And yet no conservatives seem to be clamoring to rescind oil subsidies or coal subsidies, but the raucous roar comes up at the Republican rallies when something is said about rescinding renewables and bringing back coal. It's literally the platform the President ran on. I don't think it's political to be able to say that the platform a party runs on is something that they support. Am I misunderstanding something here?
Well this gets into the domain of realpolitiks. As I understand it the platform was not to reinvigorate coal but rather remove targeted regulation that accelerated the collapse of those communities especially in West Virginia and buy them time to transition. I want to lead the world as much as everyone else, but people argue that a heavy green investment would be a self inflicted wound especially when places like China are the biggest polluters and are still outputting more CO2 and see the results of a gas tax in France that disproportionately affects rural communities. I want sustainable energy as much as everyone else on here does, but we need to transition responsibly as our debt is massive.
I'm sorry I'm jumping into a political argument, I'll try my best to stay on point.
From what I read about West Virginia, those communities were collapsing anyway, and what Obama administration did, is to try and support government programs for the former coal miners to learn new trades and get some financial support.
Based on this information, in my opinion this is not even realpolitik, its lying -- as in, knowing facts and then misrepresenting and misleading people; because of any number of reasons -- be that coal lobby, or what 'feels right' for the average voter rather then what happens in reality, and I don't know how to deal with that myself because this realization makes me feel anger.
