this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2024
425 points (98.0% liked)

politics

18950 readers
4309 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The former President's plan to bring water to the California desert is, like a lot of his promises, a goofy pipe-dream.

In an apparent effort to address the pressing issue of California water shortages, Trump said the following: “You have millions of gallons of water pouring down from the north with the snow caps and Canada, and all pouring down and they have essentially a very large faucet. You turn the faucet and it takes one day to turn it, and it’s massive, it’s as big as the wall of that building right there behind you. You turn that, and all of that water aimlessly goes into the Pacific (Ocean), and if they turned it back, all of that water would come right down here and right into Los Angeles,” he said.

Amidst his weird, almost poetic rambling, the “very large faucet” Trump seems to have been referring to is the Columbia River. The Columbia runs from a lake in British Columbia, down through Oregon and eventually ends up in the Pacific Ocean. Trump’s apparent plan is to somehow divert water from the Columbia and get it all the way down to Los Angeles. However, scientific experts who have spoken to the press have noted that not only is there currently no way to divert the water from the Oregon River to southern California, but creating such a system would likely be prohibitively expensive and inefficient.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Red_October 3 points 17 minutes ago

I really tried to give the benefit of the doubt in interpreting the dumb shit he said, but there just is no version of his idiot ramblings that actually makes sense.

[–] CharlesDarwin 5 points 3 hours ago

Dimbulb donnie is just everyone's Crazy Uncle Liberty, and it's been Thanksgiving since about 2015.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 6 hours ago

He’s a 10 year old child that likes to make pretend without ever having to face any consequences should his little fantasies ever come true.

That’s our job. We’re the ones that face the consequences.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Trump lives in some sort of reality pastiche of Richard Scary and Marquis de Sade.

[–] CitizenKong 2 points 50 minutes ago* (last edited 50 minutes ago)

I wish he would be in prison as frequently as the Marquis was. Both violent rapists though, so that tracks.

[–] aesthelete 21 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (3 children)

Amidst his weird, almost poetic rambling, the “very large faucet” Trump seems to have been referring to is the Columbia River. The Columbia runs from a lake in British Columbia, down through Oregon and eventually ends up in the Pacific Ocean. Trump’s apparent plan is to somehow divert water from the Columbia and get it all the way down to Los Angeles. However, scientific experts who have spoken to the press have noted that not only is there currently no way to divert the water from the Oregon River to southern California, but creating such a system would likely be prohibitively expensive and inefficient.

The fucking sane-washing continues. He's not being poetic. He's not laying out an "apparent plan" that we need to vet with "scientific experts". He thinks there's literally a fucking big faucet up there already as big as a building that "takes a day to turn" and he's the only person smart enough to think of "turning the faucet" or the only one strong-willed enough to kill the smelt for the good of the forests or whatever.

People keep grafting actual concepts onto this absolute moron's imbecilic utterances and giving him a leg to stand on...just fucking quote the asshole and move on with your day.

[–] InverseParallax 2 points 2 hours ago

The ag lobby told him there's an ocean of fresh water, and the only thing stopping it is all the evil librul greens demanding they protect the mosquitos or something.

The farmers in the central valley believe the same thing, they get 80% of California's water and still fervently believe we're all holding out on them and there's a lake superior we've been hiding behind our backs all along out of spite.

[–] CharlesDarwin 3 points 3 hours ago

Yeah, but does he have concepts of a plan?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I mean, I was vomiting in stanzas when I read this....

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 hours ago

Iamblech pentameter

[–] Jeffool 9 points 6 hours ago (3 children)

I know this is the politics community so forgive me for saying "this comment aside," but we really need to figure out a cheaper and cleaner way to desalinate seawater.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 hours ago

We need to stop encouraging people to live where there isn't any water. There's a reason nearly 3/4 of the US population lives east of the Mississippi, and that reason is the Eastern half of the country gets a straight up order of magnitude more rain water than the Western half

[–] Doomsider 8 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

This is a nonstarter because there is a quarter pound of salt in every gallon of salt water. A small town of 50k would easily produce close to a million pounds of salt a day. Now try to scale that up to 20 million people in LA for instance.

[–] jaggedrobotpubes 1 points 2 hours ago

Just put it in Utah.

[–] PugJesus 5 points 4 hours ago

Solar desalination is very viable. It's just that water is so cheap at the moment that it's not worth the investment.

[–] renrenPDX 7 points 8 hours ago

The PNW isn’t immune to the drought pal.

