Where do the Presidential Candidates Stand on Scientific Issues?
Read Time:18 Second
This week’s debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton is the first of three the candidates will engage in before the November election. As in years past, each debate will be broadly aimed at one of three single subject areas—domestic policy, the economy and foreign policy. For the last several election cycles, a consortium of Nobel…
Happy
0 %
Sad
0 %
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
0 %
Surprise
0 %
0
0
What Republican can afford to recognize science? Mr. Pence seems to think that smoking doesn’t cause cancer. Might as well hang it up right there.
The question of where the candidates stand on science has been extremely important to both my husband and me. It’s fortunate that Hillary Clinton at least recognizes science, because Donald Trump is an ass and is likely to destroy the global economy as not.
I am currently reading the book _The War on Science…_ by Shawn Otto (mentioned in the article), and whereas it points out a lot of problems with our government and science, and although I had really hoped to really like it, my belief is that the organization sucks, and the writing is inconsistent at best. The whole first third of the book is almost incomprehensible, although it does point out a couple of salient issues. The book is too long and too disconnected.
So much for my review of _The War on Science…_ :-), But seriously the scientific stance of anyone who thinks they should be ruling our country is so important! Yes, I am of the group that believes that we should have a science debate along with the three standards!
Science is important to as well Marsha.