Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin

[Popeye_Card]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_Ref ... l_reserves

This is basically a money grab.

Elaborate? (I'm not being snarky, just want more of your thoughts.)

There's a lot of barrels of crude in that wilderness. Sure, someone will get to drill it and make a big load of cash, but why does it matter? Or, are you against drilling there/and or drilling anywhere for whatever reasons (environmental?, limited market impact?, etc.)

I'm against it for now. I think it's a short-term, nearsighted fix. We'll need to eventually get into it, but I'd rather that be long down the road. Maybe when drilling and transportation practices are even safer than they are today.

I'm all for energy independence, but I have slightly different stances. It's all about eliminating the gap between production and consumption. Personally, I'm willing to throw Canada's resources in with the "production" side, because they have plenty of them, they're already pumping, they're a steady government, and a constant ally. Also easier to ship from Canada than from Alaska (pipelines are already under construction). Anyway, in the short term I'd really like to reduce that consumption side of the equation. Part of Obama's pledged $4 billion to the auto industry is also a pledge towards this goal. If you increase average mpg from, say, 27 mpg to 35 mpg, that's a 25%+ gain for consumer consumption. Additional commercial and industrial efficiencies can lower their consumption rates.

I think the folks that are so gung-ho about drilling in ANWR right now are the ones who have most to gain financially. That isn't surprising of course. But I scoff a bit at the notion that it's all for "energy independence". Yes, it helps, but that's not the real reason you're so supportive of it.

[Socnorb11]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_Ref ... l_reserves

ANWR is basically a money grab...and won't lead to any "energy independence"

id like to see how they came up with those price differences. I think the fact that wed have our own source if needed would keep price gouging down.

The world sets the market price, not just us.

[TimeForGuinness]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_Ref ... l_reserves

This is basically a money grab.

Elaborate? (I'm not being snarky, just want more of your thoughts.)

There's a lot of barrels of crude in that wilderness. Sure, someone will get to drill it and make a big load of cash, but why does it matter? Or, are you against drilling there/and or drilling anywhere for whatever reasons (environmental?, limited market impact?, etc.)

It's all about numbers...we wouldn't see the effects of ANWR until 2020...and even then it will only be contributing another 1.5-2 million barrels a day. As of 2005, the US consumption was 20 million barrels a day with over 70% of that coming from imports.

What will be the consumption in 2020...12 years away?

To me, it doesn't make sense to taint a conservation area for little return at the pump.

[ghostrunner]

The community organizer comments were dumb and insulting. I think they were trying to point out Obama's use of that as experience and perhaps say that it's a vague description of what he did, which it is. However, the way they said it was a big loser for them.

And to be fair, some in the press and some Democrats were basically saying Palin's mayor/city council gig amounted to nothing, and she was getting hammered all week. I don't think it's a big qualification, but if Obama's going to put community organizer on his resume, then her early work ought to count for something. So I think they were trying to retaliate a little and show her being able to dish it out as well as take it.

Like I said though, i think it backfired a little. I thought they did get some good shots in on Obama's celebrity, his indulging in the "historic moment" schtick, and his "clinging to guns" comments and I thought those jabs were fair and even funny in a couple instances.

[Diddy]

I've got no problem if you want to vote for McCain.

My question was about what you heard Wednesday night that made you want to vote for McCain. In my view, we didn't hear anything new about McCain on Wednesday night. I think everyone agrees that it was almost entirely a mud-slinging festival by Guiliani and Palin, and not much else. That's why I'm wondering what you saw that I didn't.

I guess i kind of liked how the mud was slung. It wasnt the typical way, it was more of a smart ass going after obama then a doom and gloom. If you vote for mccain,obama well all die tone i seem to get from most mud slinging.

Im sure i also got cought up in how the palin speech was delivered cause i think that she did and excelent job of giving her speech, this is also how i think obama gets many of his supporters because he is a good speeker.

[sighyoung]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_Ref ... l_reserves

ANWR is basically a money grab...and won't lead to any "energy independence"

id like to see how they came up with those price differences. I think the fact that wed have our own source if needed would keep price gouging down.

I believe the estimate came from a Department of Energy report, requested by Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/ ... 008)03.pdf

[Popeye_Card]

This is all coming down to the political map. To me, there are 4 states that are battling it out as far key voting states (NV, MT, VA and OH), the rest have likely been decided and others are locks at this stage.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

You could add Colorado, NC, and maybe Florida.

Indiana is hugely conservative, but they also have a lot of industries tied to the auto industry. If Obama can play that angle up, there's a small chance he could pull a coup there.

[TimeForGuinness]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_Ref ... l_reserves

ANWR is basically a money grab...and won't lead to any "energy independence"

id like to see how they came up with those price differences. I think the fact that wed have our own source if needed would keep price gouging down.

The world sets the market price, not just us.

I was just wondering that...doesn't the oil drilled in ANWR go into the world supply? I guess if we leave OPEC, we could drill our own oil...but we wouldn't have enough.

[Diddy]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_Ref ... l_reserves

ANWR is basically a money grab...and won't lead to any "energy independence"

id like to see how they came up with those price differences. I think the fact that wed have our own source if needed would keep price gouging down.

The world sets the market price, not just us.

did i say we set it?

[UK]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_Ref ... l_reserves

This is basically a money grab.

Elaborate? (I'm not being snarky, just want more of your thoughts.)

There's a lot of barrels of crude in that wilderness. Sure, someone will get to drill it and make a big load of cash, but why does it matter? Or, are you against drilling there/and or drilling anywhere for whatever reasons (environmental?, limited market impact?, etc.)

It's all about numbers...we wouldn't see the effects of ANWR until 2020...and even then it will only be contributing another 1.5-2 million barrels a day. As of 2005, the US consumption was 20 million barrels a day with over 70% of that coming from imports.

What will be the consumption in 2020...12 years away?

To me, it doesn't make sense to taint a conservation area for little return at the pump.

I'd rather see a greater focus on ways to conserve fuel rather than ways to produce more fuel, you're excatly right as far as the US still not being able to produce nearly enough to become self-contained with oil.

Combine that with a greater risk to the environment and possibly procrastinating with alternative fuel exploration and the negatives outweigh the positives concerning off-shore and ANWR methods of obtaining oil.