182
top 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] HulkSmashBurgers@reddthat.com 20 points 2 months ago

The fossil fuel industry is a drag on energy innovation. Though it will be hard to unseat them from their position of power.

[-] just_another_person@lemmy.world 16 points 2 months ago

They could have used their wealth to pivot into clean energy a long time ago, but decided on this path instead. Stupid.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

They’re probably planning to pull a big tobacco and buy the largest alternative energy companies once they face industry revenue decline.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

That’s a given

[-] Coelacanth@feddit.nu 16 points 2 months ago

I wish it was possible, but I'll settle for a better energy policy than Trump's - and I quote - "drill baby, drill!"

[-] anticolonialist@lemmy.world -5 points 2 months ago

Trump said drill baby drill and Biden did. I see no difference

[-] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago

You may need cataract surgery if the world looks that black and white to you.

[-] kmartburrito@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

Look at their post history and tag them in Lemmy so they stick out and you will start seeing a clear pattern

[-] anticolonialist@lemmy.world -3 points 2 months ago

Their only differences is how they deliver the message, the end result is the same. Democrats hate Trump because he says the quiet parts out loud. Biden, like Clinton advised, keeps a public policy and a private policy. The public policy is the gaslighting propaganda bullshit, the private policy is what ends up getting passed.

[-] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 13 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I mean you should dream big, but forget it. Nobody that tries to fuck with big oil survives it. Politically and sometimes literally.

Maybe small changes but nothing close to whats necessary.

[-] vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 2 months ago

Bigger body count than Boeing

[-] Scubus@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago

Yeah, I'd like for her to make references to it while campaigning, but not go too hard on it.

Then once she's in office, she makes an executive order immediately allowing all oil refineries to be exploded in an environmentally friendly manner.

[-] nifty@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Climate change is a hydra. I think policy makers need to tax corporations for the damage they do instead of giving carbon offsets, and work with other countries to demand fair wages for all types of workers. No more .50 cent jobs for someone working for an American company in Africa or South East Asia.

Globally, workers also need to unionize, that’s the only way people will get the climate and environmental policies which favor sustainable societal and national growth over short-term vision policies which only favor a few. Tbh, I see a lot of merit in some capitalist ideology, but there needs to be more solar punk capitalism.

[-] Evotech@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

And other delusional thoughts

[-] Spacehooks@reddthat.com 2 points 2 months ago

She needs to not mention guns EVER.

[-] Kiernian@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Seriously.

Like, the Democrats finally learned ONE EFFECTIVE THING with "weird".

It would be super cool if we didn't ONCE AGAIN torpedo the ever-living fuck out ourselves by saying PROVEN STUPID SHIT THAT ALWAYS GUARANTEES THE SAME RESPONSE.

We have at least ten more years before talking about gun control will have the opposite effect it does now.

Currently even mentioning it does nothing demonstrable FOR the person who says it (because it's typically hand waving instead of problem solving) but it sure as hell drives up ammo sales and gun afficianado panic levels.

It's a footgun, not a soapbox.

[-] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

If the US didn't start producing more oil than Saudi Arabia in 2018, that fight might make sense.

[-] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)
[-] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago

I thought it was more recent, thanks. Fixed

[-] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Well no shit they'd say that

What a pointless article

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

Climate activists §, could we keep that on the DL for about twelve weeks? I mean - wink wink nudge? Harris declaring the destruction, nationalization, or other all-out existential attacks on oil isn’t necessary right now and we’ll have a much better chance of doing those things if we don’t throw soup right now.

§ “climate activists” are, of course, corporate news - desperately casting about for some rift to exploit for the horse race coins. Intraparty-interparty, they don’t give a shit. “Find Those Clicks!” the Corporate News Barons shout.

[-] djsoren19@yiffit.net 4 points 2 months ago

Would it actually change anything though? All of the oil companies have already come out in support of Trump and are funneling money towards him. They already don't want Harris and are doing what they can against her.

If she publicly called them out and indicated she would be taking a stand, it might help to further motivate Democrats and leftists.

[-] Kiernian@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Right now they're just waving fistfuls of money in Trump's direction and he gets to pick up whatever falls out of their hands as they're waving. It's definitely big money that he's getting, but it's ultimately castoffs to the people who attempted to BUY GOLF ON A PLANETARY SCALE just because they felt like it.

Right now any mumbling about climate change is status quo for them.

Drawing direct ire would be an INCREDIBLY STUPID CHOICE right now. Get into office FIRST, then go after the oil barons.

Publicly call out poorly designed cities, under funded public transportation, and corporate resistance to working from home.

Do not publicly call out the oil barons by name.

Not right now.

Do not summon what you cannot banish.

[-] snugglesthefalse@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago

What's with the simoleon symbols?

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Asterisks format for italics and bold, and bullet points, so i can’t use them for footnotes. That was one I figured wouldn’t be confused for formatting.

And yes I could escape it, but that just poses other problems.

[-] MediaBiasFactChecker@lemmy.world -3 points 2 months ago

The Guardian Media Bias Fact Check Credibility: [Medium] (Click to view Full Report)

Name: The Guardian Bias: Left-Center
Factual Reporting: Mixed
Country: United Kingdom
Full Report: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-guardian/

Check the bias and credibility of this article on Ground.News


Thanks to Media Bias Fact Check for their access to the API.
Please consider supporting them by donating.

Footer

Beep boop. This action was performed automatically. If you dont like me then please block me.💔
If you have any questions or comments about me, you can make a post to LW Support lemmy community.

this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2024
182 points (98.9% liked)

politics

19100 readers
4233 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.
  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