Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumHillary Already Reversing Her Positions to Appease Corporate Donors
It looks like Hillary Clintons opposition to the coal industry didnt last very long. In a recent spat with pro-coal protestors, Clinton made it clear that she had little intention in hurting the coal industry. Ring of Fires Farron Cousins discusses this.
Jackie Wilson Said
(4,176 posts)lewebley3
(3,412 posts)Old Crow
(2,212 posts)At least for this week. Next week, who knows?
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)YOHABLO
(7,358 posts)Blanks
(4,835 posts)When a candidate promises that minimum wage is going to be raised to $15 because wages have been stagnant for a long time, people think that it's gonna happen right away.
This is the same thing. Yes, that's her plan convert to renewable energy sources, stop relying on coal as a source of energy, take care of the workers in the industry with retraining. It's probably at least a 20 year plan.
It's not 'caving to industry' to elaborate on the time frame, to inform the industry that you're not going to do something reckless and start abandoning coal plants.
This is exactly the kind of thing that brought the Tea Party into power. Politics moves slow and the reason it moves slowly is because we have a system built on compromise. The 'reeducation program' has to be in place before you start pulling the plug and there has to be a viable plan for switching to alternative energies before you can actually start switching.
The guy in the video is s blowhard. Reminds me of Joe the plumber.
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)Even Her Majesty admitted she "misspoke". You can't even do the same?
Blanks
(4,835 posts)lewebley3
(3,412 posts)arcane1
(38,613 posts)abelenkpe
(9,933 posts)There's nothing I'd like more than to get started down the path toward sustainability. I'm a civil engineer with a secondary degree in natural resources and environmental science.
It's what I wake up every morning wishing we were moving toward, but I see the people with opposing views on a constant basis and they will not vote for the candidate who puts the environment before jobs.
My criticism of Hillary on this is that she came out so forcefully AGAINST the coal industry initially instead of FOR the retraining program, but the press chooses which clips they're gonna play, they decide how the story is going to play out. They decide who is going to look bad. When you have candidates speaking to different groups with different interests every single day, it's easy pickings if you're gonna find an issue where a politician has walked a position back.
starroute
(12,977 posts)Experts are warning that we have ten years at most to make the required changes and that the window is rapidly closing. They're saying we need the equivalent of a Manhattan Project to phase out fossil fuels as rapidly as possible.
This is not an area where incrementalism is possible or where people have to be reeducated before any changes can be made at all. And it's especially important to have leaders who can convey a sense of the urgency and not be saying the equivalent of "what's the rush?"
angrychair
(8,698 posts)This quote from you:
It is always 10, 20, or 30 years away.
Funny how the goalposts keep moving. Funny how there is always money to subsidize the oil and coal industry to the tune of billions of dollars or spend more on Defense than the next 11 countries combined (all either our allies or non-hostile) but never enough for the actual R&D needed to achieve the goals people like HRC only give lip service too.
We are smart enough to figure out better ways of killing each other but not better ways to produce energy?
DreamSmoker
(841 posts)To Cherry Pic and use this as an excuse not to Vote Democrat or Hillary is plain Stupid..
Especially if Your choices are Hillary or the Devil...
Victor_c3
(3,557 posts)They did what was necessary to keep a real progressive out of the White House. Enjoy a Hillary Clinton presidency! You guys brought it on to yourselves!!
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)centered
raindaddy
(1,370 posts)from the democratic wing of the Democratic party after her first term...
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)scottie55
(1,400 posts)Thyunkit?
Victor_c3
(3,557 posts)Oh, the betrayal!! I thought she was a real progressive - she even said so herself!!!!
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)protect the environment. Sanders is getting the coal miners vote not
Hillary
Victor_c3
(3,557 posts)What sorts of "real" progress has Hillary gotten done? More wars in the Middle East? Her support for the patriot act? Support for big banks and Wall Street over working class and middle class Americans?? She sounds really progressive to me
Bernie Sanders is just a poser
ToxMarz
(2,166 posts)Ring of Fire has become unlistenable unless you HATE Hillary Clinton. There is no praise there for her for anything. I have been listening for years and stopped a few weeks ago. Even Jimmy Dore has been infected, but at least he doesn't carry it to far in his personal podcast so I can still listen to that. Hope to be able to back to listening to it after the Primaries. What I understood from Hillary's statement was that the words "we are going to put coal miners and coal companies out of business" were not consistent with what she proposed and she still has the same proposal. Clinton wants to help coal country adapt. Nothing has changed as far as she has said concerning that proposal of the $30 billion plan she released last fall calling for increased job training, ets. So Farron Cousins problem is that unless she characterizes it as "we are going to put coal miners and coal companies out of business", she is a liar. Well if that was you and your families livelihood, I think you would want to hear a little more than that. More about the plan to retrain them and bring new industry to the area. They may not have heard that before, only the part about putting them out of business.