Author Topic: Who should be the Democratic nominee for President in 2020? (Read 182345 times)

b_lumenkraft · « **Reply #250 on:** June 13, 2019, 10:07:04 PM »

Finally Some Interesting Poll Movement! - 5 More Democratic Primary Polls! June 2019

b_lumenkraft · « **Reply #251 on:** June 14, 2019, 05:36:12 PM »

Out of touch Biden doing his out of touch thing.

b_lumenkraft · « **Reply #252 on:** June 15, 2019, 08:40:40 PM »

Lee Carter Schools MSNBC On How Democrats Can Win

b_lumenkraft · « **Reply #253 on:** June 17, 2019, 09:48:00 AM »

Quote

A nationwide Fox News poll released Sunday shows President Donald Trump trailing Senator Bernie Sanders, 49% to 40% among all registered voters nationwide.

The Fox poll also showed Biden leading Trump by 49% to 39%. Also beating Trump in the poll were Senators Elizabeth Warren (43%-41%) and Kamala Harris (42%-41%), and Mayor Pete Buttigieg (41%-40%) of South Bend, Indiana.

Yep, that turns out just as i expected. Bernie is your best bet!

(so since 2016, nothing changed on this front)

b_lumenkraft · « **Reply #254 on:** June 17, 2019, 04:47:28 PM »

So this is interesting:

According to this poll ^[1], there are 4% of DEMOCRATS who would vote for Trump if Biden would become the Democratic nominee.

Now, given the gerrymandering, voter purge, electoral college and all the other anti-democratic measures put in place to favour the Republicans, a Democratic nominee would need a 5-10 points lead over Trump to win the election.

How i see it, in this climate, if Biden wins the Democratic primaries, the likelihood of 4 more years of trumpism is almost guaranteed.

[1] https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2019-06/daily-beast-gender-topline-2019-06-17-v2.pdf

Tom_Mazanec · « **Reply #255 on:** June 17, 2019, 07:00:26 PM »

Still yet more on Democratic Party and climate debates:
https://cleantechnica.com/2019/06/17/dems-get-caught-in-climate-change-controversy-over-upcoming-debates/
and https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/the-energy-202/2019/06/14/the-energy-202-democrats-climate-debate-debate-is-not-going-away/5d026d971ad2e52ca1223d74/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6467d8c76901

Klondike Kat · « **Reply #256 on:** June 18, 2019, 03:10:31 AM »

Quote from: b_lumenkraft on June 17, 2019, 04:47:28 PM

Now, given the gerrymandering, voter purge, electoral college and all the other anti-democratic measures put in place to favour the Republicans, a Democratic nominee would need a 5-10 points lead over Trump to win the election.

Gerrymandering has absolutely no effect on presidential elections. The National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (passed during the Clinton administration requires states to keep voter registration lists accurate and current. Experts contend that the electoral college only slightly favors the GOP. Even with Clinton’s disproportionate support, she needed less than 1% more voters to become president (that would have amount to a 3 pt advantage). Biden, with more even support, would win with much less.

b_lumenkraft · « **Reply #257 on:** June 18, 2019, 06:54:03 AM »

Kat, who are you trying to kid??

Clinton had 3mio more votes in 2016. Don't tell me the electoral college is democratic.

The voter outcome is a function of money paid for campaigns in like 95% of the time. In the US, you are not elected, but you buy your office.

The US election system is inherently undemocratic and corrupt. It's a sham.

If you don't see that yourself, i can't help you, really! Listen to an expert. Chomsky for example.

Klondike Kat · « **Reply #258 on:** June 18, 2019, 03:29:51 PM »

Quote from: b_lumenkraft on June 18, 2019, 06:54:03 AM

Kat, who are you trying to kid??

Clinton had 3mio more votes in 2016. Don't tell me the electoral college is democratic.

The voter outcome is a function of money paid for campaigns in like 95% of the time. In the US, you are not elected, but you buy your office.

