this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2023
612 points (95.8% liked)

politics

19144 readers
2220 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

With the 2024 presidential race beginning to unfold, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont said he believes that President Joe Biden will again earn the Democratic nomination — and the president likely win reelection if he runs on a strong progressive campaign.

"I think at this moment ... we have got to bring the progressive community together to say, you know what, we're going to fight for a progressive agenda but we cannot have four more years of Donald Trump in the White House," Sanders said Sunday on "Face the Nation."

Sanders endorsed Mr. Biden in April. Sanders referenced several of those issues in underscoring what he believes is the importance of building "a strong progressive agenda" to win the presidency in 2024.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

As well as mandated increasing federal fossil fuel extraction leases many times over before beginning any expansion of renewable energy.

It's amazing how neoliberals will just blindly believe the propaganda of Politico, NYT and WaPo 🤦

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Would you rather be dependent on foreign supply while waiting for renewable energy to be built? A lot of america still runs on oil and it's gonna take a long time for that change even with the green transition finally happening.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Fun fact: the US already produces much more oil than it uses and exports most of it.

The "energy independency needs oil" argument is a false one made up by the fossil fuel industry and the corrupt politicians they own.

Their efforts, not a lack of feasibility, are the main impediments to transitioning to a renewable energy grid, which can be done surprisingly fast (a 50MW wind farm can be operational in 6 months, a 10MW one in only 2, and a solar farm in 6-12) and the resulting decentralised grid would be much more resilient in avoiding catastrophic failure than one focused on a few large fossil fuel burning plants that stop working every time it gets too hot or too cold.

In conclusion: your pro-fossil fuel argument is invalid and you've fallen for empty propaganda.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

As an actual climate lobbyist, the IRA is the single most effective piece of climate legislation ever passed.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Lobbying for WHICH climate action group, though? Some are as good for climate action as Neera Tanden's CAP is for progress.

In fact, you're sounding like a more polite version of her right now with your exceedingly vague yet utterly false trumpeting of neoliberal saviours 🙄

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Lobbying for WHICH climate action group

That's not relevant to their point

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's relevant to whether their profession lends any legitimacy to their ridiculous claim.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"Doxx yourself or you're a liar"

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Nope, that's not at all what I was saying.

I was pointing out that not all climate lobbyists know any more about climate policy and the content of specific bills than reasonably diligent laypeople.

As such, "as a climate lobbyist", does not necessarily lend the authority to the following statement that some might imagine.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They seem to be able to detect foreign propaganda and are immune to it, and deny US propaganda exists, despite living in the propagandized country on earth

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

And even then, they're much better than Republicans who can't detect and are extremely susceptible to foreign propaganda.

Of course, "much better than Republicans at resisting propaganda" is like "much better at bowling than an armadillo". The species just isn't built for it 🤷