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?
bro, people want to experience life and that means not worrying about climate change, that means cheap gas and food, cheap electric for air conditioning. We as apes cannot face the future outside of make believe afterlife stories. We live in a 2 and 4 year cycle and those who we elect mostly live in the financial cycle of our markets. Right now we need to focus on fixing our government before it can address climate .
But they are worrying about climate change. Your reply before this one was literally a response to me proving they did. Why would you say something so obviously false?