A popular misconception about identity politics...

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Are you having reading difficulties? She's a Trump voter.

But isn't the point of supporting Biden that he's more likely to win independents? And this woman was an independent. So, isn't the question of whether or not she would vote for him relevant?

 

[anticlimatic]

gangs of liberals are kind of fun though, they tend to be multicultural, sort of like the gangs Charles Bronson always had to fight in the Death Wish movies. Gangs of conservatives...dueling banjos.

Dueling wife beaters and anger management issues. I work with 90 percent conservatives and I dislike most of them as people, even though I coincidentally agree with their politics.

 

[cascadeco]

US should be the hero in the climate story | TheHill

America leads in clean fossil fuel energy, and pollutants are down 73%.

Why you tout these stats, the opinion piece you share here even stating within it that the figure is since the EPA's inception, is beyond me, as the current administration has no bearing whatsoever on why this figure came to be. The current administration has, however, attempted to do its utmost to disband the EPA, which is why it is truly puzzling and hypocritical why you or anyone is applauding the current admin on its upstanding environmental record and patting the U.S. On the back for its exemplary work on the global climate whilst also applauding the current admin who did and does nothing to further this.


Is Trump Rolling Back Clean Water Regulations?

Trump EPA Acts to Roll Back Control on Climate-Changing Coal

Toxic Superfund Cleanups Decline to More Than 30-Year Low


And Trump himself loves the EPA and wholeheartedly supports it? (and if you agree he does NOT place importance in the EPA, for God's sake don't cite opinion pieces that use stats based on the EPA being in existence!)

Trump to Appoint Anti-EPA Attorney General to Lead EPA

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/everything-donald-trump-accomplished/

This stuff needs to be spelled out why?


I could spend days digging up all of the current Administration's attempts to curtail environmental health, remove protections, and so on. Would you like me to? (I won't; this is a rhetorical question). It doesn't matter if the response to this is in the realm of 'Oh it didn't actually go through/wasn't passed by Congress/ it was overruled by federal courts,' etc. As, in fact, many of his attempts have been blocked by courts. But don't pretend the administration actually works towards improving the state of the environment. The fact is, the administration *attempts to reverse previously implemented environmental protections and wildlife/wilderness protections*, and has no priority whatsoever of building a legacy of environmental stewardship or reducing pollution. It certainly has no qualms, though, of using previous administration's efforts and stats built up *prior* to its own policy change attempts, though, to act as if it is doing wonderful things in the name of the environment. That opinion piece is laughable and hypocritical in that respect.

 

[The Cat]

Why you tout these stats, the opinion piece you share here even stating within it that the figure is since the EPA's inception, is beyond me, as the current administration has no bearing whatsoever on why this figure came to be. The current administration has, however, attempted to do its utmost to disband the EPA, which is why it is truly puzzling and hypocritical why you or anyone is applauding the current admin on its upstanding environmental record and patting the U.S. On the back for its exemplary work on the global climate whilst also applauding the current admin who did and does nothing to further this.


Is Trump Rolling Back Clean Water Regulations?

Trump EPA Acts to Roll Back Control on Climate-Changing Coal

Toxic Superfund Cleanups Decline to More Than 30-Year Low


And Trump himself loves the EPA and wholeheartedly supports it? (and if you agree he does NOT place importance in the EPA, for God's sake don't cite opinion pieces that use stats based on the EPA being in existence!)

Trump to Appoint Anti-EPA Attorney General to Lead EPA

FACT CHECK: Everything Donald Trump Has Accomplished in Just Four Months?

This stuff needs to be spelled out why?


