US Presidential Election 2016...because it's never too early

[Galeongirl]

Maybe the entire world should just start reading temperatures in Kelvin. Degrees in decimals, so the Fahrenheit fans can have their accuracy, and it has a logical scale for the Celcius fans. Win/win for science!

[DaveC]

Kelvin is a nice idea, but unfortunately the chances of it ever actually happening are absolute zero.

[Diemen]

Heyooooo!

[deep]

At least it would bring gasoline prices down.

I'm tire of looking at $4 gas prices.

[martha]

Originally Posted by Diemen

Speed will be especially hard, considering car manufacturers already put the conversion from mph to kph right there on the speedometer.

I've been trying to practice reading my speeds in kph around town, but the km readings on my speedo are damn near impossible to read without squinting, staring, and crashing.

JUST DO IT THE AMERICAN WAY.

[deep]

It would sure be a help in many south west states, anything to keep the temperatures under 100 degrees would be fantastic.

[LuckyNumber7]

Originally Posted by Galeongirl

Maybe the entire world should just start reading temperatures in Kelvin. Degrees in decimals, so the Fahrenheit fans can have their accuracy, and it has a logical scale for the Celcius fans. Win/win for science!

I would appreciate the hell out of using Kelvin. But, I also do understand the shift for water freezing as the reference.

[Axver]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

But we can say low, mid, or upper 70s. And perhaps having grow up with it, I can fairly precisely decide what it is I should be wearing based on the difference between 72 and 77.

What I was getting at was that, for example, if I tell you it's 22 in Melbourne today and Cobbler tells you it's 23, you still get the same idea of how warm it is (even though that basically covers 71-74F). Nobody's regretted their clothing choice because they dressed for 22 and the temperature ended up nudging 23. Now, if Cobbler reckons it's 26, you might start to suspect one of us has got it wrong and decide to check a weather forecast before choosing what to wear.

Could we also talk about how the UK and Australia are in a minority of countries driving on the wrong side of the road?

Keep left mate, like our politics.

(If only.)

Originally Posted by cobl04

Irvine's conservatism finally rears its ugly head.

In full seriousness, I only understand height in feet and inches. I can't even remember what my height is in centimetres because the number's meaningless to me. So that one bit of imperial has lingered, though I know other people in their twenties who are the opposite of me and are baffled by height in imperial. The news now only uses metric for height, but I remember both being given as a child.

As a child, I was weighed in stone by my mother - who was herself a child when New Zealand transitioned to metric. I haven't been weighed in stone since I was about ten, but I still loosely understand it.

[Axver]

To perhaps get this thread back on topic, yesterday some friends and I were discussing next year's primaries. The Republican field already seems very large, but off the top of our heads we couldn't think of who was going to run against Hilary Clinton for the Democrat nomination. Even when we Googled it, the names of other potential contenders had little or no familiarity for most of us, and we like to think of ourselves as people well informed about global politics who will follow the campaign closely once it heats up.

So I was just wondering, is there anybody who's likely to mount a strong challenge to Clinton for the Democrat nomination, or is it essentially hers as long as she doesn't reveal a fondness for ISIS, Hitler, or the metric system?

[nbelcik]

http://thevane.gawker.com/fahrenheit...ius-1691707793

Celsius is a great scale for temperature if we lived in water. We don't live in water.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[bobsaget77]

Some 2016 thoughts on the GOP race and whether they can make a run at Hillary...

Most people are counting out any republican candidates, but it is still very early. I think we'll have a much better picture in January once the Republicans start to weave themselves out.
It'll be interesting to see who captures the Tea Party vote and whether or not their candidate will actually get the nomination. I'd say Cruz is the strongest contender from that group and could possibly make things interesting. Santorum and Huckabee are the only others in that pot and they have absolutely no chance at all.
At the end of the day, I think it will come down to Rubio, Bush, and Cruz. Rubio will be the one to watch in the long run, though, and I think he'll get the nomination.
He has the best shot at getting some much coveted minority votes that the GOP has been slaughtered in for decades. If he could put up a solid showing in that facet, he would give Hillary a tough run.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[bobsaget77]

Originally Posted by Axver

So I was just wondering, is there anybody who's likely to mount a strong challenge to Clinton for the Democrat nomination, or is it essentially hers as long as she doesn't reveal a fondness for ISIS, Hitler, or the metric system?

No chance.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[Galeongirl]

Originally Posted by DaveC

Kelvin is a nice idea, but unfortunately the chances of it ever actually happening are absolute zero.

Well played sir, well played!

[anitram]

I love the argument that Celsius is less precise than Fahrenheit, all the while referring to height in feet and inches over centimetres and distance in miles. That's some kind of cognitive dissonance right there.

[Oregoropa]

Fun fact. -40 F and -40 C are the same temperature


Back to the Democratic nom. Sanders is polling close to single digit striking distance of Clinton in a few states.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[Galeongirl]

Originally Posted by anitram

I love the argument that Celsius is less precise than Fahrenheit, all the while referring to height in feet and inches over centimetres and distance in miles. That's some kind of cognitive dissonance right there.

If they want it more precise, just use Celcius with decimals. Same diff. It's an odd argument indeed. Though I think the UK still uses feet and inches as well. And miles per hour of course. Some sort of hybrid system would probably works best.

[Mrs. Garrison]

Originally Posted by Axver

To perhaps get this thread back on topic, yesterday some friends and I were discussing next year's primaries. The Republican field already seems very large, but off the top of our heads we couldn't think of who was going to run against Hilary Clinton for the Democrat nomination. Even when we Googled it, the names of other potential contenders had little or no familiarity for most of us, and we like to think of ourselves as people well informed about global politics who will follow the campaign closely once it heats up.

So I was just wondering, is there anybody who's likely to mount a strong challenge to Clinton for the Democrat nomination, or is it essentially hers as long as she doesn't reveal a fondness for ISIS, Hitler, or the metric system?

Unless George Clooney suddenly throws his hat into the ring for the Democratic nomination, it's still Hillary's to lose.

I'm not saying that George Clooney would ever do that, just using him as an example because of his popularity, political leanings, etc.

[BigMacPhisto]

Originally Posted by Oregoropa

Back to the Democratic nom. Sanders is polling close to single digit striking distance of Clinton in a few states.

Yep, and that's even with a lot of people still unaware of who he is...I think Clinton will lose early states like Iowa and New Hampshire, but as I said earlier, there's just no chance she loses in somewhere like Florida or California as I can't see millions of low-information voters suddenly knowing who the other candidates are and what they stand for...

For what it's worth, Sanders was in California the other day and says he plans to make it competitive there...a steamroll effect like John Kerry in '04 could really wipe Hillary out.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by anitram

I love the argument that Celsius is less precise than Fahrenheit, all the while referring to height in feet and inches over centimetres and distance in miles. That's some kind of cognitive dissonance right there.

or maybe the conversation was simply tongue-in-cheek?

[DaveC]

Did you guys hear the rumour that George Clooney is thinking of running for the Democratic nomination?