Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
one...two...tree

Clean energy is a wedge issue that favors Democrats

18 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

During Obama's State of the Union speech, Democracy Corps ran a dial-test focus group. Fifty swing voters were given devices that let them register approval or disapproval continuously throughout the speech. Two results in particular are worth highlighting.

Overall, there was a striking degree of unanimity, quite in contrast to the polarization in Washington. Reactions to the speech split along party lines on only a few issues. The most interesting split came during the section of the speech on energy:

This section received the highest sustained ratings of the speech from Democrats and independents, but it was also one of the few polarizing sections as Republicans reacted negatively to the President's call for more support of clean energy (
independents, like Democrats, responded very favorably
). Overall, Obama gained 22 points on the issue, one of his biggest gains on the evening, as
these voters endorsed his appeal to end subsidies for oil companies and instead focus those resources on expanding clean energy in America
. [my emphasis]

It seems the Republican attempt to drag clean energy into the culture war has reached only the conservative base. Independents outside the Fox-Limbaugh loop still favor it.

In other words, this is a powerful wedge issue that favors Democrats.

With the Wall Street Journal editorial page beating its chest, Politico making sweet, sweet love to the Solyndra non-scandal, and the Chamber of Commerce dumping money into attack ads, Democrats have gotten unduly spooked. They've started believing John Boehner's trash talk, that energy is a wedge to divide unions from greens.

It's an empty threat. The fact is, overwhelming majorities of Americans — across party, age, and regional lines — support clean, modern energy. A poll conducted by ORC International in November found that 77 percent of Americans, including 65 percent of Republicans, believe that "the U.S. needs to be a clean energy technology leader and it should invest in the research and domestic manufacturing of wind, solar, and energy efficiency technologies." Last February, a Gallup poll offered a list of actions Congress might take. The most popular option, with an incredible 83 percent support, was "an energy bill that provides incentives for using solar and other alternative energy resources."

Americans love clean energy. When they hear about green energy infrastructure, according to the focus-group results …

… participants immediately make the connection between new energy and new jobs. They say, "Alternative energy — good jobs, local jobs — I think we have a tremendous opportunity here — it's about creating goods and services — invest in infrastructure."

Americans know that clean energy is the future. They want to embrace the future. They want to, well, win it. They certainly don't want to fend it off for the sake of oil companies. Americans hate oil companies! (Almost as much as they hate congressional Republicans.) They don't want to subsidize oil companies any more. Even Republicans support ending oil subsidies by a 2-to-1 margin.

On to the second significant finding: Americans want to tax the rich.

These swing voters, even the Republicans, responded enthusiastically to [Obama's] call for a "Buffett Rule" that would require the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share. As one participant put it, "I agree with his tax reform — the 1 percent should shoulder more of the burden than the other 99 percent. He [Obama] talked about being all for one, one for all — that really resonated for me." These dial focus groups make it very clear that defending further tax cuts for those at the top of the economic spectrum puts Republicans in Congress and on the Presidential campaign trail well outside of the American mainstream.

(See also this Sept. 2011 Gallup poll or this Oct. 2011 Bloomberg poll or this Oct. 2011 CBS News poll or many others).

What this shows is that the Occupy movement has won. Americans across party lines increasingly see things in terms of the 1 percent and the 99 percent. A Pew survey earlier this month found that "conflict between rich and poor now eclipses racial strain and friction between immigrants and the native-born as the greatest source of tension in American society." Two-thirds of Americans now see "strong conflicts" between the rich and poor. Even Mitt Romney is using Occupy's language.

These issues — clean energy and taxing the rich — are not unconnected. Properly done, clean energy is a populist issue. Big Oil perfectly symbolizes the 1 percent, and Americans are ready to redirect public resources away from oil and toward a wide network of home-grown cleantech innovators.

Clean energy isolates the Republican base from the broad mass of American opinion and, in particular, from swing-state independents. It's a wedge issue and an electoral winner for Democrats if they can quit playing defense and go on the attack. The appropriate response to threats from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is a well-administered ####### kicking.

http://grist.org/politics/clean-energy-is-a-wedge-issue-that-favors-democrats/

Edited by Mister Fancypants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can tell from you flooding the board with so many new threads that you are still pissed.:whistle:

Just fighting the good fight by spreading the truth and squashing the truth haters and science denialists. :whistle:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just fighting the good fight by spreading the truth and squashing the truth haters and science denialists. :whistle:

You keep doing that and ol lucky just might report you while using a little :star: in his post.


