The Death of Climate Denialism

[eridani]

http://inthesetimes.com/article/18040/the-death-of-climate-denialism

Soon the Right will have to abandon its head-in-the-sand strategy—but its next tactic may be more dangerous.

As Dana Milbank, a Beltway standard-bearer for the Washington Post, wrote in a recent op-ed, “Climate has become one of those issues where the gulf between the insular far right and the rest of American … culture has become so vast that it is serving like a moat, keeping out the very demographic groups the GOP needs in coming years.” Eighty-three percent of people in the United States believe climate change constitutes a “very” or “somewhat serious” threat, and institutions from the IMF to Goldman Sachs are sounding the alarm. A New York Times and Stanford University poll this year found that nearly half of Republicans nationwide support some type of government action to curb global warming.

Some influential Republicans are taking heed. Alex Lundry, vice president of the conservative polling firm Target Point Consulting, wrote in a January op-ed for The Daily Caller, “If Republicans insist on listening to those that believe we won’t see the effects of climate change for decades, we are setting ourselves up for a political and a policy mistake that will damage the party and, more importantly, the country.” Tossing around the idea of a third presidential run, Mitt Romney said in January, “I’m one of those Republicans who thinks we are getting warmer and that we are contributing to that.” Rand Paul, another 2016 hopeful, has taken a similar stance. Soon after Romney’s pronouncement, 15 GOP senators, including Paul, voted for a resolution declaring that climate change is not a hoax and that human activity contributes to it.

[chervilant]

1. Why do I suspect that

this is because it's perceived as politically expedient, and NOT because any of these partisan hacks have a clue about what we're facing?

[Blue_Adept]

3. Denliasm was politically expedient for them before

Now they're shifting to where it is now.

[dembotoz]

2. But then they will want to study it for 20 years

[CanonRay]

4. Great, now that it's probably too late to turn this Titanic

now they can jump onboard and blame Obama for it.

[starroute]

5. So what's the more dangerous tactic?

You might at least give us a clue so we don't have to click on the story just to find out what it's about.

I realize that the "danger" part of the story doesn't come across in a brief quote. But the short version is that conservatives are going to push for tax credits and other incentives to the "free market" to transition to renewables while slashing the government investment and regulations that are needed to ensure it doesn't just become one more corporate free-for-all.

[eridani]

6. Establishing programs to deal with climate chande, and then stacking--

--them with deniers so nothing actually gets done.