this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2024
152 points (95.8% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2710 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
top 5 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 months ago

"Trump ~~will~~ would..."

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago

With the stroke of a sharpie.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

On the one hand, Project 2025 is deeply terrifying. It's a recipe book for full-blown authoritarian fascism in the US. And its stance towards climate may actually herald in an ending of this phase of human civilization because of how monumentally, mindblowingly stupid and evil its contributors are.

On the other hand, Trump would never do what he was told. He would never be organized or deliberate enough to carry it out. He'd just keep tweeting all day and being completely, psychotically capricious. So at least I know that particular cake is unlikely to be baked.

The really obnoxious thing about all this stuff is that Biden's record on climate is excellent. It stands on its own, even before comparisons to the pure anti-science madness of Trump. Which progressives mostly don't even know about, and even the ones who have a vague idea he's done something often hand wave it all as insufficient or misguided without bothering to know even the most basics of basics about the policies.

Climate is an existential threat and it would be hard to come up with any more effective policy for addressing it within the American system than the IRA and other actions Biden has somehow managed to get through a majority climate-hostile Senate. It's been excellent. Get out and vote for more of it or else we may all be doomed.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago

I still don’t understand how people think the Trunp does anything. He is a crybaby wearing literal diapers who is only job is to throw a temper tantrum to distract everyone from the horrible people around himself with who do this evil shit. He is an enabler and a distraction.

The only reason the uneducated masses are voting for him is because they are too stupid to see that he represents the people who are actually ruining their lives and decreasing the quality of life.

They believe they are giving the finger to the system, and the Trump will magically make things better again. He is a snake oil salesman in a shit filled diaper.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Joe Biden’s presidency has increased the profile of the science-based federal agency but its future has been put in doubt if Trump wins a second term and at a time when climate impacts continue to worsen.

“The National Oceanographic [sic] and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa) should be dismantled and many of its functions eliminated, sent to other agencies, privatized, or placed under the control of states and territories,” the proposal says.

That’s a sign that the far right has “no interest in climate truth”, said Chris Gloninger, who last year left his job as a meteorologist in Iowa after receiving death threats over his spotlighting of global warming.

The guidebook chapter detailing the strategy, which was recently spotlighted by E&E News, describes Noaa as a “colossal operation that has become one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry and, as such, is harmful to future US prosperity”.

It was written by Thomas Gilman, a former Chrysler executive who during Trump’s presidency was chief financial officer for Noaa’s parent body, the commerce department.

In the post-second world war era, John F Kennedy called for a global weather-forecasting system that relied on unprecedented levels of scientific exchange.


The original article contains 1,049 words, the summary contains 197 words. Saved 81%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!