Pretty feeble slippery slope argument. “If we let these climate activists have their climate change debate, then we’ll have to make all the other debates about some other single topic that only a few people care about.”
Horseshit, Perez. We have very little time to get started reducing emissions so that we can get to net zero by 2050, or sooner. I cannot fathom why Perez and whoever else is backing that stance are adamantly opposed to having 11 multi-topic debates, and allocating a single debate to solely address the existential crisis of our time.
The looming self-inflicted climate catastrophe gets a lot of attention in the media, but almost exclusively in terms of warnings about consequences. I don’t see very much in the non-specialist media regarding the necessary massive policy changes that have to be implemented to mitigate the impacts. A presidential debate is an ideal means of bringing these issues to the general public, whose support is necessary for making those changes. Not allowing that debate is just continuing business as usual.
What would happen to her senate seat if she were to win? MA has a R governor and is there any doubt he’d fill it with a R for the short term until a special election can be held.
P.S. For a whole lot of reasons I’m not optimistic about flipping the senate. Talented capable people are running for the presidency instead of taking on incumbent Rs who are up for reelection in 2020.
i think climate change is the most challenging issue we face. IMO the debate format is not the format to do it justice. as a debate topic, i think that the urgency of our situation needs to be conveyed. this is a global concern that needs a widespread mutual effort. that is absolutely what the dump is incapable (another I word) of handling.
I really am so pissed that that seems like such a big deal when every fucking administration and every fucking ticket in a presidential race since the founding has consisted of two people of the same goddamn gender.
But yes I do dare because it’s absurd on the face of it that we still haven’t had this.
Is it possible people like Beto, perhaps Buttigieg, may choose to run for a statewide office if they lose convincingly in Iowa and South Carolina? Or would they stay in to perhaps secure a VP spot from the eventual nominee?
And maybe Hickenlooper can run for Senate in Colorado.
So, there we’ll be, watching Dem candidates on a debate stage while PP knows he’s gone this far and can do much more harm before January 2021 as he goes ahead with what’s been his priority for a long time. And no, don’t take it to mean I’m saying the party shouldn’t press ahead as best they can.
49 rollbacks of environmental rules completed, 34 in process, 83 completed.
Incumbent R senator Gardner of CO is up for reelection and Hick is running for the presidency as is the governor Bennet instead of mounting a challenge to the incumbent who’s deemed to be vulnerable. Go figure.
we are thinking the same. he needs some seasoning and we, the country, need an effective senator from texas. (i really fucking wish he had taken ted out). cornyn will do.
Typical establishment b$$$$t. What does this a$$hole actually do, anyway, but defend right wing Dem incumbents against progressive challengers? F this a$$hole!
Unfortunately, he has no substance. He’s just crimping the Obama “no blue and red states” nonsense that got us President Donald Trump. I would prefer he just go home and stay inside.