The US election system is inherently undemocratic and corrupt. It's a sham.

If you don't see that yourself, i can't help you, really! Listen to an expert. Chomsky for example.

Kidding no one. Just presenting the facts. I am not refusing your money allegation, but that was not part of your previous claim of undemocratic. Nor am I refusing your allegation of corruption. Corruption and politics go hand in hand. Rather, I was criticizing your other claims; namely that gerrymandering, the voter rolls, and the electoral college are anti-democratic and favor Republicans in the presidential election.

Over the past 8 elections (4 victories by each party), the electoral college has shown a 1% tilt towards the GOP; meaning that if a Democratic candidates garners 1% more votes than the Republican, each would receive similar EVs. Last election was an anomaly, as Clinton received 59 fewer EVs that the vote margin would suggest. The only other recent election that deviated significantly from this trend was 2004, where Kerry received 38 more EVs than the trend line. Clinton lost three states by less than 1%. Those three states were worth 46 EVs, enough to win the election. She also lost Florida by 1.2%. Your claim of a 5-10 pts bias towards the GOP is unsupported, unless you were referring to the polls, which tend to overstate the support for the Democrats.

b_lumenkraft · « **Reply #259 on:** June 18, 2019, 03:50:46 PM »

Quote from: Klondike Kat on June 18, 2019, 03:29:51 PM

I am not refusing your money allegation, but that was not part of your previous claim of undemocratic.

I wrote: "...gerrymandering, voter purge, electoral college and all the other anti-democratic measures..."

Consider the "and all the other anti-democratic measures" part to address my claim.

I added that for a reason. I don't have the time to address all the things. There are just too many.

Tom_Mazanec · « **Reply #260 on:** June 18, 2019, 10:06:27 PM »

POTUS hopefuls want companies to disclose climate risks:
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/17/democrats-energy-industry-climate-risk-1483586

b_lumenkraft · « **Reply #261 on:** June 19, 2019, 01:23:16 PM »

Klondike Kat · « **Reply #262 on:** June 19, 2019, 03:12:50 PM »

I would not put too much faith in those polls. First, the election is too far off for the polls to be meaningful. Second, polls one month before the election in 2016 showed Clinton with a larger lead - and we all know how that ended. Just a few examples from October, 2106:

NBCNews: Clinton 50% Trump 40%
Bloomberg: Clinton 49% Trump 37%
Quinnipiac: Clinton 52% Trump 44%
IPSOS/Reuters: Clinton 44% Trump 37%
Fox News: Clinton 49% Trump 41%
AP/GfK: Clinton 54% Trump 41%
USAToday: Clinton 49% Trump 39%

On November 8, 2016, CNN gave Clinton a 91% of winning the election. The same day, Nate Silvers at 538 predicted that Clinton would win Fla, NC, PA, MI, WI, and NH. She lost all but NH, which she won by 3,000 votes. IBD/TIPP was the only outfit that predicted a Trump victory. IBD/TIPP also tracks economic optimism; which was high in 2004, very low in 2008, turned positive just in time for the 2012 election, and was slightly negative in 2012. It hit a record high recently. In the words of Bill Clinton, "it's the economy, stupid."

b_lumenkraft · « **Reply #263 on:** June 19, 2019, 03:19:02 PM »

First: Nate Silver is an utter moron and knows about politics as much as the president knows about sea ice.

Second: Guess who had more votes than Trump. Perhaps the polls weren't so wrong? Perhaps the process is undemocratic?

Tom_Mazanec · « **Reply #264 on:** June 19, 2019, 03:58:09 PM »

Quote from: b_lumenkraft on June 19, 2019, 03:19:02 PM

First: Nate Silver is an utter moron and knows about politics as much as the president knows about sea ice.

Second: Guess who had more votes than Trump. Perhaps the polls weren't so wrong? Perhaps the process is undemocratic?

