Debate REAL Issues

It’s time for presidential candidates — and especially, the moderators of debates — to stop avoiding real issues.


Science is involved in some — in fact, in many — of the most important issues facing us. Energy independence. Clean water. Food. Health care. Economic competitiveness. Surveillance and privacy. Education. Climate change.

But republican presidential candidates don’t want to talk about these issues. When they’re forced to face, they can’t give anything better than slogans and sound bites. They think “drill baby drill” is an answer to the energy problem. They think “kill baby kill” is the way to make peace. They think the answer to the climate problem is to deny reality.

Science has an astounding impact on human life. It’s high time we forced presidential candidates to debate the issues related to science.

Especially republicans.

There’s an organization called “sciencedebate.org” which is trying to get the presidential contenders to face the issues. Help them out. It’s in everybody’s best interest — including yours. Including your kids’.

You can submit question at their website.

6 responses to “Debate REAL Issues

  1. Perhaps something related to violence, cruelty, and possible changes in American mass psychology.

    Yesterday Donald Trump said the NFL was going “soft,” and by that he meant, was seeking to avoid incidences of brain damage among its players. The example was meant to be analogous to how weak America had become.

    Some accounts concluded that Trump was “pro brain damage” or that he had “endorsed” brain damage.
    While this is disturbing in itself, what I found most frightening was the reaction of his supporters:

    ” ‘We’re going bad, folks, we’re going soft, just like the NFL. Am I right?’ he added, to cheers from the audience.”
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-football_5692d6a2e4b0c8beacf772ad

    “His audience seemed to warm to his message that football was not as tough as it used to be, with his comments met by cheers.”
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-republican-nomination-race-donald-trump-attacks-american-football-for-being-soft-and-boring-a6805321.html

    Trump is selling a blood spectacle, and he’s getting an enthusiastic response.

  2. Well, although y’may not like their other politics, and they are not a majority, by all accounts, there is Republicen.

  3. I think every eligible player should wear a kind of a life vest with a gig handle on the back and a big handle on the front. The only legal tackle is to grab one or both handles and pull the player to the ground. You can’t swing him around, and you can’t grab his handle unless he has the ball. You can’t grab a receiver’s handle if he is off the ground catching the ball until one or both of his feet are on the ground.

    If you aren’t an eligible player, you can’t touch the ball at all. You can’t even recover a fumble. On defense, linemen are not eligible players. Linebackers and pass defenders are eligible.

  4. cosmicomics: ‘Some accounts concluded that Trump was “pro brain damage” or that he had “endorsed” brain damage.’

    In other words, he wanted to get more voters.

  5. Michael Hillinger

    Being in New Hampshire, I have the opportunity to talk to these candidates in small venues. I have asked them about the science (for example, here is my question to John Kaisch https://youtu.be/a1RgYkhLbms). Alas, they always have an “answer” and it usually has as little to do with science as possible. Instead the focus on confusing the issue and making it sound like any solution is all cost and no benefit.