I could spend days digging up all of the current Administration's attempts to curtail environmental health, remove protections, and so on. Would you like me to? (I won't; this is a rhetorical question). It doesn't matter if the response to this is in the realm of 'Oh it didn't actually go through/wasn't passed by Congress/ it was overruled by federal courts,' etc. As, in fact, many of his attempts have been blocked by courts. But don't pretend the administration actually works towards improving the state of the environment. The fact is, the administration *attempts to reverse previously implemented environmental protections and wildlife/wilderness protections*, and has no priority whatsoever of building a legacy of environmental stewardship or reducing pollution. It certainly has no qualms, though, of using previous administration's efforts and stats built up *prior* to its own policy change attempts, though, to act as if it is doing wonderful things in the name of the environment. That opinion piece is laughable and hypocritical in that respect.

 

[á´…eparted]

Yeah seriously, this. I don't have the patience to correct people anymore, but we will always need people to do it.

 

[The Cat]

Yeah seriously, this. I don't have the patience to correct people anymore, but we will always need people to do it.

The economy is gonna mean fuck all if we keep fucking the environment like this. It's killing my state. Literally.

 

[á´…eparted]

The economy is gonna mean fuck all if we keep fucking the environment like this. It's killing my state. Literally.

The environment is going to be the sole reason the economy will mean fuck all. It's just going to become an increasingly larger money sink with minimal financial return. It's unavoidable at this point.

Honestly, if anyone is living in an area that tangibly looks like the environment is going belly up, start planning on getting out now if possible. There's time, but it will take long term planning. It's one of the reasons I'm angling to leave the country.

 

[Maou]

Why you tout these stats, the opinion piece you share here even stating within it that the figure is since the EPA's inception, is beyond me, as the current administration has no bearing whatsoever on why this figure came to be. The current administration has, however, attempted to do its utmost to disband the EPA, which is why it is truly puzzling and hypocritical why you or anyone is applauding the current admin on its upstanding environmental record and patting the U.S. On the back for its exemplary work on the global climate whilst also applauding the current admin who did and does nothing to further this.


Is Trump Rolling Back Clean Water Regulations?

Trump EPA Acts to Roll Back Control on Climate-Changing Coal

Toxic Superfund Cleanups Decline to More Than 30-Year Low


And Trump himself loves the EPA and wholeheartedly supports it? (and if you agree he does NOT place importance in the EPA, for God's sake don't cite opinion pieces that use stats based on the EPA being in existence!)

Trump to Appoint Anti-EPA Attorney General to Lead EPA

FACT CHECK: Everything Donald Trump Has Accomplished in Just Four Months?

This stuff needs to be spelled out why?


I could spend days digging up all of the current Administration's attempts to curtail environmental health, remove protections, and so on. Would you like me to? (I won't; this is a rhetorical question). It doesn't matter if the response to this is in the realm of 'Oh it didn't actually go through/wasn't passed by Congress/ it was overruled by federal courts,' etc. As, in fact, many of his attempts have been blocked by courts. But don't pretend the administration actually works towards improving the state of the environment. The fact is, the administration *attempts to reverse previously implemented environmental protections and wildlife/wilderness protections*, and has no priority whatsoever of building a legacy of environmental stewardship or reducing pollution. It certainly has no qualms, though, of using previous administration's efforts and stats built up *prior* to its own policy change attempts, though, to act as if it is doing wonderful things in the name of the environment. That opinion piece is laughable and hypocritical in that respect.

I posted an article touting the decrease in CO2, and you say say I am wrong and post a bunch of articles on other things?

EPA is an organization, and can easily be bloated. Reducing the agency doesn't mean that it reduces their effectiveness. Things should be efficient.

Also, that whole water rollback is a big nothing burger. As its literally just fighting over what the definition of what a body of water is. Trump simply narrowed it to not include seasonal runnoff in protections. Its just more efficiency. EPA will have less areas to monitor that are not even around for more than a few months a year. Its not like people are polluting runźoff creeks deep in the mountains. Its city factories that do the water pollution/water treatment dumping into rivers As long as treatment is enforced, there is nothing to worry about. This is entirely designed to make Trump look like he is sabotaging the enviroment doing literally nothing of note.

Diversity of energy reduces demand on a single fuel, which reduces enviromental impact. You need to accept green energy is not viable everywhere. Quit catastrophizing.

