Obama Can Say 'Climate' After All | The Nation - 5 views
-
“yes, my plan will continue to reduce the carbon pollution that is heating our planet, because climate change is not a hoax. More droughts and floods and wildfires are not a joke. They are a threat to our children’s future.”
-
president’s own statements, before last night, have not been terribly reassuring either, if only because there have been so few of them.
- ...6 more annotations...
-
promised to “be very clear in voicing my belief that we’re going to have to take further steps to deal with climate change in a serious way.”
-
Even as his own government’s scientists were affirming climate change’s connection to the extreme weather events of 2012, the president declined to use his bully pulpit to make the connection clear to the public, much less attempt to rally Americans to action.
-
assumed that talking about climate change turns voters off: it’s too dark, too controversial, too complicated
-
“Three out of four Americans now acknowledge climate disruption is real, and more than two out of three believe we should be doing something about it,
-
In 2008, it looked as though Barack Obama would be the hero to lead such a quest. Now, his speech in Charlotte has raised hopes among some environmentalists that Obama, after an extended absence, may be ready to rejoin the battle
-
This article addresses a point that hit home with me from the Democratic National Convention: Obama brought up climate, but did not champion it in the same style and with the same conviction that he used to. Even while I was struck by his lack of gusto on the subject, the article is surprised that he brought it up at all. This issue has seen barely any coverage at all, with Romney in particular suggesting that even caring about climate change is shallow and ungrounded. He has continued to basically ridicule Obama's (self-proclaimed) devotion to the issue, which is not typical even for mainstream republicans. Obama himself has been almost entirely silent on the issue for the entire campaign (he brought up the term once in 2012). This article makes a really good partner for the first one Eli posted, which dealt with the variety of issues that the radicalization of parties has effectively silenced the debate over. As with the issue of immigration, we see the Republican Party leaning extremely right and making any productive discussion of the issue difficult. If Romney himself treats climate change as a joke and mocks environmentalism as a cause, how can the sides even begin to discuss specific issues of policy? I am honestly really doubtful of Obama's stance as an environmentalist: after the failure of one of his recent cap-and-trade policies, the term "climate change" was entirely avoided in his speech. I remember Dan saying in class that if Obama didn't claim to champion these issues during his presidency, you wouldn't be able to tell by his policy. From this article's description of his rhetoric for the last year, I would say that now he is neither talking the talk nor walking the walk, leaving his affiliation to this cause simply to the fact that he is a Democratic candidate and climate change is a "Democratic issue". To me, there is concrete proof that neither candidate has been taking climate change seriously this election. If both candidates are treating this
- ...2 more comments...
-
Climate change is just one of many issues that Obama must discuss in a specific way as to not seem too revolutionary nor liberal (I like how this article mentions that "Democratic politicians have shunned the "L word": liberal"). Every mention has to be well-tailored and as non-controversial as possible as to not offend a sensitive audience, which reminds me of how Obama addresses his views on social issues in front of more conservative audiences, where he either evades the topic at hand, whether it be about abortion or marriage equality, or presents his opinion in a simple and placid way. When discussing climate change, Obama employs a similar attitude, which I personally find maddening, especially since the article mentions that "the public... finally see for themselves... the reality of climate change" and that even if Obama took a more powerful stance on the issue, it would doubtfully make a big impact on his supporters, most of whom are already agree with Obama's alleged opinions. Beyond the very toned-down attitude Obama brings, it's also interesting what he chooses to note when mentioning climate change. Instead of honing in on details, he talks about events of the past few years that vaguely reference major problems and then focuses in on the aspects that could appeal to a broad range of voters, like when he talks about the "threat[s] to our children's future." This also serves to combat Romney's rather ridiculous claim that by focusing on the climate, it is impossible to also care about the American people themselves.
-
I think that Obama has been smart to stay mostly silent on climate change. Yes, it's a big issue, but had he made it a major cause of his campaign he would have been even more vulnerable to depiction by Romney as a head-in-the-clouds kind of guy. During an economic crisis, the voters want the president to be focusing on immediate steps for the good of the American middle class - more jobs, lower taxes, cheaper healthcare. Climate change can and obviously does evoke strong emotion in certain voting blocs, but for the majority of middle-class Americans who are still reeling from the recession, they want their president to be focused on their immediate recovery. I think Obama only brought it up here as a direct response to Romney's challenge - to not address it would make him seem weak in his stance. I also think it's worth noting that in this brief mention, he ties it to the immediate future, to help ward off that daydreamer image that Romney evoked.
-
I recently heard an interview with Michael Lewis who wrote an article for Vanity Fair that involved spending a lot of day to day time with Obama. One of the things he talked about was Obama's view of his ability to use his position as president as a "bully pulpit." Obama told Lewis that his experience had been that he, in particular, was such a lightning rod for negative response, that when he took a position conservative journalists and politicians automatically responded so negatively that it was more useful for him to operate more subtly. I would imagine that he was using his speech at the convention to let voters know that he still wants to do something about climate change, and takes it seriously. Hopefully, he will be in a position to do this when he is not thinking about re-election.
-
I think the way Obama has treated climate change as an economic issue is very compelling. One of the main issues that people have with renewable energy is that isn't currently economically sustainable. I think Obama can work on the issue of climate change with the economy in mind and that is what he is doing. The issue that Obama faces on bringing the climate change issue into the economic realm is the Solyndra investment that the government made under his administration. Obama needs to walk the fine line between championing climate change and doing what's best for the economy.