sigbet.jpg

"I want to take this opportunity to mention how thankful I am for an Obama re-election. The choice was clear. We cannot live in a country that treats homosexuals and women as second class citizens. Homosexuals deserve all of the rights and benefits of marriage that heterosexuals receive. Women deserve to be treated with respect and their salaries should not depend on their gender, but their quality of work. I am also thankful that the great, progressive state of California once again voted for the correct President. America is moving forward, and the direction is a positive one."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's only a "wedge issue" if you're an idiot. Everyone else understands that we have to drill for oil and gas until other technologies are ready to replace fossil fuels.


biden_pinhead.jpgspace.gifrolling-stones-american-flag-tongue.jpgspace.gifinside-geico.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You still pissed too?star_smile.gif

A little ya. The thread ban was one thing...even though I was right, but the real p*sser was your last few post...the last one especially with that stupid :star:

I officially hate that emoticon now. :hehe: meh ok, I'm done b*tching about it. I feel a little better now.

Ok so back to clean energy is it? So who's footing the bill for this one?


sigbet.jpg

"I want to take this opportunity to mention how thankful I am for an Obama re-election. The choice was clear. We cannot live in a country that treats homosexuals and women as second class citizens. Homosexuals deserve all of the rights and benefits of marriage that heterosexuals receive. Women deserve to be treated with respect and their salaries should not depend on their gender, but their quality of work. I am also thankful that the great, progressive state of California once again voted for the correct President. America is moving forward, and the direction is a positive one."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A little ya. The thread ban was one thing...even though I was right, but the real p*sser was your last few post...the last one especially with that stupid :star:

I officially hate that emoticon now. :hehe: meh ok, I'm done b*tching about it. I feel a little better now.

Ok so back to clean energy is it? So who's footing the bill for this one?

Well good you finally over it.star_smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's this about a wedgie issue, huh man?


06-04-2007 = TSC stamps postal return-receipt for I-129f.

06-11-2007 = NOA1 date (unknown to me).

07-20-2007 = Phoned Immigration Officer; got WAC#; where's NOA1?

09-25-2007 = Touch (first-ever).

09-28-2007 = NOA1, 23 days after their 45-day promise to send it (grrrr).

10-20 & 11-14-2007 = Phoned ImmOffs; "still pending."

12-11-2007 = 180 days; file is "between workstations, may be early Jan."; touches 12/11 & 12/12.

12-18-2007 = Call; file is with Division 9 ofcr. (bckgrnd check); e-prompt to shake it; touch.

12-19-2007 = NOA2 by e-mail & web, dated 12-18-07 (187 days; 201 per VJ); in mail 12/24/07.

01-09-2008 = File from USCIS to NVC, 1-4-08; NVC creates file, 1/15/08; to consulate 1/16/08.

01-23-2008 = Consulate gets file; outdated Packet 4 mailed to fiancee 1/27/08; rec'd 3/3/08.

04-29-2008 = Fiancee's 4-min. consular interview, 8:30 a.m.; much evidence brought but not allowed to be presented (consul: "More proof! Second interview! Bring your fiance!").

05-05-2008 = Infuriating $12 call to non-English-speaking consulate appointment-setter.

05-06-2008 = Better $12 call to English-speaker; "joint" interview date 6/30/08 (my selection).

06-30-2008 = Stokes Interrogations w/Ecuadorian (not USC); "wait 2 weeks; we'll mail her."

07-2008 = Daily calls to DOS: "currently processing"; 8/05 = Phoned consulate, got Section Chief; wrote him.

08-07-08 = E-mail from consulate, promising to issue visa "as soon as we get her passport" (on 8/12, per DHL).

08-27-08 = Phoned consulate (they "couldn't find" our file); visa DHL'd 8/28; in hand 9/1; through POE on 10/9 with NO hassles(!).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's sucks being on the wrong side of an argument, but not accepting defeat makes it all the more difficult to swallow. :whistle:

so you're in agreeance that you're on the wrong side of an issue (hell, all issues for that matter)?

Glad to hear!!! :thumbs:


nfrsig.jpg

The Great Canadian to Texas Transfer Timeline:

2/22/2010 - I-129F Packet Mailed

2/24/2010 - Packet Delivered to VSC

2/26/2010 - VSC Cashed Filing Fee

3/04/2010 - NOA1 Received!

8/14/2010 - Touched!

10/04/2010 - NOA2 Received!

10/25/2010 - Packet 3 Received!

02/07/2011 - Medical!

03/15/2011 - Interview in Montreal! - Approved!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
- Back to Top -


Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×