It doesn’t matter how democratic it is or isn’t. You project the results based on the game you are playing. Nate projected the winner. All the other pundits said Hillary would win. They were the ones who did not know politics.

b_lumenkraft · « **Reply #265 on:** June 19, 2019, 04:27:11 PM »

Tom, you need to listen to the guy. I listened to his podcast quite a lot. I trust him when it comes to numbers and stats. But when he talks politics, you think you are listening to a 16yo.

Quote

It doesn’t matter how democratic it is or isn’t. You project the results based on the game you are playing.

Democracy is when everyone has a vote and all votes are equal. If one person has the equivalent of many votes, that ain't a democratic anymore. The game is called differently now.

Tom_Mazanec · « **Reply #266 on:** June 19, 2019, 05:41:38 PM »

Klobuchar's first act as POTUS:
https://dailycaller.com/2019/06/18/amy-klobuchar-first-act-climate-change/
DNC missing the boat:
https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/dnc-missing-boat-climate-change

Tom_Mazanec · « **Reply #267 on:** June 19, 2019, 05:48:24 PM »

Quote from: b_lumenkraft on June 19, 2019, 04:27:11 PM

Tom, you need to listen to the guy. I listened to his podcast quite a lot. I trust him when it comes to numbers and stats. But when he talks politics, you think you are listening to a 16yo.

Quote
It doesn’t matter how democratic it is or isn’t. You project the results based on the game you are playing.

Democracy is when everyone has a vote and all votes are equal. If one person has the equivalent of many votes, that ain't a democratic anymore. The game is called differently now.

We are not a democracy, we are a republic. In the democracy you describe, if a majority of the citizens wish to kill everyone who speaks with a lisp, so be it.
No system of government is perfect except a true Theocracy, and that won't be until the Parousia.

b_lumenkraft · « **Reply #268 on:** June 19, 2019, 05:55:17 PM »

Quote from: Tom_Mazanec on June 19, 2019, 05:48:24 PM

We are not a democracy, we are a republic.

Your fellow countryman tell me all the time the US is a democracy. What's correct now?

The US is an oligarchy. And yes, a republic can also be an oligarchy.

Quote

In the democracy you describe, if a majority of the citizens wish to kill everyone who speaks with a lisp, so be it.

No, not in the slightest. This statement so far off i don't even intend to answer it.

Tom_Mazanec · « **Reply #269 on:** June 19, 2019, 11:38:05 PM »

Quote from: b_lumenkraft on June 19, 2019, 05:55:17 PM

Quote from: Tom_Mazanec on June 19, 2019, 05:48:24 PM
We are not a democracy, we are a republic.

Your fellow countryman tell me all the time the US is a democracy. What's correct now?

The US is an oligarchy. And yes, a republic can also be an oligarchy.

Quote
In the democracy you describe, if a majority of the citizens wish to kill everyone who speaks with a lisp, so be it.

No, not in the slightest. This statement so far off i don't even intend to answer it.

As you (briefly) described it, that is a "democracy". Perhaps you could go into more detail on how people who thpeak with a lithp would be protected in your Utopia.
And by your standards, has there ever been a "democracy" (at least one that is not an oligarchy as well)?

b_lumenkraft · « **Reply #270 on:** June 20, 2019, 05:54:28 AM »

As i said above, Tom. "Democracy is when everyone has a vote and all votes are equal." This is not my standard, but the reality in most democratic countries, not utopic!

In the US, there are multiple measures in place, that prevent to have that.

Learn about voter purges, the electoral college, gerrymandering, how money buys legislation, and the fact that there are two right-wing parties and you don't actually have the choice to vote anything but conservative/corporate. That's what i'm talking about.

