Is the lack of response to global warming a plot?

[Benjabobaria]

Lol, clearly not a plot to drown Democratic states *snickers*
Currently central states vote Republican because of their lack of people. The Rust belt voted for Trump for his protectionist ideas. There are Southern coastal states with conservative governments as well. However in the future I could see a coast-center split in voters as the effects of global warming worsen. People in the center would not see the effects as much.

While this plot thing is a dumb conspiracy, the Republican party really needs to stop denying climate change. They've always been pro-business, which is likely why, and the post-truth era has worsened things with the rise of the alt-right. The Democratic party has some flaws but ignoring the single greatest threat to humanity is not one of them. Hopefully Trump's unpopularity will lead to a Democratic takeover, because America needs to act on climate change.

[Greed and Death]

There won't be "apocalyptic floodwaters" like a giant tsunami.

The sea will continue to rise and encroach gradually, which will eventually turn NYC into Venice and gradually eat other coastal cities. Those people won't vanish though - they'll move inland and keep voting.

This "plot" is silly.

But large numbers of them will be impoverished and a large amount of blue state wealth will be Destroyed..

It is worth pointing out of the two major Red state Ports, Houston and New Orleans. Houston is built so far inland Global warming will not be a problem and New Orleans is so blue the rest of the state wishes it would hurry up and sink.

[San Marlindo]

Belief in global warning and belief in climate change are not mutually exclusive.

It's possible for example, that somebody believes in combating desertification without believing in global warming.

[Internationalist Bastard]

If by plot you mean the blatantly obvious truth that conservatives prefer business over regulations, then yes

[Internationalist Bastard]

Belief in global warning and belief in climate change are not mutually exclusive.

It's possible for example, that somebody believes in combating desertification without believing in global warming.

Very true

[Ifreann]

There won't be "apocalyptic floodwaters" like a giant tsunami.

The sea will continue to rise and encroach gradually, which will eventually turn NYC into Venice and gradually eat other coastal cities. Those people won't vanish though - they'll move inland and keep voting.

This "plot" is silly.

But what if global warming happens the day after tomorrow?

[Internationalist Bastard]

There won't be "apocalyptic floodwaters" like a giant tsunami.

The sea will continue to rise and encroach gradually, which will eventually turn NYC into Venice and gradually eat other coastal cities. Those people won't vanish though - they'll move inland and keep voting.

This "plot" is silly.

But what if global warming happens the day after tomorrow?

Then we freeze. I can't remember, was that Nick Cage film?

[Ifreann]

But what if global warming happens the day after tomorrow?

Then we freeze. I can't remember, was that Nick Cage film?

Dennis Quaid and Jake Gyllenhaal.

[Internationalist Bastard]

Then we freeze. I can't remember, was that Nick Cage film?

Dennis Quaid and Jake Gyllenhaal.

Really? Could've sworn. Ah well

[Ifreann]

Dennis Quaid and Jake Gyllenhaal.

Really? Could've sworn. Ah well

It's certainly crazy enough.

[Longweather]

Anyways, aside from my joke earlier. I don't believe the lack of response to global warming is a plot by Republicans to drown out many American liberals (truly a different standard compared to the rest of the world) as well as their compatriots in the south. They just dislike regulations and, presumably, don't agree with climate alarmists on the severity of the issue. I've seen that term used by the American conservatives as a counter climate skeptic.

Personally, I view both terms to be similar to calling a person a "heathen" or "heretic."

[AiliailiA]

OP is silly. The lack of response is because global warming is an externalized cost, any response to it involves paying the costs ... and people are pretty good at blaming the 'tragedy of the Commons' on anyone but themselves.

[AiliailiA]

There are Southern coastal states with conservative governments as well.

Hey, I just realized how the OP trimmed the 270-to-win map to exclude those Southern coastal states.

I revise my opinion of the Original Post from "silly" to "bullcrap".

[Neutraligon]

Anyways, aside from my joke earlier. I don't believe the lack of response to global warming is a plot by Republicans to drown out many American liberals (truly a different standard compared to the rest of the world) as well as their compatriots in the south. They just dislike regulations and, presumably, don't agree with climate alarmists on the severity of the issue. I've seen that term used by the American conservatives as a counter climate skeptic.

Personally, I view both terms to be similar to calling a person a "heathen" or "heretic."

I would disagree that they don't like regulations, they do like regulations but on different things.

[Neanderthaland]

Additionally we'll be forced to add topsoil to all the coastal gardens.

...the plot thickens.

[Nulla Bellum]

Americuh first. Let's stop American warming and nuke them sumbitch polluters over in Global wherever that is.

/sarc

[Neutraligon]

Given that global warming would push the liberals inland I doubt it.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

No.

If it was, it would be the stupidest plot in history.


After seeing massive damage to the cost, they would all agree drastic action must be taken and vote democrat after seeing irrefutable proof that Global Warming is real.

I feel like you're being excessively optimistic. We've long since confirmed that people will deny shit that has proof right in front of them because they don't want to admit they were wrong, and that goes for both sides of the aisle.

Yes, but there is a reason stuff like say, 9/11 conspiracy theorists are in the minority.

Once there is irrefutable proof, most people who didn't believe it will say "Well, I was wrong."

[Darussalam]

While I think the mainstream opposition to the notion of anthropogenic climate change is a...notably unique aspect of US politics, so to speak, I'm disinclined to believe that it's a particularly coherent and organized conspiracy plot, let alone the one with resolution as absurd as to drown coastal Democrat-voting states. If anything, I'm more inclined to suggest that even the OP of the thread does not genuinely believe in such idea.

Rather, I propose that climate change denialism stems from the powerful influence from the energy industrial lobbies, as well as the greater populace's pessimistic attitude towards state intervention, which is the most common proposed response to climate change. Not to mention a tendency among humans to downplay a more drastic, but less "dramatic" problems, in favor of more theatrical issues such as cultural anxiety towards immigrants and asylum seekers or the war on terror.

[Alvecia]

I think it is a "plot" by many Republicans, but not for the stated reasons.
Denying Climate Change gets them more votes from their core constituents and funds from the fossil fuel industries.

[Kannap]

More like a plot to make lots of money from fossil fuel industries by ignoring or denying global warming and climate change.

[The Emerald Legion]

While I think the mainstream opposition to the notion of anthropogenic climate change is a...notably unique aspect of US politics, so to speak, I'm disinclined to believe that it's a particularly coherent and organized conspiracy plot, let alone the one with resolution as absurd as to drown coastal Democrat-voting states. If anything, I'm more inclined to suggest that even the OP of the thread does not genuinely believe in such idea.

Rather, I propose that climate change denialism stems from the powerful influence from the energy industrial lobbies, as well as the greater populace's pessimistic attitude towards state intervention, which is the most common proposed response to climate change. Not to mention a tendency among humans to downplay a more drastic, but less "dramatic" problems, in favor of more theatrical issues such as cultural anxiety towards immigrants and asylum seekers or the war on terror.

A safe bet. Considering.

Personally, I doubt it.

There are Southern coastal states with conservative governments as well.

Hey, I just realized how the OP trimmed the 270-to-win map to exclude those Southern coastal states.

I revise my opinion of the Original Post from "silly" to "bullcrap".

I trimmed nothing. I have people to do that for me. (AKA, that was just the first google image I found of the campaign map.)

And yes. It's silly. Was meant to be silly. Sometimes you've got to break up the monotony of serious politics after all.