You may have noticed that in recent weeks, the Biden administration has been rolling out a hell of a lot of new regulations. Earlier this month it was big student loan reforms and a massive improvement in how public lands are managed, then this week we had better pay and working conditions for working Americans, minimum staffing ratios for nursing homes, and even improved service on airlines.
That’s not only because it’s an election year, though Joe & Kamala certainly do like to point out that where the Other Guy rages (and wants to raise inflation!) they’ve been busy making Americans’ lives better. But the bigger reason is that the administration wants to get new rules finalized prior to May, to keep them from being tossed out in the next Congress via the Congressional Review Act, which Donald Trump and his cronies used to reverse a bunch of Barack Obama’s environmental regulations.
. . . The requirement that coal plants find a way to eliminate 90 percent of their emissions by 2032 effectively accelerates the end of coal for power generation, which was inevitable anyway. Roughly 70 percent of US coal plants have already closed, and last year, coal generated only 16 percent of electric power, a new record low. In addition to the emissions rule, three other final rules also impose strict new limits on mercury, coal ash, and pollution of wastewater, to put an end to the environmental degradation caused by coal.
. . . The other option, obviously, would be for utilities to meet coming demand with renewables, as administration officials pointed out when previewing the new rule. Thanks to the IRA’s hundreds of billions of dollars in incentives, carbon-free power generation, including battery storage, already beats the cost of building new gas plants. Going forward, the administration is confident renewables will be the far more cost-effective and reliable way to meet increasing demand by 2032, when the emissions limits fully kick in.
Okay.
I’m sorry, I got bored. Can you make that into a tiktok video for easier consumption?
I’ve really got to stop being optimistic about devout Democrats. It really is the party of James Carville and Hillary Clinton - ignorant, elitist, and tone deaf until the end of time.
LOCK HER UP
I mean uh…sorry, that just came out. I meant um…something something Bernie something something DNC?
So I’m a right wing troll now? Think about it logically for a second. What do right wing trolls want to do when they jump into internal Democratic disputes? I’m pretty sure their primary goal would be to drive a wedge between the activist left and the establishment. Now, what am I arguing for? If you look back on this thread, I’m encouraging Democratic loyalists to post more content about Biden’s accomplishments instead of trying to shame voters. It’s basic conflict resolution. You aren’t going to get any kind of reconciliation by being rude and dismissive. My whole point is to bring as much reconciliation to the Democrats as I can without compromising my political beliefs.
There is a serious rift in the Democratic party that you seem to be somehow completely unaware of. It didn’t start with Hillary, or even Bill or Bernie. Look into the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago if you want to understand how deep and far back the rift goes. You aren’t going to pave over the differences by belittling or dismissing legitimate disagreement. The only way to get to a unified front against Trump and his fascists is to acknowledge the differences in a respectful way, and then emphasize what can be gained by working together. That’s way more important than trying to win some kind of smug victory in an online forum.
The idea that I’m a right wing troll is ridiculous, and I think you could learn a lot by exploring why you jump so easily to that assumption. If people like you didn’t exist, right wing trolls would have to play your side as well. They want us sniping at each-other. Compare it to Hamas’ strategy in attacking Israel. They knew that Israel couldn’t help overreacting and destroying their own credibility. It’s the same thing Osama bin Laden did to the US. When right wing trolls spread their disingenuous bullshit, their whole goal is to get a reaction from Democratic loyalists that further alienates the Democratic establishment from it’s base.
I mean, okay, let’s give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you’re being genuine here. Surely you acknowledge the absolute deluge of obvious propaganda, rehashed from 2016, trying to convince young, idealistic, uninformed voters to either not vote or to vote 3rd party. It’s not an unreasonable assumption that anyone making comments in that vein is an agitator or a useful idiot. It’s correct most of the time.
Getting drawn into one-sided good faith debates with such people is playing into their hands. Ridicule and dismissal defeats them.
If there is still doubt then you’re just an idiot, but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you just think you’re being witty.
I acknowledge Oct 7. That doesn’t mean I endorse the response. It seems like an obvious response. It seems maximally oppositional to their attackers. It’s also exactly what their attackers wanted.
I’ve already explained to you why this is wrong. You are just making an assertion without even a hint of a theory as to why it’s correct. You don’t think that they expect you to do this? You think they don’t expect you to piss off actual progressives when you act that way?
You identified me as a right wing troll as a result of their posts, and I never even said anything of the sort. In my recent history you can see me arguing against a lot of their bullshit, including “genocide Joe”. Hell, you can go back to 10+ years of posts on Reddit with this username if you really want.
This is exactly the dumb behavior my original comment was about. You’re not helping.
Do you or do you not acknowledge that there have been a lot of trolls and propaganda? Instead of answering my question you went on a weird tangent about Oct 7.
It wasn’t a tangent, it was an analogy. I have also made it clear several times that right wing trolls exist. Why would I be discussing their strategy and how you’re playing into it if I didn’t think they exist? I don’t think you are exactly trolling, but at this point it’s clear to me that you are not trying to understand what I’m saying at all. I see no point in continuing.
Well we need to have a baseline agreement on the state of things before we discuss how best to handle it. I was trying to nail you down on that first. If you didn’t believe trolls were a problem, there’d be no point in discussing how to handle them.