Edit: This is the kind of initiatives you want to support if you like a more democratic election system:

Quote

BREAKING: Moments ago, the Maine House joined the Maine Senate and PASSED President @SenTroyJackson’s bill to expand Ranked Choice Voting for presidential elections! @rcvmaine #RCV4POTUS #mepolitics

Link >> https://twitter.com/rcvmaine/status/1141372979701587969?s=19

b_lumenkraft · « **Reply #271 on:** June 20, 2019, 07:08:51 AM »

Joe Biden Keeps Praising The WORST People Ever

Klondike Kat · « **Reply #272 on:** June 20, 2019, 02:56:10 PM »

Quote from: Tom_Mazanec on June 19, 2019, 11:38:05 PM

Quote from: b_lumenkraft on June 19, 2019, 05:55:17 PM
Quote from: Tom_Mazanec on June 19, 2019, 05:48:24 PM
We are not a democracy, we are a republic.

Your fellow countryman tell me all the time the US is a democracy. What's correct now?

The US is an oligarchy. And yes, a republic can also be an oligarchy.

Quote
In the democracy you describe, if a majority of the citizens wish to kill everyone who speaks with a lisp, so be it.

No, not in the slightest. This statement so far off i don't even intend to answer it.

As you (briefly) described it, that is a "democracy". Perhaps you could go into more detail on how people who thpeak with a lithp would be protected in your Utopia.
And by your standards, has there ever been a "democracy" (at least one that is not an oligarchy as well)?

Yes, the U.S. is a republic, not a true democracy (although there are some examples of democracy). Ancient Athens was a true democracy, whereby the citizens voted directly. Individual Swiss cantons are democracies, although the central government is a federation.

b_lumenkraft · « **Reply #273 on:** June 20, 2019, 03:06:42 PM »

Let me google this for you.

Quote

A republic (Latin: res publica) is a form of government in which the country is considered a “public matter”, not the private concern or property of the rulers.

Quote

Democracy (Greek: δημοκρατία dēmokratía, literally "rule by people") is a system of government where the citizens exercise power by voting.

Quote

A federation (also known as a federal state) is a political entity characterized by a union of partially self-governing provinces, states, or other regions under a central federal government (federalism).

As if a democracy couldn't be a republic? Or what?

I am talking about 'one person - one vote'. I'm not comparing apples and oranges as you guys do.

And no, in ancient Athens it wasn't 'one person - one vote'!

Quote

Only adult male Athenian citizens who had completed their military training as ephebes had the right to vote in Athens. The percentage of the population that actually participated in the government was 10% to 20% of the total number of inhabitants, but this varied from the fifth to the fourth century BC. This excluded a majority of the population: slaves, freed slaves, children, women and metics (foreigners resident in Athens). The women had limited rights and privileges, had restricted movement in public, and were very segregated from the men.

Tom_Mazanec · « **Reply #274 on:** June 20, 2019, 04:02:02 PM »

OK, if not Athens, then who (if anyone)?

b_lumenkraft · « **Reply #275 on:** June 20, 2019, 04:16:59 PM »

Pretty much every democracy in the world today.

Tom_Mazanec · « **Reply #276 on:** June 20, 2019, 06:20:41 PM »

So are the American States democracies? If not, why not? What are some democratic nations?

b_lumenkraft · « **Reply #277 on:** June 20, 2019, 06:29:45 PM »

I fell like i answered these questions a few times already, Tom.

Tell me what part you don't understand? Is it the gerrymandering, the undemocratic aspect of the electoral college, or that politics is inherently corrupt there? I don't know what i can say more. Do you know what these things are and mean?

SteveMDFP · « **Reply #278 on:** June 20, 2019, 06:37:23 PM »

Quote from: Tom_Mazanec on June 19, 2019, 05:48:24 PM

We are not a democracy, we are a republic. In the democracy you describe, if a majority of the citizens wish to kill everyone who speaks with a lisp, so be it.
No system of government is perfect except a true Theocracy, and that won't be until the Parousia.

No, we are a democratic republic, a form of democracy.

