/sci/ - Science & Math

While I am a conservative myself, I'd have to say Obama for this case.

There be a shit storm brewin'. I can feel it.

>>5045689

Jesus made science with his magic. Romney 1
Obama 0

Obama is going to be easier on the natural sciences: stem cells, medicine in general, environmental science, etc.

Romney is better for mathematical science and engineering: nuclear power, military industrial engineering.

>>5045689
Obama

The republican party is the party of cave men.

\thread

Neither. I'd expect about the same funding for legitimate science projects from either of them, which is abysmally low, and it doesn't seem to change very much president-to-president as it is essentially a set budget with different allocations every term. Unless you count engineering solar/wind energy sources, then Obama. If you count college aid (mostly goes to liberal arts) then Obama.

Honestly the country just isn't that interested in science.

>>5045689
It is really sad how you don't know anything about the politics of your own country.

American Republicans are anti-science.

\thread

>>5045711
how is romney better for natural science?

what's the difference if it's public or privatized? it's the same science. we went to the moon on a federal NASA program.

Obama would be more receptive to science from basic research,

Romney would be more receptive to science which will a profitable end product

>>5045726
>implying Romney won't decrease science spending

Republicans are cutting science left and fucking right, ask anyone who works in research or acedemia.

Romney will be a true disaster for american science.

>>5045731
Romney isn't better for natual science. You are being trolled.

>>5045733
>science
>profitable end product

99% of all science does not produce a profitable end product in the short term. Science is not about profits.

well obama cut funds from NASA sooo id have to say Romney

>>5045747

how naive. I was young like that once.

>>5045689
Are you fucking retarded?
Do you not understand what a republican is?
They literally want to teach kids "magic" instead of science.

I'll informed Americans like you are the reason the country is going to fucking shit.

>>5045751
0/10

>>5045689
Obama

\thread

>>5045747
Spoken like a true academic... One that will never get funding.

I'm afraid grants don't work like that. Nor does industry research.

>>5045754
/sci/ really is a board of highschoolers and 1st year undergrads!

>>5045689
Obviously Obama. It is pretty obvious. Do you live under a rock?

>>5045760
>>5045762

Jill Stein > Gary Johnson > Mitt Romney > Barack Obama

Jill Stein

/thread

>>5045689
Obama

>>5045739

Presidents don't have that much power. They can sign and veto bills, but most grant money is allocated by congress (including defense), making it irrelevant who you vote for president.
You'd honestly have a bigger impact writing your congressman, and then every other congressman.

If Romney is elected there isn't going to be some horrendous slash in scientific spending. Even on the topic of embryonic stem cells Romney has yet to make a clear position, but he has stated he's fine with adult stem cell research.

Regardless of who you pick science isn't ever going to get more than 2% of our GDP.

The only real issue would be whether or not a candidate bans a section of research, but neither have stated they will (although Obama does have a moratorium on nuclear reactors in place, which does prohibit test reactors as well).

Compare Bush era to Obama's term. Basically same amount of funding, the only difference is Bush banned embryonic stem cells off and on.

>>5045689
>Romney
>science

>>5045774
>Romney isn't going to cut scientific spending

What universe do you live in? How did you get to ours?

>>5045773
>Romney more science friendly then Obama

>>5045689
>Romney
>science funding

I'm not saying Obama is pro-science, but Romney is rather anti-science.

If you were gonna choose between the two, I'd go Obama.

>>5045774
>They can sign and veto bills, but most grant money is allocated by congress (including defense), making it irrelevant who you vote for president.
Seeing as a Congress with a sufficiently large majority that it can override vetos is rare to begin with and tends to immediately disintegrate the next election, it seems to me that picking a President who aligns with your views is more important than you're making it seem.

>>5045689
The time of america is over. Romney will win and america will be a complete third world country in 10-15 years. The income gap will continue to grow exponetially, until the american middle class is completely wiped out.

The migration of educated people out of american will continue to increase exponetially, and your economy will go to complete shit.

