I’m not seeing that the cost of coal for energy production changed at all…
Change means a lot of things to a lot of people, but the desire for change that brought about Brexit and Trump and is empowering right-wing parties all over the West is about elites holding too tightly to the reins of power and treating the people as an obstacle to be overcome rather than their bosses. The lying is the worst part, IMO. It encourages the ignorant to get politically active because they think the politicians they support are fighting for them. But when that turns out to not be true, they take their activism elsewhere. In liberals’ case, it was to Bernie Sanders, for conservatives and even many Obama supporters it was to Donald Trump. Because when Sanders and Trump talked about opposing free trade agreements, they meant it. When Obama said it, it was just strategic positioning.
No, these were brought about by ignorance, racism, and xenophobia.
I think this kind of sentiment might be a small part of it (though your first sentence is still so vague as to be almost meaningless), but I think a much larger part of Brexit and Trump’s success is white nationalism/supremacism, xenophobia, homophobia, transphobia, and other forms of bigotry. That certainly drove Trump’s rise in conservative politics, and victory in the Republican primary contest.
As for lying, I’m skeptical that a truly honest candidate could actually ever get elected. And in my experience and opinion, Obama (and the Democrats in general) have been significantly less dishonest than their opponents. I could be biased, of course, but so could you (and you admittedly are in the case of Obama, considering your intensely negative personal feelings about him).
IMO Obama’s talk was the same campaign BS as every other politician does. The only reason it’s more glaring in the case of Obama was that he is a very skilled orator and had a lot of additional glamor as the first African-American candidate/president, which made people believe it a lot more than they usually do.
As to how much he himself believed in it, again, it’s the same as every other politician. I assume most politicians believe in their own rhetoric, which ultimately boils down to believing in themselves for the most part. If you’re a politician who sees most of the rest of the political establishment with someone of a jaded eye, and see yourself as sincere and committed - which probably applies to most politicians - then you’re going to see the importance of your own election - and the degree of “change” that it represents - as much greater than it actually is.
You’re putting the cart before the horse. Xenophobia and racism are caused by elites disregarding the legitimate complaints of the citizenry about unfettered trade and immigration and even going so far as to call such complaints racist as a way of making the subject taboo. Needless to say, it didn’t work.
That’s ridiculous. You really believe that racism in America is “caused by elites disregarding the legitimate complaints of the citizenry about unfettered trade and immigration”?
Nonsense. Xenophobia and racism are caused by the fact that some people let their reptile brain stems run the show because thinking is too darn much work.
I’ll post here to rebut this although it would probably be best served by being debated in its own thread. Trump is lying in a different way than the typical politician and people are falling for it because they’re not used to seeing the Trump style of lie. Take free trade, NAFTA, the TPP, etc. Trump promised he would oppose them and I give him credit for keeping his word. The problem is that along with that is the implied promise that opposing NAFTA and TPP is a good thing that will benefit the “ordinary American.” On this count Trump has lied his ass off. Same thing with his restrictions on travel from the countries on his travel ban list, his hardline stance on Iran, the plan to get rid of Obamacare, etc. Yes, he is keeping his promise to do or at least try to do all these things, but he has lied on the implied promise that doing these things will make things better for the people that voted for him.
Apparently, you like living in the dark.
Coal produces 33% of the power in the U.S. 33% is natural gas, 20% nuclear. Link.
So, your plan to tell the coal miners to fuck off would lead to massive energy shortages in a very short period of time.
But go on, tell the fuckers who are keeping your lights on and the ice in your (apparently often drank) bourbon to fuck off. That seems to be the Democrats fancy new plan on gaining political power.* Insult the voters until they agree with you*!
Slee
I phrased my argument poorly. Racism as a POLITICAL FORCE only gains strength by disregarding legitimate complaints of the voters, or worse, calling them racist. That gives an opening for racist demagogues to rally these voters, who then tune out the morons who refused to listen to them.
They tightened the amount of pollution they’re allowed to emit. ISTM that’s a pretty honest and non-dancing way to go about it. Characterizing that as “gutting” the industry is certainly not more honest or straightforward. And when Dem candidates are brutally honest and say it will cost coal jobs it doesn’t seem to score them any points.
The accusations are definitely used as a political weapon. I don’t know if the root cause of racism or xenophobia are the result of elites though.
It’s also little dubious to say complaints about “unfettered trade and immigration” are “legitimate”. You can complain about the levels but neither of those can be honestly described as “unfettered”.
That’s simply a fairly mainstream presidency.
If Obama were really “transformative change,” we’d have seen something like:
[ul]
[li]Single-payer healthcare[/li][li]Defense budget halved[/li][li]Universal basic income[/li][li]A Ginsburg-type to replace Scalia[/li][li]Massive campaign to fight man-made climate change[/li][li]Massive increase in taxes on wealthy[/li][li]No U.S. military intervention in Libya or Syria[/li][li]Drastically curtailed U.S. arms sales abroad[/li][li]Much more gun-control legislation[/li][/ul]
I think this is false as well. At least, maybe this is a small part of it, but it can only succeed if there is significant underlying racist sentiment, or tolerance of racism (effectively the same thing) to begin with.
Of course they’re a political weapon - how can racists and bigots be defeated if they’re not called out? Like any tactic, it can be misused, but we’ll probably disagree on how common that misuse is.
Best rebuttal I’ve seen in a while!
It really wasn’t.
Not really. Coal’s share of electricity production has dropped from nearly 60% in the late 1980s to about 32% now- and dropping. Just in the last decade its share fell about 20%. It is clearly on the way out.