# Do you believe climate change will be a campaign issue? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [April 26, 2012, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-climate-change-will-be-a-campaign-issue/620029 "2012-04-26T15:45:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Koxinga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/4af34b/32.png) [@Koxinga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Koxinga)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2012, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-climate-change-will-be-a-campaign-issue/620029/1 "2012-04-26T15:45:49Z")
I was kind of surprised to see [Obama make this assertion](http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/75590.html). Do you think he’s on the right track to challenge Romney on this front? ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2012, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-climate-change-will-be-a-campaign-issue/620029/2 "2012-04-26T16:15:27Z")
It all depends on the audience. The readership of _Rolling Stone_ is, I imagine, pretty left-wing, so an interview with them is for getting the enthusiasm of the base. So, sure, emphasize climate change there. I don’t for a minute expect that he’ll mention it at all at a campaign stop in West Virginia, though. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2012, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-climate-change-will-be-a-campaign-issue/620029/3 "2012-04-26T16:23:46Z")
I would have to agree for the “simple” reason that fossil fuel companies are financing a lot of the “climate zombie” congress critters that do tell their districts and states that there is nothing to worry about, and then just by “coincidence” then pass laws that are the less inconvenient to the fossil fuel companies or attempt to dismantle environmental rules. ---
**Author:** ![CJJ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecc23a/32.png) [@CJJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CJJ)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2012, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-climate-change-will-be-a-campaign-issue/620029/4 "2012-04-26T20:53:39Z")
I doubt they’ll actually debate the issue. If you look thru the article, you see how Obama contrasts the Republican party’s current position with the views of their nominee (McCain) in 2008 to illustrate how much the GOP has changed in just four years. I believe Obama is raising this because Romney’s stance on global warming has been an embarassing flip-flop. [Here’s Romney last summer](http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/56580.html) answering a question at a town hall meeting in New Hampshire: [QUOTE=Mitt Romney August 2011] "I don’t speak for the scientific community, of course, but I believe the world is getting warmer, and I believe that humans have contributed to that. I can’t prove that, but I believe based on what I read that the world is getting warmer… “No. 2, I believe that humans contribute to that. I don’t know how much our contribution is to that, because I know there’s been periods of greater heat and warmth than in the past, but I believe we contribute to that. And so I think it’s important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may well be significant contributors to the climate change and global warming that you’re seeing.” [/quote] Two months later during the NH Primary, he [reversed his position](http://newhampshireprimary.blogspot.com/2011/10/mitt-romney-turns-global-warming.html): [QUOTE=Mitt Romney October 2011] “My view is that we don’t know what’s causing climate change on this planet. And the idea of spending trillions and trillions of dollars to try to reduce CO2 emissions is not the right course for us.” [/quote] ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2012, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-climate-change-will-be-a-campaign-issue/620029/5 "2012-04-26T21:08:19Z")
> [@](#): > > Do you believe climate change will be a campaign issue? It might be a minor side issue, but it’s not going to be a major game changing issue. Basically, most people who ‘believe’ in AGW are already going to be voting for Obama, and most people who think it’s a hoax will be voting for Romney…and that accounts for the 20/20% of hard core voters that vote by party regardless. Most VOTERS probably don’t care, or don’t care enough to make it a vertical issue on which their vote will hinge. This campaign is going to hinge on the economy and unemployment, and the two candidates vision for how we improve both and revitalize that economy in the face of all the shit happening not only in the US but world wide. THAT is going to be the main issue and theme being debated. Climate change? It may get something on page 2, if it’s lucky…probably more like page 10. JMHO, but that’s how I see it. Things like climate change get more traction in years where the economy is doing well and unemployment is fairly low and people can focus on other things. -XT ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2012, 6:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-climate-change-will-be-a-campaign-issue/620029/6 "2012-04-27T06:27:37Z")
As it turns out a green economy also means jobs. > **[Home | Washington Climate Action](https://climate.wa.gov/)** But that is not where I think the environment and the climate will turn into campaign issues, it will be thanks to the intransigence of the Republican politicians. [http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/01/09/400795/network-news-coverage-of-climate-change-collapsed-in-2011/](http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/01/09/400795/network-news-coverage-of-climate-change-collapsed-in-2011/) > [@](#): > > Arizona lawmakers appear close to sending to Gov. Jan Brewer a tea party-backed bill that proponents say would stop a United Nations takeover conspiracy but that critics claim could end state and cities’ pollution-fighting efforts and even dismantle the state unemployment office. > > A final legislative vote is expected Monday on a bill that would outlaw government support of any of the 27 principles contained in the 1992 United Nations Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, also sometimes referred to as Agenda 21. > > Senate Bill 1507 was passed by the state Senate last month and received an initial House affirmation Wednesday. It is sponsored by state Sen. Judy Burges, R-Sun City West, who also sponsored a state birther bill that Brewer vetoed last year. > > “The bill is designed to protect the rights of Arizona citizens and prevent encroachment on those rights by international institutions,” Burges told [msnbc.com](http://msnbc.com) in an email. “We have three branches of government and when one branch preempts the process through executive orders, the balance of power is lost in the process. It is that simple – no more, no less.” Now why is this bill moronic? Besides its implied conspiracy theory origins: > [@](#): > > “It’s the most poorly crafted bill in this state,” Campbell told [msnbc.com](http://msnbc.com). “It’s so broad and overreaching, we’re not sure what it could impact.” > > Among the U.N. declaration’s non-binding principles are calls for sustainable development, environmental protection, eradicating poverty, eliminating unsustainable production and consumption patterns, economic growth and the participation of women in government decisions. > > “We wouldn’t be able to use CFL light bulbs in state buildings because that would be considered energy efficiency,” Campbell said. > > Campbell also said that the state’s Economic Security Department, which handles unemployment and welfare benefits, could be outlawed because it has to do with eradicating poverty. > > Also, Arizona universities have sustainability programs that could be banned if the bill becomes law, Campbell warned. > > Arizona State University has a School of Sustainability, Northern Arizona University offers a master’s in sustainable communities, and the University of Arizona has an environment and sustainability portal. A few months ago I mentioned that universities and local planners do listen to scientists, not to politicians, as NPR reported they were working to deal with the most likely outcome of global warming in a place like Arizona; with planned underground reservoirs and other public works. Meaning that while climate republican zombies are oozing around the capitol, they were mostly harmless and just did pandering talk on this issue. This is way different, it is now politicians telling the experts and engineers to actively ignore science and do nothing. I do not see how this would not become a campaign issue, although I agree it would not become a leading one. (And it will be not as important thanks also to the so called “liberal media”) [http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/01/09/400795/network-news-coverage-of-climate-change-collapsed-in-2011/](http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/01/09/400795/network-news-coverage-of-climate-change-collapsed-in-2011/) ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2012, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-climate-change-will-be-a-campaign-issue/620029/7 "2012-04-27T22:35:14Z")
Not climate change per se, but environmental regulation will certainly be an issue. ---
**Author:** ![Koxinga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/4af34b/32.png) [@Koxinga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Koxinga)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2012, 1:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-climate-change-will-be-a-campaign-issue/620029/8 "2012-04-28T01:36:35Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Not climate change per se, but environmental regulation will certainly be an issue. You mean like [this](http://edition.cnn.com/2012/04/27/us/epa-crucify/index.html)? Yes, I could see how the Romney campaign might be able to make a bit of hay out of that, especially if overzealous regulation of oil and gas companies can be linked in the public’s mind to rising gas prices at the pump. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2012, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-climate-change-will-be-a-campaign-issue/620029/9 "2012-04-28T03:59:05Z")
Except, isn’t the price of gas at the pump actually falling? It certainly is in my area…it’s down about $.10-.15/gallon lately around here. -XT ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2012, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-climate-change-will-be-a-campaign-issue/620029/10 "2012-04-28T16:39:44Z")
> [@Koxinga](#): > > You mean like [this](http://edition.cnn.com/2012/04/27/us/epa-crucify/index.html)? Yes, I could see how the Romney campaign might be able to make a bit of hay out of that, especially if overzealous regulation of oil and gas companies can be linked in the public’s mind to rising gas prices at the pump. I don’t know if I’d call that “overzealous regulation” so much as “abject stupidity.” ---
**Author:** ![Docta\_G](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/2bfe46/32.png) [@Docta\_G](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Docta_G)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2012, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-climate-change-will-be-a-campaign-issue/620029/11 "2012-04-28T20:01:15Z")
> [@Koxinga](#): > > I was kind of surprised to see [Obama make this assertion](http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/75590.html). Do you think he’s on the right track to challenge Romney on this front? Obama is just pandering to the people on the left he alienated in his first term in office. He can go fuck himself. ---
**Author:** ![BigAppleBucky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigapplebucky/32/178_2.png) [@BigAppleBucky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigAppleBucky)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2012, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-climate-change-will-be-a-campaign-issue/620029/12 "2012-04-28T23:52:20Z")
> [@Koxinga](#): > > I was kind of surprised to see [Obama make this assertion](http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/75590.html). Do you think he’s on the right track to challenge Romney on this front? Short answer - a very minor one. Should it be an issue? I certainly think environmental issues as a whole should be. Not just climate change, but over-fishing, strip mining, air and water pollution, etc. And why not? Aside from avoiding blowing up the planet, what is more important than the health of our only home? A related issue would be the anti-science, anti-objectivity of the climate change (and evolution) deniers. This is a major failure of the American education system. The facts and the science should be the starting point of a debate, not the very subject. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2012, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-climate-change-will-be-a-campaign-issue/620029/13 "2012-04-29T00:14:28Z")
> [@Docta\_G](#): > > Obama is just pandering to the people on the left he alienated in his first term in office. He can go fuck himself. Look, cut him some slack. Consider the breadth and bitterness and energy of the backlash provoked even by the things he dared to do. Did you see that coming?! I didn’t.