This is going to be awesome to watch! Romeny 2012! America Falls!

Has America ever had a pro-science president? Outside of the Cold War era of course, everyone endorsed science then because we wanted to be ahead of the Russians.

>>5045689
>science
>Romney

Yah, the Kolob worshipping leader of the anti-science party is somehow possibly more pro-science than the chain smoking atheist. Fuck this board cancer, poor /sci/.

>>5045793

Presidents rarely veto bills due to both political pressure and the need to appease congress because the president cannot legislate.

http://io9.com/5940676/read-obama-and-romneys-answers-to-the-countrys-top-science-questions

This is the most thought they've put into the issue, and that said it's obvious neither of them care that much about it. Neither of them are campaigning for science. You may see higher college aid with Obama, you may see less corporate R&D regulation with Romney, either way, it's not going to be much.

Christ perhaps you lot should read their policies before you vote. Neither of them have any significant science-related policy. They both give glancing ideological speech when asked, though.

>>5045800
So who do you think will be the next superpower(s) after America falls? I think China has good prospects but I can't really think of anyone else. Maybe Europe as a whole but even with the EU they still seem too separated to function as a superpower.

>>5045803
Obama and Clinton are pro-science.
Bush was anti-science.

Republicans tend to be anti-science. It is in direct conflict with their beliefs in magic. There are very very very very few republican scientists.

gary johnson 2012
you know in your heart that it's true

the demos and repubs just dump taxpayer money into random corporations like solyndra which end up going bankrupt. free enterprise is much more fair and efficient for developing new technologies, just look at what happened during the italian renaissance.

>>5045813
>and the need to appease congress because the president cannot legislate.
>implying the President can't issue an Executive Order in a pinch

Obama. Both are pretty bad though.

>>5045825

>implying executive orders are legislation
>Implying either of them would issue an executive order on behalf of science
>Implying executive orders aren't always a matter of political scrutiny

Both candidates have generally similar stances on energy issues - they support alternatives like wind, solar, nuclear, and natural gas but are realistic about how long it will take to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels.

Obama has a considerably better record on education, he's been behind several big STEM ed initiatives the last four years.

Obama has a much better record when it comes to funding of scientific research. General science funding has gone up under the current Administration. Romney tends to favor less public science funding.

Obama has a better and more consistent platform when it comes to the space program. He and Administrator Bolden spent the better part of his first year in office trying to get Congress to increase NASA's funding and scrap the Constellation program. They succeeded in part, the average budget for NASA is considerably higher than it was under the Bush Administration (though not as high as Obama wanted) and Constellation was scrapped in favor of shifting more support into public-private partnership programs like CCDev (though Congress refused to pass any NASA bill that didn't include a government-built launch system so a similar program called SLS is still in the works). Romney's position on space is more wishy-washy and amounts to scheduling a panel to talk about holding a meeting to discuss forming a committee to blah blah blah.

>>5045814
>China has good prospects

Hate to burts your bubble, but China is the prominet super-power in the world already. Everyone in the world knows this, but dumb ass america.

You can literally go to any natin on earth and talk about this shit with the locals and they will tell you that americas time is over, and it has been since the fucking economy collapsed.

China beats america on just about every measure of a nation now (but human rights). Economics, science, innovation, millitary, etc.

America lasted as a lone super power for just a measibly ~60 years. It is fucking pathetic.
And instead of fucking reazling the problems the country actually has and trying to regain its status in the world, it actually does the complete opposite and puts someone like Romney in the election!

Seriously? What the fuck is wrong with america? Why do they do shit so obviously against their best interests? Is the population really that dumb?

>>5045821
>free enterprise
>the italian renaissance
oh lol thought you were being serious for a second
im voting for johnson simply because i refuse to choose between 2 corrupt pieces of shit, but yeah if you really care about science funding you better not vote for the one candidate who will globally cut all science funding period.

>>5045769
>>5045773

Also I am no longer able to quote posts on Opera using the inline extension. What happened?