[–] [email protected] 48 points 12 hours ago (9 children)

This isn't an idea, or even a promise. Trump thinks that there currently exists a faucet that could divert the Columbia River, a river he does not know exists and would probably think is in Mexico somehow, and that the faucet is purposefully moving water to the ocean as a way to spite the residents of California going through a water crisis. His only promise is that he would turn said faucet to eliminate the water crisis. Why are journalists ascribing so much intelligence to someone who has consistently bragged that he thinks at an 8-year old level?

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] carl_dungeon 14 points 10 hours ago

What a fucking idiot. The only dumber people are those that believe him.

[–] jordanlund 4 points 7 hours ago (3 children)

As an Oregonian, I have no idea what faucet he's talking about.

Bonneville Dam maybe? 🤔

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonneville_Dam

[–] chockblock 4 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Someone on Reddit theorized that he saw the term Delta and associated it with Delta Faucets the company, and that is where the faucet idea of his comes from.

[–] SulaymanF 2 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

It’s the faucet he read about on truth social, which means it’s real. There was even a picture of the faucet, and we all know those can’t be faked. /s

[–] elrik 3 points 5 hours ago

No it's the faucet across from the toilet he has to flush ten, sometimes fifteen times, which is also where he got this idea.

[–] werefreeatlast 2 points 6 hours ago (3 children)

It's not impossible as many are thinking. However I would never vote for another Republican lying bastard asshole ever again. But think about how we move oil around the country besides stupid trains. We use pipelines. So now just build one and fill it with water rather than oil. It won't pay for itself because the price of water is so much lower than oil. But if you all want some water, it's just a long ass straw.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

They sont have any pipelines running into California because the terrain makes them prohibitedly expensive. If BP and Exxon Mobile say it is cheaper to import Saudi crude to California because it is too expensive to pipe Texas crude, then there is no way. Canada has one pipeline to connect Albertam oil to Vancouver, but it is so expensive to pipe that oil across the Canadian Rockies that the pipe it downhill to Saskatchewan where it can then be pipped downhill all the way to Texas. Pipelines across mountains are just not feasible unless you are trying to move stuff from the top of the mountain to the bottom.

[–] Fosheze 1 points 2 hours ago

Much like oil it would probably be easier to haul the water via train than make a pipe which can cover that terrain.

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice 2 points 5 hours ago

Well I will leave it to you to turn the faucet as large as the building behind you in a day. If you fail to do it in a day... Which doesn't exist, and therefore impossible, come back and let me know how it isnt impossible

[–] SulaymanF 1 points 5 hours ago

It’s still a stupid idea. Taking the runoff from a mountain and pumping it thousands of miles is more expensive than getting water from natural aquifers locally. Heck, even building a local desalination plant and turning saltwater from the city’s coast is cheaper than this giant pipeline idea. There’s a reason NYC doesn’t need to build a pipe all the way from Niagara Falls.

[–] Boddhisatva 146 points 16 hours ago (12 children)

I guess it was gradual, but when did it become the job of journalists to try and guess what politicians mean when they make statements? Shouldn't the meaning be made clear by the speaker? Right now it seems like its:

Trump: Speaks rambling gibberish saying something about a faucet

Journalists: "It seems like Trump is talking about the Columbia river and here's why that is significant..."

[–] ceenote 116 points 15 hours ago (3 children)

This is what "sanewashing" refers to, if anyone was unclear on that.

[–] CharlesDarwin 1 points 3 hours ago

This should be the word of the year, by the way. Someone really, really nailed it with that portmanteau. It perfectly describes what the "liberal media" does all the time with RWNJs like dimbulb donnie.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 13 hours ago

Oh I like that term. Will be applying it in my life. Thank you.

[–] rayyy 9 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

“sanewashing”

The media is rightly concern that MAGA will have a fit if they tell the truth so they go full Onion. We have reached the point of, "Idiocracy", but here we are.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] NineMileTower 112 points 16 hours ago (4 children)

If you support Turmp at this point, you're a fucking dunce.

[–] spankmonkey 32 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

If someone ever supported Trump, they're a fucking dunce.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

In 2016: Maybe it was a funny protest vote "against the system", for memes or whatever.

In 2020: Maybe voters were tricked into believing what he was doing was good or something. Jan 6 should have been a wakeup call.

In 2024: Just take a look at ANYTHING Trump has said, and what he has actually done about it and you should know that he is the least trustworthy guy you'll ever meet. At this point it's delusional. I could have excused it for the past 5 to 8 years but now I can't.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] nemonic187 31 points 16 hours ago (4 children)

Anyone still supporting this human shaped STD has herpes of the brain.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›