2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumClinton:“Coal Will Be Part Of The Energy Mix For Years To Come, Both In The U.S. And Around The worl
"The Down with Tyranny blog quotes Hillary Clintons statement in a recent letter to Democratic U.S. Senator from West Virginia, Joe Manchin, assuring him that as President she wont be overly aggressive to reduce the coal industry, because coal-mining jobs are at stake; thus: Coal will be part of the energy mix for years to come, both in the U.S. and around the world.
That blogger, who styles himself Gaius Publius, has excellent sources in the national Democratic Party, and he comments:
Clinton uses job-concern as a reason to seem like we should proceed carefully. But after all, a great many people in the U.S. are out of jobs many in disappearing industries and yet Ill be willing to bet money she either signs TPP or refuses to renegotiate it; then signs TTIP and TISA, and with them, says goodbye to the last jobs worth having, save those near the top."
Is this another flip flop?
http://rinf.com/alt-news/breaking-news/clinton-coal-will-part-energy-mix-years-come-u-s-around-world/
grasswire
(50,130 posts)CalvinballPro
(1,019 posts)Context remains king, and Clinton has clearly been talking about targeted programs to replace deadly coal jobs with renewable energy jobs instead. Would I rather work underground getting black lung, or outside installing wind turbines or solar panels? Hmm, let me think...
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)I want someone who will stand behind their words even if I don't like them.
Hillary's constant changing of positions, depending on who's in front of her, really makes me doubt anything she says.
For the record. Coal needs to be phased out.
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)down ? Why anger all those voters in the coal belt ? I'm sensing a context issue with this OP.
okasha
(11,573 posts)She has also said that alternate jobs training must be available for miners and others who will lose their employment in the transition.
Yeah, a context problem. More like a truth problem actually, since the OP lies by omission.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)NWCorona
(8,541 posts)If we could actually have a clean energy plan and implement it. The costs associated with mining could make it unfeasible compared to other sources. That's a ways away tho.
That said coal will still be utilized in other parts of the world and here in some cases. Coal doesnt have to be king.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Wind and water sources, he wanted great strides but it is very slow in coming on board. It is a better way to get our energy, renewable and cleaner. Before shutting down our current sources the new ones needs to be in place. There will be jobs created with the new sources. So no, shutting down coal is not going to happen until other sources are in place.
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)renewable energies that came online around the world. 90% !!!!!
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)Thanks for the info
djean111
(14,255 posts)Some would call that lying.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Yes, this is a flop compared to what she said about a week ago. As far as how many times she has changed positions on this issue over the course of her career, I can't even guess.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)Too bad for pacific islanders whose home become seabed
The refugees will be serviced by Haliburton, Boots, Root and Kellogg, any resistance to the new world order by the MIC.