Libertarians and fans of "The Federalist Letters" endlessly claim that only the ancient Greek city-states were "true" democracies. They are simply clinging to archaic language, with an aim towards toxic politics. In the 18th century, the model of the Greek city-states was the only prior example of democracy. The city-states ran by direct votes, with no limiting constitution or option of judicial appeal.

In modern parlance, a republic with public votes, a constitution, and an effective judiciary is a democracy. We're no longer in the 18th century, so we should drop archaic definitions.

Tom_Mazanec · « **Reply #279 on:** June 20, 2019, 08:20:35 PM »

If it's corrupt politics that disqualify a nation as a democracy, then there are no democracies.
Politics is inherently corrupt.

b_lumenkraft · « **Reply #280 on:** June 20, 2019, 08:27:53 PM »

So when a politician is directly paid by corporations in one country and taking private donations are illegal in another country, this is the same? Both are inherently corrupt? Please, tell me how that is Tom.

Tom_Mazanec · « **Reply #281 on:** June 20, 2019, 08:35:14 PM »

There may be different forms of corruption in different cultures, but Man’s Fallen Nature and the psychology of politics guarantees there will be corruption.

b_lumenkraft · « **Reply #282 on:** June 20, 2019, 09:12:18 PM »

Yes, and this is why it is so important to regulate them. In the US the door is wide open. Most democratic countries in the world added regulations in this regard.

But what do you expect when there is a constitution made by people who were slave owners. Sometime between now and then there should have been a modernisation.

sidd · « **Reply #283 on:** June 21, 2019, 01:36:10 AM »

Stoller at medium beats on Biden:

"Biden has a relatively small number of important accomplishments, and many of them — like the war in Iraq or the Bankruptcy Bill of 2005 — are deep policy failures."

"enjoy being famous, pursue a moderate form of social liberalism, and eschew any strong ideological challenge to corporate power"

"just an unmanageable candidate"

https://medium.com/@matthewstoller/bidens-laziness-problem-c479ae1f2a68

sidd

sidd · « **Reply #284 on:** June 21, 2019, 02:36:07 AM »

Biden fellates oligarchy:

"their taxes might have to be raised a little ... the increase wouldn't even be noticeable"

"nobody has to be punished"

"Nothing would fundamentally change"

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/06/19/vowing-not-demonize-rich-biden-tells-billionaires-nothing-would-fundamentally-change

sidd

Paddy · « **Reply #285 on:** June 22, 2019, 03:49:31 PM »

Given that we have two geriatric candidates leading the field for the dems (Bernie and Biden), and an obese geriatric incumbent, what are the odds that the next term's president might either have to step down due to illness or die in post?

Klondike Kat · « **Reply #286 on:** June 22, 2019, 04:29:05 PM »

Quote from: Paddy on June 22, 2019, 03:49:31 PM

Given that we have two geriatric candidates leading the field for the dems (Bernie and Biden), and an obese geriatric incumbent, what are the odds that the next term's president might either have to step down due to illness or die in post?

I say slim. The four presidents who have died were either 93 or 94; Ford, Reagan, and Bush. Carter is currently 94 and still kicking. Sanders is 77, Biden 76, and Trump 72 - a spring chicken by comparison.

b_lumenkraft · « **Reply #287 on:** June 22, 2019, 04:34:33 PM »

Actually, the odds are not so bad. If you made it so long, the likelihood of making it 4 more years is high.

Life expectancy for a 70yo is over 14 years.
Life expectancy for a 75yo is over 11 years.
Life expectancy for an 80yo is over 8 years.

https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html

Tom_Mazanec · « **Reply #288 on:** June 22, 2019, 07:02:14 PM »

Democrats: Reform campaign financing to save climate:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/the-energy-202/2019/06/20/the-energy-202-want-to-address-climate-change-fix-campaign-finance-first-2020-democrats-say/5d0a5bc3a7a0a47d87c56d5a/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.5d5a7cd47514
and which accept FF Industry money?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2019/jun/20/democrats-2020-fossil-fuel-donations

TerryM · « **Reply #289 on:** June 22, 2019, 10:36:05 PM »

Quote from: Tom_Mazanec on June 20, 2019, 04:02:02 PM

OK, if not Athens, then who (if anyone)?

