surreal1272

Ooh, a highly combustable liquid that sits behind your ass everytime I get in the car. Urine or gasoline, both are pretty damn dirty but only one can cause an explosion if hit the wrong way. See how your snide remarks can used against you? I must have missed something. What does urine have to do with this article?

Kind of my point. Military spending is over half our yearly budget while our roads, bridges, transportation, schools, and healthcare needs go to pot. Sadly I don’t see it changing anytime soon. Too many big players in the war business. Oh and while we do need to address the piggy bank situation, we should also address so much of our money being in our peoples piggy banks (like China and Japan, two of our biggest debt holders). It certainly goes both ways. @ocnblu-Debate the facts you seem in such a rush to down vote. It’s not that hard really. Or maybe it’s because you can’t really debate the facts. Who knows because you’ve never said.

Listen here blu. Why do YOU have to interject your BS troll posts into EVERY EV thread? Your posts are pure fear mongering in nature whether you want to admit it or not. When compared to gas powered engines, EVs are most certainly progress. The progress is a reduction in our dependence in Middle East oil and an investment in better EV tech is a step in that direction. How you don’t see that is beyond any sense of logic. And of course there are some down sides but at least they are being addressed and sure as $h! at a faster rate than gasoline powered engines ever were. We’ve relied on the same old tech, while being beholden to the same dirty rules and dirty players (see the Middle East again) for more than a century now. Where is the progress in that?No one has denied the challenges that lay ahead for EVs. The difference is though is that negative has been acknowledged whereas you fail to acknowledge any positives from EVs, and they are there whether you want to admit it or now. Again, if you hate the facts, then maybe you should just stop commenting on the subject altogether and quit with the condescending remarks and insults while you’re at it. All that does is prove this fear. And BS to your “century of trying” remark as well. The tech simply was not ready or viable 100 years ago and it was hamstrung by incompetent companies (see the GM 1990s EV debacle as a prime example) and competing industries that sought to prevent its implementation (see the oil industry). Now though, every manufacturer is finally on board and real progress IS being made. Your attempt to paint this such a broad brush is laughably pathetic and ignorant to the facts, facts you continually refuse to acknowledge. Next time you want to call someone “skeeter”, you need to look in the damn mirror junior. Shhhhh @dfelt. Facts are hard for some folks. They might lash out at you for committing such heresy.

China’s protectionism is not the only reason why China has been successful of the trade front. Having the largest labor force in the world is a much bigger factor. Protectionism has proven to be a failure in this country is all I know and the 1930s prove that. China manages to get away with the policy because of many other factors. Remove even half of that labor force and it’s protectionism practices would simply self destruct, just like ours did in the 30s. There are other factors to this but the labor force size was the first to come to my mind. One positive thing we should take from China is reinvesting in ourselves, like fixing and upgrading our infrastructure. I fear, however, that infrastructure week has passed us by for now.

What you called “anti-Trump” posts, sensible folks call “pointing out facts”.

I’d like to add the sale of over $100,000,000 worth of weapons to Saudi Arabia, a “deal” orchestrated by the master negotiator and the same country committing atrocities in Yemen who pretends to be our “ally” but really isn’t (reference 9/11 and the recent murder of a Wash Po journalist as examples of this allied farce). Guess we will always have North Korea though right? Oh wait.

Yeah, you certainly proved everyone wrong there. ?

Quite simply an amazing song and even more amazing live. It was also lyrical perfection but in fairness, I have always been a huge Cornell fan. Chris Cornell “When I’m Down”

“Can’t handle” not “kind handle”. Thanks a lot autocorrect. Like you said, cry me a river. If the site owner were a Trump supporter, you’d be singing a vastly different tune. It’s also funny that you assume that those who “think” like you would share the same opinion as you regarding political discussion. I personally know plenty of Trump supporters who have no problem with it so maybe the problem is just you and your personal hang ups. And while you berate Warren (who I don’t care for at all) you would openly ignore all of Trump false representations of himself. Oh I agree but in the context of what I’m saying, it perfectly reflects the inability to have a open dialogue with said person who just bitches about not getting his fair shake on this site, politically speaking which quite frankly is a cop out.

