On one of the most consequential nights in the 2024 presidential race, the fate of our entire planet received all of 120 seconds. In fact, Harris several times praised the expansion of oil and gas development under President Joe Biden’s administration and doubled down on her promise not to ban fracking. Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump were each allotted one minute to discuss their plans for fighting the climate crisis during the September 10 presidential debate.

  • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
    263·
    2 months ago

    However, she did cast the deciding vote for the largest climate bill in world history, but let’s forget about that.

  • someguy3@lemmy.world
    204·
    2 months ago

    Gore ran on it and lost the election. So Obama learned to stay the fuck away from it. Hillary said she’d have a map room to fight it and lost the election. So Biden learned to stay the fuck away from it. But in office Biden did green energy anyway, and polls said he was going to lose the election. So Kamala learned to stay the fuck away from it. It’s a losing issue because the voters never show up for it. I think it’s important, but voters never show up.

    • GreenSkree@lemmy.world
      11·
      2 months ago

      Plus, there’s so much disinformation from the other side that you’re apt to lose voters that consume any amount of that crap.

      If something doesn’t energize your base and it makes you lose votes from outside your base, it’s a net loss to campaign on. It seems that climate change is currently one of those issues.

      • someguy3@lemmy.world
        3·
        2 months ago

        Both to campaign on and to act on, unfortunately. If people want this to be acted on, then Dems need to win.

        • GreenSkree@lemmy.world
          1·
          2 months ago

          If people want this to be acted on, then Dems need to win.

          Oh, absolutely.

          Both to campaign on and to act on, unfortunately.

          I think there’s a big difference between them making the small (but good) progress with legislation they’ve done this term compared to making climate a part of their campaign and bringing it up all the time. Idiots on the right will attack opponents on anything, but currently, I imagine most of the population is put off by the “she’s gonna ban ur meat and stove!!1” weirdos. Sometimes not engaging is the most effective way to keep bad arguments out of the public sphere.

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      31·
      2 months ago

      It’s an issue that young voters want to talk about but they don’t show up to vote no matter how much politicians cater to them (look at other countries to prove it) and the changes necessary to protect the environment aren’t popular with the people that actually vote…

      • fluxion@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        2 months ago

        The youth seem to generally have the best moral compass vs other demographics. If they backed it up with actually turning out to vote, countries might stop slipping on the wrong direction.

  • blazera@lemmy.worldEnglish
    3·
    2 months ago

    Theyre targeting the largest voter base. Majority of new vehicles sold are big ass SUVs. Americans dont give a damn about the climate, or others safety and well being in general.

  • Nuke_the_whales@lemmy.world
    41·
    2 months ago

    It’s not an issue because out of both parties it’s clear which side you need to vote for if you’re an environmentalist. I know the Democrats will never be good enough for environmentalists, but they know that Trump is not an option and will do the things that are designed to destroy the environment.

    • Verdant Banana@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      14·
      2 months ago

      are you trying to marginalize environmentalists and at the same time trying to make the current climate crisis out to be just a small issue that only some environmentalists want when in reality it is an issue all life on this planet faces

      Democrats and Republicans make it hard to tell the two apart

      • Nuke_the_whales@lemmy.world
        2·
        2 months ago

        Is that what your poor reading comprehension picked up? Let me simplify. Who is gonna help you more if you’re trying to g help the environment, Harris or Trump? Does anyone with a brain cell think Trump?? Anyone?

        It’s not a big election issue because we know who is on what side of this issue.

        • Verdant Banana@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
          12·
          2 months ago

          obviously not Trump but what does Harris bring to the table, Walz?

          Resistance to the Line 3 pipeline expansion is led by Indigenous women and two-spirit people.[35] Ojibwe-led groups including Giniw Collective, Camp Migizi, Red Lake Treaty Camp, RISE Coalition, and Honor the Earth among others have been at the center of resistance.[36] Demonstrators and protesters organizing in opposition to the pipeline refer to themselves as “water protectors”[37] and follow a campaign of non-violent civil disobedience that includes direct actions.[38] Organizers aim to convince the Biden administration to revoke or suspend the pipeline project’s federal clean water permit.[23] Minnesota Governor Tim Walz has not taken a firm stance on the pipeline expansion, which received federal approval under the Trump administration.[18][23]

          Opposition to the pipeline persisted throughout the years-long permit process and continued as legal challenges to the project were mounted.[39][18] Opponents of the pipeline organized protests, at one point making an encampment outside of the offices of the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission.[17]

          After the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers gave final approval for the project, it was granted a Minnesota Pollution Control Agency construction storm water permit on November 30, 2020.[40] Construction of the pipeline immediately commenced.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Line_3_protests

          • chryan@lemmy.world
            3·
            2 months ago

            obviously not Trump but what does Harris bring to the table, Walz?

            As @Nuke_the_whales@lemmy.world has succinctly pointed out, your choices are: vote for Trump, or vote for Harris.

            Asking inane questions like “what does Harris bring to the table?” is both-siding bullshit that detracts from this simple fact: If you care about the environment, Trump is the absolute worst choice. Vote Harris.

            There is no resolution to your straw man argument worth having and quoting a Wikipedia article doesn’t change the reality of your choice.

            • Verdant Banana@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
              14·
              2 months ago

              obviously no it does not change the reality that would take citizens actively standing against the two-party sham

  • Telodzrum@lemmy.world
    11·
    2 months ago

    Voters’ revealed preferences demonstrate time and again they do not cast ballots based on foreign policy, climate policy, education, inequality, gun control, etc. It’s basically just the economy, violent crime, and immigration that decide elections. As such, climate discussions were properly left out of discussions at the most recent debate.

  • ShareMySims@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    36·
    2 months ago

    It wasn’t included, because, just as the replies here show, elections are not about improving society, but instead are nothing but a popularity contest designed and orchestrated to keep the public distracted while those who exploit and oppress us continue to do so uninterrupted.

    The public’s continued participation is the continued legitimisation of the process. Getting you riled up to vote “team ____ no matter who”, making you feel like you’re part of a team, that’s just part of the cult indoctrination, and the harder you deny it works on your “team” just as much as it does on the other, the stronger it’s obviously working on you.

    Their rules are made up by them to keep themselves at the top, stop obeying their self appointed authority, they don’t care about you, nor the planet.