The voters in Crimea, first in their vote to be independent of the Ukraine, then in their subsequent vote to join the Russian Federation.

The voters in The Boliverian Republic of Venezuela - after Chavez introduced constitutional changes (including the right of recall).

Possibly the Brexit voters who voted against the position held by most of their MPs.

Democracy isn't dead - They just don't always vote in the way we think that they should have.

Terry

Klondike Kat · « **Reply #290 on:** June 23, 2019, 12:17:01 AM »

Quote from: TerryM on June 22, 2019, 10:36:05 PM

Quote from: Tom_Mazanec on June 20, 2019, 04:02:02 PM
OK, if not Athens, then who (if anyone)?

The voters in Crimea, first in their vote to be independent of the Ukraine, then in their subsequent vote to join the Russian Federation.

The voters in The Boliverian Republic of Venezuela - after Chavez introduced constitutional changes (including the right of recall).

Possibly the Brexit voters who voted against the position held by most of their MPs.

Democracy isn't dead - They just don't always vote in the way we think that they should have.

Terry

Terry,
Good points. When everyone is allowed to vote, the results may not always align with what you or I think they should.

sidd · « **Reply #291 on:** June 23, 2019, 06:53:16 AM »

Re: They just don't always vote in the way we think

"The people have spoken, the bastards." -- Dick Tuck

sidd

Rich · « **Reply #292 on:** June 24, 2019, 01:22:30 PM »

America is no longer a functional democracy. We go through the process of voting and the Congress we elect legislates in accordance with the wishes of the big donors.

The 2014 Princeton study determined pretty conclusively that the US is a functional oligarchy.

We don't always see eye to eye, but I agree with lumenkraft 110% on this.

Two corporate / conservative parties to choose from. Almost all Congress critters go on to higher paid lobbying gigs when they leave office.

b_lumenkraft · « **Reply #293 on:** June 24, 2019, 01:35:39 PM »

Quote from: Rich on June 24, 2019, 01:22:30 PM

We don't always see eye to eye, but I agree with lumenkraft 110% on this.

High five buddy! 🙌

b_lumenkraft · « **Reply #294 on:** June 24, 2019, 01:46:44 PM »

Nobody Understands 2020 Better Than Cornel West

Tom_Mazanec · « **Reply #295 on:** June 24, 2019, 04:04:14 PM »

Nobody understands 2020 better than him? Out of 7 billion people? That’s quite a claim

b_lumenkraft · « **Reply #296 on:** June 24, 2019, 04:27:56 PM »

These inaccurate NTs, eh Tom?

But seriously, he might be in the top 0.0001%

Tom_Mazanec · « **Reply #297 on:** June 24, 2019, 06:17:52 PM »

Democrat candidates pushing old, poor climate policy:
https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2019/06/2020-clean-power-plan/

Elizabeth Warren climate plan:
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/6/22/18691902/elizabeth-warren-2020-climate-change-policy-proposal-corruption

Sciguy · « **Reply #298 on:** June 25, 2019, 10:38:59 PM »

As Tom's second link above points out, Sen. Warren has three specific proposals dealing with climate change. The first two (no fossil fuels extraction from public lands and requiring 10% of electricity to be generated from renewables on public lands) are good incremental policies that will help reduce our fossil fuel emissions and increase our renewable emissions. Her third proposal is the big one that would incorporate many of the jobs and energy aims of the Green New Deal. Combined with her other proposals, her plans to address climate change make her the candidate I prefer now.

However, my Governor, Jay Inslee, has the best set of proposals to address climate change. Like Sen. Warren, he has issued three major proposals to deal with the issue.

