this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2024
504 points (98.1% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2502 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 54 points 1 month ago (1 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?

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world -2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

There's a flood control gate somewhere around Vancouver, is that what he's talking about? It's a bit bigger than any wall though...

[–] Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world 25 points 1 month ago (1 children)

No, he is talking about a faucet because he doesn't understand any of it. There is no faucet. He's dumb. Move on.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Even if he was, that's not how that works. I'm not saying he's smart I'm just trying to figure out what he's going to do so I can be somewhat prepared.

[–] Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

He does this shit all the time. He will greatly exaggerate something then the media blows it up and then his press people redress it with some story tangentially related. Don't feed into it. It's a cheap, gotcha.

He is dumb. Let him sound dumb.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

We need to get a portal to the good timeline and shove him through.

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I imagine step 1 would be planning a route for all the water. Step 2, purchasing all of the land along said route. Step 3, realizing it costs a shit ton as it is 2000km/1200 miles from Vancouver to Los Angeles, note you will also have to pay reperations to both Canadians and Americans not along the route effected to the west.. Step 4. Plan the the infrastructure. Step 5, realize this was all supposed to be done in a day... Step 6 realize both Biden and Trump are long dead from old age. Step 7 remember California will move as the plates on the earth move, so the pipe needs to be flexible, get a new quote at 100x the gdp of many countries.

Start the project.

[–] kerrigan778@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yes, clearly he means demolishing Bonneville Dam, somehow reversing the flow of the Willamette and then digging a trench through Grants Pass, where, if we flood the San Joaquin Valley will provide plenty of water to LA.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

See, that's the kind of really dumb thing I would expect him to do.