of the derailment and it became official today: Train in deadly Amtrak derailment was traveling at 80 mph in 30-mph zone

Why does this fool have to go out and weaken "our" argument for improved infrastructure by sounding like a fool: Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) | Twitter

"The train accident that just occurred in DuPont, WA shows more than ever why our soon to be submitted infrastructure plan must be approved quickly. Seven trillion dollars spent in the Middle East while our roads, bridges, tunnels, railways (and more) crumble! Not for long!"

If I make the people I'm talking to smoke pot I can probably then weave a thread claiming his tweet was an allusion to the need for positive train control to be implemented.

Mostly though I wonder if Trump has a case of AGS, the Al Gore Syndrome. When Gore gives a speech which agrees with me, I cringe. If the man launched a campaign to save puppies voters would go vote for a hunting season on puppies lol.

Gore has a more advanced case of AGS in my opinion yet somehow he got 48.4% of the vote (to W's 47.9%).

So I'll shake my head whenever the President and I agree. Maybe if Trump's AGS progresses he can do better than the 46.2% he won with! (Hillary had 48.2%)

Most articles I read soon after the accident alluded to speed being the cause of the derailment and it became official today: Train in deadly Amtrak derailment was traveling at 80 mph in 30-mph zone

Though that the train was travelling at 80mph in a 30mph zone is ample reason to posit that the train's speed was the cause of the accident, that being so is not a foregone conclusion. There are plenty of waterways, air routes, road and rail sections whereat "posted" speed limits are a function not of what the road, rail, water or air can sustain but rather because of environmental and/or situational factors having nothing to do with the medium by which vehicles are transported.

For instance, on roads, congestion and the potential presence of careless-enough road-crossers is often enough a reason for a relatively low speed limit. Another reason for comparatively low speed limits in places is that freight trains may safe to travel on that track corridor at 30mph and passenger trains safe at 80mph, but the speed limit is yet set at 30mph. Yet another reason for "posted" speed limits being comparatively low can have to do with what's far ahead along the transitway or what one has just passed. We routinely observe that sort of thing when entering and exiting cities and towns and in many cases the the lower speed limit has nothing to do with whether the road/rail can handle vehicles travelling at faster speeds than are stipulated.

Accordingly, absent some obstruction on the track or weakness in the trestle (bridge?), it's entirely possible that the track is more than capable of handling a passenger train (as compared to a freight train) travelling at 80mph.

Does that mean the train's speed isn't the cause of the accident? No. It means that concluding that speed was the cause constitutes jumping to conclusions. For the train's speed of travel to have been the cause, the train would have had to have been travelling faster than the track -- both its structure and layout -- could sustain without trains routinely jumping the track.

The train accident that just occurred in DuPont, WA shows more than ever why our soon to be submitted infrastructure plan must be approved quickly.

I doubt that anyone thinks infrastructure upgrades, refurbishments and new installations are not overdue. Too, I cannot imagine many people oppose seeing their tax dollars used to that end. I suspect there is, however, a whole lot of disagreement about the prioritization of the upgrades, refurbishments and new installations. To be sure, for example, the airline industry wants to see nothing resembling major upgrades in rail infrastructure. Indeed, the airline industry would, I suspect, become all but apoplectic were we to implement a national maglev rail infrastructure for it would,in all likelihood effect the end of regional commercial passenger airline travel. [1] (See also: Japan's maglev train goes 374 mph, sets world record - CNN Video)

Note:

1. Were regional airline flights supplanted by regional train travel, I, for one wouldn't miss traveling by regional passenger jet. No planes are less comfortable and less safe to be on and passengers get no greater airport or other conveniences/advantages for travelling on the damn things. There're a bunch of reasons people take the Acela between between Boston and NYC and D.C. and NYC.
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   Maglev speed trains between those cities would result in nobody flying between them on commercial passenger planes. I doubt many folks would even take charter flights for those trips.

Update:

I think I may have just heard that the train crashed while going around a curve. I tuned to a news report partway through and they were talking about the automated systems that were supposed to have sufficiently slowed the train to get it safely through the place where it derailed. That piece of information militates markedly more strongly for speed being the reason for the crash.​

There was a curve, like you said its possible speed was not the problem....not probable but possible I'll add.

What I read indicates Positive Train Control, the automated safety system, is not active on that set of tracks yet. The article alluded it would not be until the FRA mandate in 2018 sometime. Much like driverless cars on the road, PTC has been delayed and fought over for some time.