Today, Gov. Inslee just announce his fourth proposal, and it's the big one.

https://grist.org/article/watch-out-big-oil-jay-inslees-back-at-it-again-with-a-greenhouse-gas-fee/

Quote

Watch out, Big Oil. Jay Inslee’s back at it again with a greenhouse gas fee.

By Zoya Teirstein on Jun 24, 2019

Adding to his growing stack of policies aimed at averting the climate crisis, Washington Governor Jay Inslee, one of the 23 Democrats running for president, announced Monday the fourth part of his Climate Mission. No other candidate has released as many proposals centered on warming — but then again, no other candidate is trying to win the right to face Donald Trump on a platform solely centered on it.

Inslee’s Freedom from Fossil Fuels plan seeks to establish a new national energy strategy — and it provides a blueprint for kneecapping the fossil fuel industry. It’s comprised of 16 policy initiatives grouped under ambitious priorities like phasing out fossil fuel production, ending the $20 billion in annual fossil fuel subsidies, and beefing up corporate transparency. This is the most fleshed out candidate strategy for how the federal government can ease the United States off of fossil fuels and onto renewables.

Quote

But not all of the climate initiatives the governor has either offered or backed have been successful in Washington state. And one of them, a carbon price, has failed three times in various forms. Which is why the inclusion of a “climate pollution fee” in the Freedom from Fossil Fuels plan is curious. After all, it hearkens back to Inslee’s highest-profile failures in this arena.

Quote

Inslee’s perseverance might be a good thing. Some environmentalists, like OG climate hawk James Hansen, have argued that a carbon tax is essential. And a slew of oil companies, CEOs of major corporations, and Republican economists agree.

So let’s take a closer look at this “fee” as the governor likes to call it.

The Democrat says he would work with Congress to set the price, which would start low and rise “steadily and aggressively over time.” (For reference, the latest ballot initiative in Washington state, which failed to pass last year, began at $15 per ton of carbon.) The fee would only apply to certain economic sectors, though Inslee doesn’t say which sectors will get tapped. And it appears that the money generated by the fee would go towards things like transitioning to a green economy, supporting front-line and low-income communities struggling with the aftermath of climate disaster, and spurring economic development.

A new twist in Inslee’s plan is that carbon dioxide isn’t the only pollutant regulated by this proposal. Methane, F-gases (synthetic gases used as refrigerants, among other things, that can stay in the atmosphere for centuries) and other greenhouse gases will also get a fee, priced by the risks each gas poses. And lest we forget that American’s aren’t only consuming products produced by U.S. companies, Inslee’s plan also proposes a “carbon duty,” to be imposed on imports of products manufactured or grown in countries that don’t adhere to the new and beefed up Paris agreement his third policy rollout proposed.

Unfortunately, Inslee's campaign isn't gaining traction, so let's hope his proposals get picked up by some of the other candidates.

Sciguy · « **Reply #299 on:** June 25, 2019, 10:50:36 PM »

Quote from: Tom_Mazanec on June 24, 2019, 06:17:52 PM

Democrat candidates pushing old, poor climate policy:
https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2019/06/2020-clean-power-plan/

The "old, poor climate policy" referred to in the link posted by Tom above would be to stay in the Paris Treaty and to restore the Obama climate rule. Neither of these is a bad thing.

The Paris Treaty is an important symbolic agreement that shows the nations of the world are working together to address the problem. While the specific commitments made by the nations are inadequate to address the problem, it at least shows that people are willing to work together to limit warming to 2 degrees C (and if possible, 1.5 C). That's better than withdrawing from the Treaty and not committing to any reductions in greenhouse gases.

The Obama climate rule took years to get through the public notice and comment periods required by US law. Creating a new rule would also take years to go through the same comment period. The Obama rule could be reinstated by a new President on January 20, 2021 without needing new laws or comment periods.