Climate at the Debate: Trump Ignored the Question and Harris Hedged
Open link in next tab
nytimes.com
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/11/climate/trump-harris-climate-change-debate.html?unlocked_article_code=1.J04.43ak.UFAZm6sI_zQ0
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/11/climate/trump-harris-climate-change-debate.html?unlocked_article_code=1.J04.43ak.UFAZm6sI_zQ0
It's unfortunately a Catch 22. Even if Kamala has an excellent plan in mind for transitioning away from fossil fuels, she has an election to win. There's no answer she can give that would make everyone happy. Say she'll come down hard on fossil fuels, and she might lose states like PA and cause Big Oil to invest in Republican races, potentially hamstringing any chance at a three-chamber path forward. On the other hand, she can't glibly say, "Drill, baby, drill," because she'd lose the climate-aware vote she needs to win.
And I don't give a fuck about what Trump says. He can eat glass and drink gasoline, for all I care.
Agreed. The problem is so deeply embedded in our society that any change that doesn't have some profit isn't going to gain traction. A real plan for climate adaptation would piss off both corporate and public and she'd be out asap for the next person who promises to keep things status quo.
I have hope she'll continue to move us towards clean energy solutions, etc., but we won't see or hear any definitive plans until she's in the Oval Office.
Just another reason our election shouldn't be entirely dependent on 10,000 people in Pennsylvania.
It might not be, since she's doing well in several swing states, but it's best not to leave it up to chance, especially when we're already seeing efforts to set up an eventual challenge to the results.
I would gladly watch it all burn down if I could just see one presidential debate where the candidates answered the fucking questions.