>>5045821
>developing new technologies
>science

I don't think you know what science is.

>>5045843
>China is the prominet super-power in the world already.
>China
>Superpower

Hate to burst your bubble, but America is the only superpower in the world right now. It doesn't lead in all aspects of any characteristic, but America is the most dominant country right now.

>>5045844
Who the fuck is Gary Johnson? Is that some homosexual thing?

>>5045855
>this is what many americans actually believe

>>5045855
>2012
>america
>a super-power

You really need to get out more kid. Your nation is literally owned by China.

How is america the most dominante country in the world? are you fucking retarded? What exactly are you currently dominating? LMFAO

>>5045774
>Presidents don't have that much power. They can sign and veto bills
That veto power is actually pretty fucking important.

>>5045861
>Your nation is literally owned by China.

You must think that America is going to pay the debt back. That's not going to happen

>>5045855
>>5045861
>>5045866
The truth of the matter: America is a superpower - the dominant superpower - as far as military matter goes and leads the world in nominal GDP.
America is, however, not that special in any way that relates to quality of life. Kinda shitty actually, by the standards of Europe.

>>5045869
>That veto power is actually pretty fucking important.

Important insofar as when he vetoes that bill it gets to go back to congress for a second review

>>5045861
well lets see
Bahrain
Djibouti
Egypt
Kuwait
Qatar
Saudi Arabia
UAE
Australia
Japan
Philippines
Singapore
South Korea
Thailand
Belgium
Germany
Greece
shall i go on, or are you starting to understand that having military bases in half the countries in the world means something?
(also don't forget that our military spending is more than the next 3 biggest spenders combined)

>>5045875
Very rarely does anything get passed by a supermajority.

>>5045765
They are kinda right. You may not see personal profit and some people do research for charities, which are technically non-profit.

But there are also research grants funded by big companies and it is in their interests to make money from your research. They're not going to give you funding if they don't see some potential benefit on their end.

>>5045877
>Kinda shitty actually, by the standards of the most developed parts of France, England, Germany, the Netherlands, Luxembourg and Scandinavia
ftfy
and even thats assuming youd rather have all your food, housing, and transportation half the size and double the price in exchange for free healthcare and education and more handout money from the government
but that aside, stop acting like "Europe" is one country thats fully developed, half the continent is broke and a good portion of it is a backwards wasteland with dirt roads and commieblocks

>>5045861
Iraq and Iran, for two.

Oh, wiat, I don't think shithole countries that we destabilized ourselves count.

Realistically though while China has an assload more money and overall influence than the US, they also need our markets to maintain their current growth. We kind of have each other by the balls to a degree, but we'd be hit much harder than they would with a trade embargo, but they'd suffer pretty heavy job losses if we stopped buying from them. Maybe it's just latent nationalism or dry hope that we at least get something out of the quintillions of dollars we spend but I suspect our military peen is bigger, even if we haven't got near the available manpower.

>China has more money than the US
>China owns the US through debt
>etc...

Most of the debt owed by the United States government is owed to private banks. China's GDP is considerably less than the US's.

This may not always be true, however.

A lot of people get the impression that China is really strong because of how rapidly it has been growing, but you must remember how awful of a state it was in 1950 - how far it had to go to get where it is now. China may well be the dominant power in the world at the end of the 21st century but it isn't now at the beginning of the 21st century.

>>5045894
>China has an assload more money and overall influence than the US
wtf no
they have the opposite of that
they have a massive population to draw from, rapidly evolving educational institutions and a massive manufacturing plant capital base
we have an assload more money and overall influence than them
if the US didnt have military, diplomatic and espionage ties all around the world we wouldnt be the superpower, its those ties that make us the superpower and china the rising challenger, china has close ties with north korea and vietnam, and questionable ties with iran and cuba, the us has most of europe ready to go to war on command

>>5045754
>>5045765
Crying "troll" over and over again is not an argument.

>>>/b/