I will concede that his energy policy may not make sense but I can’t find anywhere in that link where Sanders “advocates completely eliminating nuclear power production.” Sustainable energy sources like solar, geothermal and wind power are heavily promoted but the only reference to nuclear power is in this section:
and that doesn’t say what you alleged. The rest of his energy policy is about reducing our dependence on fossil fuels. Having read the info at the link you provided I have to say using that to claim Sanders “advocates completely eliminating nuclear power production” is a ridiculous position. Clearly he would prefer to see cleaner, sustainable energy sources be our focus, but there is nothing there that supports the claim you made. If you care to come back with a cite that supports your point I would be very interested in reading it, but that isn’t it.
“Transitioning toward a completely nuclear-free clean energy system for electricity, heating, and transportation” is advocating for the elimination of nuclear power, as is his call to enact “a moratorium on nuclear power plant license renewals in the United States”.
Tonight on the news Bernie Stalin mentioned that he wants his universal health care to be managed by the government. Has he no idea how well the government is doing with VA healthcare? Let’s build off that Bernie, it’s working so well for all the deserving veterans. Debate that Bernie.
No, no it isn’t. Again, where does he call for the complete elimination of nuclear power production? Those are your words. Please provide a cite showing they are Sanders.
And he is hardly the first to call for a moratorium on nuclear power plant license renewals.
You are making no sense. Refusing to renew the licenses of nuclear power plants eliminates nuclear power. That’s his position: “a completely nuclear-free clean energy system”.
VA doctors work for the government, like doctors in Britain’s National Health system. What Sanders wants is “Medicare for all” or single-payer, like in Canada – i.e., the government only replaces the health insurance companies.
That’s not what Bernie said. He said he wanted it to be run by the government. I remember rolling my eyes when he said that. He also mentioned that his 52% max tax on those +250k/yr would pay for that. When asked if that would kill jobs he said no. More disposable income means more jobs. When asked if he felt there was a prayer of getting his ideas through congress, he said mentioned “millions” of people demanding it. The guy is clearly a loon.
It wouldn’t be Trump and it wouldn’t be Sanders . . . Do you mean Clinton? There certainly will not be any third-party candidate who matters enough to get a place in the debates or in public attention – not unless Trump makes an independent bid, and at this point why would he?
If the choices are Trump and Sanders, a free trader will definitely be viable, not everyone buys their pernicious garbage. Whether this person is third party or independent is yet to be determined. There will be enough support to earn a spot in the debates. Do you honestly think there will not be a viable third candidate if Trump and Sanders win their respective nominations?
While I would certainly like to see more nuclear power in this country, I’m not aware of any candidate at all who agrees with me. Therefore that cannot be a factor in my decision, and I must decide based on other factors.
Yeah, for real, fellow Sanders supporters: that’s absolutely calling for getting rid of nuclear power. Either reject that position of his, or argue that it’s reasonable; you can do either, but don’t pretend he doesn’t take that position.
Indeed. And either one is fine - sometimes I do feel that some Sanders supporters can’t admit that they disagree with the Senator on some instances. It’s ok to do so. No one agrees with a candidate on 100% of the issues.
I don’t. As stated in another thread, I believe my brother the (software, not nuclear) engineer when he says improvements in nuclear power plant design make accidents impossible in recently-built plants. As for the waste problem, I would put the waste in a desert somewhere, perhaps one previously used for nuclear-bomb testing – not in the ocean, not in any place it can’t be gotten back from, our descendants might discover some use for it.
No basis other than the obvious fact that many of Trump’s fans would love him to give them a bit of veiled anti-Semitism, delivered in his trademark passive-aggressive style. And he does have a track record of giving his fans what they want, ethnic-hatred-wise.
I’m not convinced he’s antisemitic. My experience is that people who are cavalier in racial/ethnic/gender stereotypes very often don’t stop at just one. The pest control guy who came to my house once and told a bunch of misogynist jokes about his ex-wife came back next time to tell a bunch of joke about his Shih Tzu based on Asian stereotypes.
I’d be mildly surprised if Trump doesn’t stereotype Jews, along with the Irish, the French, and Australians.
I’m not a Sanders supporter but I think there’s wriggle room here.
As I understand it, Sanders is not saying “let’s eliminate nuclear power and then figure out how to make it up from alternative energy sources”. Rather, he’s saying “let’s do so much developing alternative energy sources that we will no longer need nuclear power and can eliminate it”.
Now, the idea that alternative energy has the potential to eliminate nuclear power might be a pipe dream. But if Sanders thinks it’s real and is only calling for being nuclear-free after alternative energy has reached this point, then I don’t think it’s the same as a guy calling for the elimination of nuclear power.
[I suppose it’s like the difference between Marxists and anarchists. Marxists also expected the state to wither away, but they weren’t about doing it upfront.]
The bigger picture is that you would certainly expect a Sanders administration to be hostile to nuclear power. But I don’t know if you can pin it on him directly.
It wouldn’t be Trump and it wouldn’t be Sanders . . . Do you mean Clinton? There certainly will not be any third-party candidate who matters enough to get a place in the debates or in public attention – not unless Trump makes an independent bid, and at this point why would he?