And continuing to offer nothing of substance and supporting the narrative that some folks kind handle political discussion. Honestly blu, it’s pretty pathetic at this point yet also a pretty typical response since you have offered nothing here but snarky remarks and down votes because there are thoughts and words here that don’t line up with yours. Cry me a river indeed. And they call liberals “snowflakes”. I have no problem if someone is a Trump supporter. The problem is when they offer no real argument to defend their position or anything else that would reasonably explain his policies and actions. They come off as echo chambers or deflect to things like Hillary or Obama (a tactic already used by one Trump supporter here). Deflection is not debating or discussing and that is pretty much all Blu has offered on this thread. Might as well be talking about EVs at this point because it’s pretty much the same behavior.

Some people just seem to go out of their way to prove why politics can’t be discussed in any reasonable manner. Sad.

Fake post.

Even the cheapest Canyon puts that total at near $70K! Holy hell! I dig the performance but the price? Not so much.

All BS aside, I do like the color on that. It’s a very “Jeep” kind of color.

Well that’ll burn through some tires, the old fashioned way. Any mention of price?

Agreed. The Tahoe is so easy to drive for a vehicle it’s size. I imagine the new Expedition is even better given the recent accolades. That pic sums up my point very nicely. Okay, so you got all the kids in there but where does the stuff go (because that kind of kid hauling usually involves stuff hauling). I know I am just stating a personal preference and if someone wants the useless third row, it’s a free country. It’s just a half baked concept to me, that’s all.

So when parents haul around a bunch of kids that requires the use of the third row of seats, cargo space is not important? That’s what I’m getting at. These smaller CUVs provide this “carry all the kids” gimmick (because no reasonable adult will sit back there) while sacrificing all the cargo space that comes with it. It is just dumb and most dealers count on folks not bearing that kind of thing in mind. If you even think you’re going to need to haul five or six kids around (while not wanting to drive a behemoth Suburban), there are these things called minivans that will carry all of those kids and your stuff oh but they’ve become “passé” so lord knows Janie soccer mom can’t be seen in an Odyssey or a Pacifica. Got to have that look Even is function be damned.

Not to nitpick here but if any friend asks me to sit back there, I’m going to tell them “no” and that’s being nice about it. It’s absolutely a marketing gimmick IMO when it comes to vehicles this small. About your “food flat” remark, you missed the point of my statement. If you load it full of people, third row and all, then you have no room for stuff. I see this type of nonsense all the time. People want the look but don’t think about real usability and function. That’s all I’m going to say about it because these type of vehicles are not for folks like me anyway.

Which is what I figured but it comes off as a marketing gimmick in a CUV that size. I wouldn’t even put children in the back of similar size CUVs with third row seating. The other issue with it is that almost completely kills the cargo room in the back. Dad-“Okay, I got all five of the kids in the Benz for the trip” Mom-“So where do we put all the luggage?”

I guess but I have tried to sit in some of these smaller three row vehicles and they are utterly useless. Even if they have the Asian market in mind, they could have just as easily left that off for the American market. People here demand a little more “head” room than what that will probably offer.

You forgot to mention less reliable (which is the biggest selling point of the RX btw) and in a smaller class of CUVs (the RX is 11 inches longer). Guess you can add less room than the RX as well. That has to make me wonder. Why does a shorter CUV even bother with a third row seat? Should make human heads happy but I can’t imagine anything larger than that wanting to occupy that small space (thinking older Highlander 3rd row here which was equally unusable).

Yet another FWD CUV with a weak engine offering. Is this Mercedes or GM? ?

True but again, I was speaking in general terms. I tend to tune out the extremist posts because it tends to be devoid of actual facts and isn’t based on reality (more like it supports a certain idealism mindset). I have family members that deal with life that way and I do not deal with life that way so we just don’t see eye to eye on political and social matters. If extends to the internet community as well. Too much “radicalized” thinking with no room for moderate compromise mindset for my taste.

He brought up “alt-right” because it’s in my signature. It was unrelated to what I was talking about here. Alt-Right, in general though, is pure extremist fantasy land BS IMO but that’s a subject for another time at another place.

I’m all for it but some folks will just continue their pattern of confirmation bias and general mudslinging while offering no real substance to the subject(s) at hand. Then you have the extremists that really ruin everything.