The Environment

knapplc said:
What policies or practices could Democrats have adopted to prevent Republicans falling in love with fascism? 
Click to expand...
Republicans would never win a national election if Democrats were just even a little competent. Republicans are like 25% of the country. Democrats could get 80+ million every election if they didnt care so much about appeasing republican voters. Instead they keep moving right with the republicans and it keeps people at home during elections. 

 
Um, show sources and graphs show exactly what I’m saying.   US grew in population, GDP and stayed the same with greenhouse emissions prior to Paris Climate accord even being a twinkle in the greenies minds much less an agreement.  

US set an example by the actions of the last 30 years not some words on paper with an ‘Accord’ that mean next to nothing.  
 

Thank you for agreeing and help prove my point by the way.  Glad we are on the same page that the US is doing just fine without Paris accord  

 
Archy1221 said:
I feel you have a way of thinking then try and work backwards to prove a point that never gets proven. Like you are not interested in learning.   
 

First, what exactly did the US change when it “entered into” the climate agreement before ‘formally’ exiting in 2020 besides maybe reporting certain numbers? 
 

Next, US growth while keeping emissions the same.   

Lastly, ask the question of why we don’t rely on nuclear more and who is holding that back?  

US GDP in 1990= 5.96 trillion.  US GDP in 2019= 21.4trillion

US greenhouse gas emissions 1990~= 6.2 metric tons.  US greenhouse gas emissions in 2019 ~= 6.2 metric tons. 
It’s almost as if China is not using newer technology to keep costs in check to export cheap products while the US has grown roughly 4 times the size while keeping its emissions in check.  So why do we need to enter into a climate agreement for something we already do??
 

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks
 



https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/092915/5-countries-produce-most-carbon-dioxide-co2.asp


Share of CO2 Emissions By Country 






 
China (28%)



 
Rest of the World (23%)



 
United States (15%)



 
India (7%)



 
Russia (5%)



 
Japan (3%)



 
Germany (2%)



 
Iran (2%)



 
South Korea (2%)



 
Saudi Arabia (2%)



 
Indonesia (2%)



 
Canada (2%)



 
Mexico (1%)



 
South Africa (1%)



 
Brazil (1%)



 
Turkey (1%)



 
Australia (1%)



 
United Kingdom (1%)



 
Poland (1%)






View attachment 17984
Click to expand...




You’re projecting.

And you seem to have a lack of understanding of how much China has changed in that same period. It’s considered the fastest period of development in human history. And you are again ignoring per capita emissions. 

 
Frott Scost said:
Republicans would never win a national election if Democrats were just even a little competent. Republicans are like 25% of the country. Democrats could get 80+ million every election if they didnt care so much about appeasing republican voters. Instead they keep moving right with the republicans and it keeps people at home during elections. 
Click to expand...




Some of it may be incompentance but going further left doesn't tend to please corporations, which some leaders in the DNC are beholden to. What needs to happen is more progressives winning primaries.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Frott Scost said:
Republicans would never win a national election if Democrats were just even a little competent. Republicans are like 25% of the country. Democrats could get 80+ million every election if they didnt care so much about appeasing republican voters. Instead they keep moving right with the republicans and it keeps people at home during elections. 
Click to expand...
I don't agree with that.

The reason Biden received 80+ million votes is because of two reasons:

a)  A huge number of people realized Trump needed to be defeated.

and

b). A relatively moderate candidate appeared on the ballot for the Ds.  

There were a lot of people who typically would not have voted for a Democrat, felt comfortable voting for Biden to defeat Trump.  I don't think that would have been the case if someone like Bernie, Warren or AOC were the candidate.

 
BigRedBuster said:
There were a lot of people who typically would not have voted for a Democrat, felt comfortable voting for Biden to defeat Trump.  I don't think that would have been the case if someone like Bernie, Warren or AOC were the candidate.
Click to expand...


Exactly. If Bernie were the candidate trump would have won reelection - difficult as that is to fathom. 

 
knapplc said:
Exactly. If Bernie were the candidate trump would have won reelection - difficult as that is to fathom. 
Click to expand...
Hard disagree. Bernie would have won by more than Biden did - difficult as that is to fathom.

And if Bernie had been on the ballot in 2016, Trump never gets elected to begin with.

 
RedDenver said:
Hard disagree. Bernie would have won by more than Biden did - difficult as that is to fathom.

And if Bernie had been on the ballot in 2016, Trump never gets elected to begin with.
Click to expand...


Extreme candidates don't drive the center. Bernie is pretty far left, we can all agree.

He never polled remotely as high as Biden. There's no solid evidence to support that he would have won by a larger margin than the guy we have now.

 
RedDenver said:
Hard disagree. Bernie would have won by more than Biden did - difficult as that is to fathom.

And if Bernie had been on the ballot in 2016, Trump never gets elected to begin with.
Click to expand...
This is interesting.  I don't know if I agree just because I am not sure if I know one Bernie supporter but I think in 2016, had it been Bern vs Don, it would have been one of the most interesting elections ever.

But you are probably right about 2020 as well, I think the D's could have run anyone (but Hillary) and won with ease.  Corona and Floyd ruined any change Trump had to win.  

Now, Bernie dealing with Corona would have made a lot of Americans (that ones that did not lose their jobs) really happy, because that dude would have been passing out money.

It is sad that Bern didn't get the chance because the D's hate him so much.

 
knapplc said:
Extreme candidates don't drive the center. Bernie is pretty far left, we can all agree.

He never polled remotely as high as Biden. There's no solid evidence to support that he would have won by a larger margin than the guy we have now.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but in 2016 and 20, it would have been "Extreme Bernie" vs "Extreme Trump"

Oh well, we will never know now.

 
knapplc said:
Extreme candidates don't drive the center. Bernie is pretty far left, we can all agree.

He never polled remotely as high as Biden. There's no solid evidence to support that he would have won by a larger margin than the guy we have now.
Click to expand...
There's no solid evidence for your claim either - it's just our opinions.

BigRedBuster said:
This is easy to believe if you're someone who wants an extreme candidate.  But....that doesn't play well with the middle and a lot of those people would have sat out.
Click to expand...
Everyone keeps talking about the center but that assumes several things: 1) the "center" is an actual position people hold 2) people in the center are a significant population of the voters compared to the non-center 3) the center people wouldn't have voted Bernie even though the alternative was Trump 4) Bernie wouldn't have made in-roads with the center during his general election campaign.

Bernie tends to do well with voters when he talks about his policies. I think it's more likely Bernie would have moved more people to voting for him than Biden did. Bernie would still have the anti-Trump vote plus he'd have a plan and policies to talk about in the campaign. Plus while he caucuses with the Dems, he's still an independent, which gives him an appeal as non-partisan and as an outsider that I think is underappreciated.

 
Back
Top