2008 An Inconvient (Electoral) Truth
posted by on November 8 at 10:57 AM
Posted by Ryan S. Jackson
Remember how Global Warming was once described by the Republican chairman of the Senate environment committee as a lurid plot by “George Soros, the Hollywood elitists, the far left environmentalists on the committee that I chair—all of them want us to believe the science is settled and it’s not.”
Well. Now it turns out that fickle independents (and some Republican voters) are threatening to desert the party if Republicans don’t change their stance on Global Warming legislation:
In a presentation similar to ones provided to congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle in recent days, Ayres illustrates how independents — who were responsible for ousting the GOP majority in 2006 — are unmistakably supportive of swift action to cut carbon emissions and require cuts in carbon dioxide emissions by cars, factories and power plants.Ayres seemed most surprised that independents and, to a lesser extent, Republicans wanted the U.S. to act even if China and India, two big polluters with rapidly growing economies, did not.
The swing district independent voters said they were much more likely to support a candidate who votes to cut carbon emissions.
As you say, it's not just a vast majority of Dems and Independents who want ACTION on global warming - it's most Republicans.
The few that are left.
At this point the cutting of carbon emmisions anyone is willing to do is too little too late. We are fucked. It should have been done 10 to 15 years ago. We are going to put out the raging fire of global warming by taking a piss on it hoping it will go out....
I don't doubt the accuracy of this poll, but it really peddles in a half-truth. There are two inseparable truths today about the American public's perception of climate change:
My father is a very typical American in this regard. He believes global warming is a terrible thing, he condemns George W. Bush for not doing anything about it, but then when I ask him what we should do about global warming, he mouths the same painless technological panaceas Bush does. He just does not get the carbon tax. He thinks it's going to stiff working stiffs -- even if it's made revenue-neutral with a corresponding cut in payroll taxes. And he absolutely refuses to make any changes in his own behavior to reduce his carbon footprint. To take a train somewhere or simply not go somewhere is unthinkable.
@2 - so you're saying, if there's a forest fire near your house, you should stop watering down your roof?
Man, you're a gullible puppy.
@ Will in Seattle, I don't know exactly what JustMe's position is, but personally I am of the opinion that we definitively ARE going to see the effects of global warming, and thus we should be conducting a double pronged effort of, yes, reducing our carbon emissions, but ALSO of trying to ameliorate the effects of global warming. Global Warming isn't going to hurt us nearly as badly as it's going to affect Bangladesh. We should be spending money to help them build up their infrastructure so they are not so prone to dramatic flooding.
Or, we could at least rebuild our own infrastructure. I hear most of New Orleans is still not rebuilt to modern flood standards, and we've spent less than 2 percent of the money supposed to be set aside for reconstruction there.
There are a lot of things Republicans and independants are sick of in the Rethug party. Let's hope they're still sick of them by next year.
Comments Closed
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).