110
Environmental activists urge Kamala Harris to go big on climate: ‘She’s got to seize the moment’
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2024
110 points (98.2% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5022 readers
401 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
She doesn't want to.
She does not want to talk about it. However she has actually a pretty good record of supporting climate action like sponsoring the Green New Deal, which she mostly got passed in form of the inflation reduction act. Action is worth so much more then words.
The reason she does not want to do it, is that it is better to run on women's rights and workers rights. Trump has an awful record on it as well and a lot more people care about it.
Do you also want to score her some points by claiming that she’s pro-Single Payer because she made the strategic decision to sponsor Bernie’s bill when she and her handlers were 100% positive that it wouldn’t pass?
These corrupt Democrats have been ignoring their constituents for decades and you want to pretend that we should give them the benefit of the doubt.
“I know she has never even run for office with anything even remotely resembling Single Payer on her platform but let’s pretend that she was just being shy and she doesn’t need to even though it would allow her to easily score points with constituents and coast into office.”
I’m guessing your 401K is invested in everything you are against.
Only 43% of Americans are for a government run health care system according to the Gallup polls you just provided. That basically excludes single payer health care. What Democrats believe does not matter, as it does not win elections.
Politicans try to judge public sentiment and what it could turn into and only do act, when something is populare. Even then they are more likely to not do it, but for the most part they try to be reelected. Hence trying to appease donors and the public. The simple dumb truth is that climate activists in the US have failed to lay the groundwork for a strong climate policy. Most only just agree that something should be done. Actually doing something, which requires some sort of sacrifice is not going to happen.
The advantage of having somebody like Harris is that they are more likely to actually enact left leaning policies, if they are populare enough. Never expect them to do anything even when necessary, if it destroys their chance of reelection. This also includes all other politicans and last time I checked a president needs the approval of the House to enact laws.
That is absolutely disgusting gaslighting you’re doing. You’re either a healthcare-employee or you’re just an absolute goon of an idiot.
Nice cherry picking. Now do Democrats, you corporatist cuck.
It’s your truth perhaps but a policy that has more than 3/4 of the support of the Dem voting populace should be adopted and advertised loudly lest she actually LOSE this election. Hillary and many before her showed us that people don’t show up to vote for someone who promises “more of the same”. Much like old school republicans and their tough on crime ethos, you don’t inspire people with fear unless you intentionally refuse to offer them anything other than fascism.
The truth is, she doesn’t WANT to say anything about the environment or true Single Payer Medicare for All because she simply doesn’t support it (and the power brokers behind the DNC won’t allow it) and anti-democratically chose her specifically because of her ability to do whatever her donors say behind closed doors.
They are literally standing in the way of what people want. They’ve been doing it since Joe Lieberman castrated Single Payer and you dumbass Dems just keep nodding your heads in agreement.
We need to get the guillotines out and you’re sitting here feigning that things cannot change for the better.
My truth is that most Americans are neither Democrats nor Republicans, but Independents. Both Democrats and Republicans mostly vote for the respective party anyway, so the Independent group is the main target.
If you want to see what happens, when you run a full on populist left platform, look at the UK with Corbin vs Johnson. The media runs a massive shit storm against Corbin and Labour lost in a landslide, besides having some really good points. Core Labour voters, especially the left wing loved Corbin though.
So what you’re saying is it is genuinely damage reduction to work towards the destruction of the US because Americans are so selfish they will overconsume the planet into massive environmental degradation.
More that the US media and politicians are controlled by capitalism and they are not going to do anything hurting that, unless they face a large enough movement, which could actually hurt them. So the best course is to elect the least corrupt politician(and they all are corrupt), who might have some morals in them, to then force them to take action.
Also the US desperately needs stronger and more left leaning institutions.
Agreed. The unfortunate conclusion here is they think that many people (particularly voters they feel are critical to this election) don't actually care about the climate. They're probably right too. So while the DNC platform is clear on their stance, they don't see it as a winning issue from a campaign perspective. Frankly that's not the worst outcome, I care more about action than campaign slogans. They need to win in order to do anything.
This is just about the most gullible, masochistic perspective I have ever seen. Of course an overwhelming MAJORITY of Democrats support clean energy and would be more likely to vote for Kamala if she put it on her platform.
Campaign promises are accepted as goals not set in stone objectives. For example: Joe Biden famously said he would “cure cancer” when he ran in 2020. Tell me, did he cure cancer? How many people criticized him for going back on that campaign promise? Do you see my point? She could promise Single Payer and clean energy and not give it to us but her donors WON’T EVEN LET HER DO THAT in much the same way that they wouldn’t allow a Palestinian to make a speech in front of the DNC yesterday.
They would literally rather lose the presidential election than allow the DNC to be taken over by actual leftists. They like Trumpism because it allows them to stand for exactly nothing other than “not Trump” and if they lose, they can fundraise off of this impending “threat to democracy” in the coming election cycle while allowing their Overton window to ratchet ever-rightward…and you’ll be right there cheering for them, excusing massive election fraud in their primaries (if they even hold a primary) to pick their candidate, falling in line, uncritically letting them convince you that as the years pass, better things are increasingly less and less possible because they are “the adults in the room.”
Who cares?
Politicians can be pushed.