Snopes is also a Liberal website. Fact checks themselves, are propaganda for the Democratic party. Yet you say I am posting opinions. You just did too.

 

[The Cat]

Oh bless your heart.

 

[cascadeco]

I posted an article touting the decrease in CO2, and you say say I am wrong and post a bunch of articles on other things?

EPA is an organization, and can easily be bloated. Reducing the agency doesn't mean that it reduces their effectiveness. Things should be efficient.

Also, that whole water rollback is a big nothing burger. As its literally just fighting over what the definition of what a body of water is. Trump simply narrowed it to not include seasonal runnoff in protections. Its just more efficiency. EPA will have less areas to monitor that are not even around for more than a few months a year. Its not like people are polluting runźoff creeks deep in the mountains. Its city factories that do the water pollution/water treatment dumping into rivers As long as treatment is enforced, there is nothing to worry about. This is entirely designed to make Trump look like he is sabotaging the enviroment doing literally nothing of note.

Diversity of energy reduces demand on a single fuel, which reduces enviromental impact. You need to accept green energy is not viable everywhere. Quit catastrophizing.

Snopes is also a Liberal website. Fact checks themselves, are propaganda for the Democratic party. Yet you say I am posting opinions. You just did too.

I see you understand a lot about water and watersheds. That whole paragraph is just ignorance. As for the rest, not worth my time.

Look, if you like Trump, great. If you value what he stands for and drives to achieve, fine. But to even pretend one of those things he drives to achieve is environmental health and improving it, is nonsense.

 

[Maou]

I see you understand a lot about water and watersheds. That whole paragraph is just ignorance. As for the rest, not worth my time.

Look, if you like Trump, great. If you value what he stands for and drives to achieve, fine. But to even pretend one of those things he drives to achieve is environmental health and improving it, is nonsense.

I think he reduces costs of running things that already exists.

 

[á´…eparted]

Look, if you like Trump, great.

No, actually, it's not. It's really fucking horrible and it's a threat to everyone's lives, including people who aren't alive yet.

 

[cascadeco]

No, actually, it's not. It's really fucking horrible and it's a threat to everyone's lives, including people who aren't alive yet.

Hahaha. (Don't disagree, but my main point is, get a reality check on what is really his priority; the environment is not. All I really want at this point is for intellectual honesty - it's just silly to read defenses on his policies and such, crafted in a way to act as if he really is all about environmental stewardship. I just... My head explodes)

 

[Maou]

Yes, I am a crazy uneducated redneck. Don't mind me as I laugh at you when Trump wins 2020.

 

[The Cat]

 

[cascadeco]

Yes, I am a crazy uneducated redneck. Don't mind me as I laugh at you when Trump wins 2020.

Who says he isn't gonna win? That's not the point; he very likely will.

I am simply telling you that your understanding of water and watersheds / how that works is ignorant. And that is true, based on what you wrote. If you actually understood how important those water supplies are that are only there 'a few months of the year', and that every single drop of water eventually enters larger permanent bodies of water, you would realize the rollback is a very big deal and you would not have said what you said.

 

[Maou]

Who says he isn't gonna win? That's not the point; he very likely will.

I am simply telling you that your understanding of water and watersheds / how that works is ignorant. And that is true, based on what you wrote. If you actually understood how important those water supplies are that are only there 'a few months of the year', and that every single drop of water eventually enters larger permanent bodies of water, you would realize the rollback is a very big deal and you would not have said what you said.

I am being dramatic. I am done with talking politics tbh. Im now more interested in mindsets.

Isnt the main concern pollution?

 

[cascadeco]

Isnt the main concern pollution though?

Whose main concern? Trumps? Yours?

 

[Maou]

Whose main concern? Trumps? Yours?

The EPA. I assume the protect the enviroment from humans yes?

 

[cascadeco]

The EPA. I assume the protect the enviroment from humans yes?

I do not know the Mission Statement of the EPA when it began, I don't feel like googling it.