But for how important this election will be for Planet Earth and the humans who live on it, the issue itself isn’t getting much airtime. Earlier this month, The Guardian examined the campaign websites of Democratic and Republican Senate candidates in eight battleground states. Of all the candidates surveyed, only two explicitly mentioned climate change.
This retreat hasn’t happened by accident. Over the last two years, some of the Democratic Party’s most influential strategists, donors, and think tanks have been explicitly telling candidates to shut up about climate change and focus on the economy instead—as if those were two separate issues.
It’s a strategy known as climate hushing. And with the midterms fast-approaching, it’s worth asking: Who convinced Democrats that ignoring climate change was a winning strategy? Does the evidence actually support that argument? And what is that silence costing the rest of us?
Second time I’ve seen this type of question pop up. Feels like a marginally more sophisticated GOP tactic to try to trick an opponent into bringing it up and then flopping hard when they sound hella tone deaf and out of touch. Only an idiot candidate would make this one of their main running points.
Climate change mitigation is super important…Just not right now. Right now the goal is to just fucking win so the GOP and corporate demagogues can be reeled in. Remember, the GOP and techbro technofascists actually want end times to hurry up and happen so they can capitalize on the turmoil (they already have a billion mile head start) or meet Jesus and go to heaven or something. Idk, they’re insane sociopaths with absolutely no tender sentiment toward anyone else. It’s absolutely insane to me how many MAGA pieces of shit there are…makes me want to believe there’s been some huge conspiracy to lace everything with lead to create a critical mass of brain damaged broken angry violent racists.
That would make sense if not for the fact this is an issue almost all Dem voters care about.
Sounds to me like it’s probably safe to say almost all Dem candidates probably care about it, too. An implicit shared understanding of its importance wouldn’t be a stretch. Dem candidates aren’t trying to win only card-carrying Dem votes, there may be other, more on the fence, demographics. If anyone decides to stay at home for the election because climate didn’t get brought up, then I’m sorry but they ultimately deserve the MAGA world they’d be enabling through their inaction.
I’m going to have to ask for evidence for that one.
Centrist swing voters either don’t exist or aren’t a significant campaign demographic; we have a quarter century of data proving this. When Republicans vote for Democrats they do so for progressives with a vision (or people who can trick them into thinking they’re progressives with a vision). Aside from that American elections are decided almost entirely on turnout, so the question is how to make all of those Dems/lean Dems vote instead of staying home, and that’s where appealing to an issue almost all of them agree is important would be useful.
Who deserves what is completely irrelevant to this conversation.
You’ve already received well-reasoned and logical answers in this thread as to why this topic is not a viable campaign issue amidst the socioeconomic and existential threats. The man with a gun in a burning house metaphor characterized this election’s mood particularly well, as did the surgeon with burning shoes. Your insistence on trying to make this topic relevant right now reinforces my suspicion that climate guilt is a desperate psyop by right wing operatives to undercut Dem candidates.
Anthropogenic climate change is absolutely a huge issue, but to paraphrase Col. Chris Hadfield, ‘it’s not the thing that’s going to kill you first.’ Clean the house of reactionary fascists, leash the capitalist greed, find steadier economic ground, and then maybe well-reasoned solutions for mitigating climate change can be addressed. Unfortunately, it’s probably all in vain since Gore lost the 2000 election. I wouldn’t be surprised if the instability and grift we’re experiencing currently is only the beginning of the end being wrought by the changing climate. Rifkin’s entropy watershed may already be upon us.
I’ve received centrist mythology offered without a lick of evidence. Again, we have actual history and data that can be used to confirm or refute these answers; these aren’t arguments so good I have to accept them without evidence. Speaking of evidence, it’s a bit outdated being from earlier this year, but climate change is still a huge issue among Dem voters. Besides, clearly some candidates are talking about climate change, so the “not a viable campaign issue” thing falls flat on its face. Logic and reason is frankly pointless if it’s not grounded in reality.
Cool. Glad to hear it’s receiving some campaign attention. Hurray for earth.