• jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    32
    ·
    5 months ago

    Because, like a lot of Biden policies, they are wins on paper but have little to no impact on voters daily lives.

    Example:

    https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-biden-administration-has-taken-more-climate-action-than-any-other-in-history

    “The Biden administration is the first to embrace the goal of reaching net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by midcentury in order to stabilize global temperatures at 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming.* That means that the Biden administration’s interim target—cutting U.S. carbon pollution to half of peak levels by 2030—requires reducing annual carbon pollution nearly four times faster than the Obama administration’s interim target did.** Ambitious policy goals drive ambitious policy change.”

    Sounds great, right? But all he did was set a goal. Are we making progress to that goal? 🤷‍♂️ Is that goal even achievable? 🤷‍♂️ 2030 is only 6 years away, how are we doing right now? 🤷‍♂️

    It’s meaningless babble to claim this as an achievement if you can’t point to a tangible change in the numbers.

    No matter who wins in 2024, they aren’t going to be President in 2030. If Trump wins in '24, or another Republican wins in '28, this goal is out the window.

    • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      51
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      Biden rejoined the Paris Climate Agreement, revoked the Keystone Pipeline permit, created a 13 million acre federal petroleum reserve for Alaskan wildlife, greatly increased oil site lease cost, signed $7B in solar subsidies, enacted the Inflation Reduction act to support clean energy…

      • ZeroCool@vger.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        41
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Yes, but you see, if you ignore all of that… Then Biden hasn’t done anything and it’s all just “meaningless babble!”

      • HWK_290@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        5 months ago

        Exactly. How dare he set goals and then take incremental steps to achieve them? The nerve!

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        Increased efficiency standards on cars, home appliances, industry. Created new permitting rules to streamline new transmission lines. Huge investment in rail

      • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        22
        ·
        5 months ago

        And how much of that matters to the average voter, sitting around with no air conditioning, reading reports about the “hottest year on record” 4 years in a row?

        None of that means anything to the average voter.

    • Optional@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      That’s how these efforts work - they start as a goal. It gets announced after enough support signs on, and they get the policies and money together, then they start spinning up the agencies and addressing the problems and . . . it’s how big things work.

      If you want to declare something and have it immediately be so, you have to do it in a videogame.

      If you’re worried that we won’t get far before idiot christofascist qultists fuck it up, well. Welcome to the party pal.jpg. Don’t boo - vote!

      • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        5 months ago

        What I’m saying is, if you want the voters to notice, you have to actually do something. Setting a goal is nothing. Then they go “look at what we did!” yeah, you haven’t done ANYTHING yet.

        Another example, all the EV chargers…

        https://www.politico.com/news/2023/12/05/congress-ev-chargers-billions-00129996

        It’s great to have a goal to build charging stations. It’s not a WIN until you can point to tangible progress.

        How many built? Last I checked it was around 9? How many are in permitting? 🤷‍♂️ How many are actively being constructed? 🤷‍♂️

        Don’t tout all the things you’ve “done” when you haven’t actually done anything yet.

        “Look at me! I set a goal to lose 175 pounds by August!”

        “Can you actually lose 5 pounds a day every day for 36 days?”

        “🤷‍♂️ But hey! I set the goal! That’s just as good!”

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          Yet, investing in that gym membership and researching better nutrition habits are significant progress, even before you start losing weigh

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      Sounds great, right? But all he did was set a goal. Are we making progress to that goal? 🤷‍♂️ Is that goal even achievable? 🤷‍♂️ 2030 is only 6 years away, how are we doing right now? 🤷‍♂️

      These are all questions that have quantifiable answers yet you chose not to find those answers. Perfectly encapsulating the point of OP.

          • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/carbon/

            “Mild weather decreased emissions from the residential and commercial sectors” - Not policy related.

            “Industrial CO2 emissions remained unchanged in 2023 as industrial production growth slowed” - Growth slowed, but emissions are unchanged, meaning we would have had more industrial emissions if growth had not slowed.

            “Transportation sector emissions remained unchanged between 2022 and 2023, as increased consumption of some petroleum products offset decreases in others”

            Six years to go! Answers are the same, no, no, and not so good.

    • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      5 months ago

      It should be because, like a lot of Biden policies, the on paper win is actually shoveling tons of taxpayer money to the individuals and institutions who have caused the underlying problem he claims to be solving (see also; basically everything Biden has done with police accountability), money fossil fuel companies are going to plow right into lobbying and PR work to further ensure nobody can have a rational conversation about what our country is doing, but, yeah, you’re probably right that for the vast majority of voters it’s just that they don’t see it in their daily lives at all

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      28
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Because, like a lot of Biden policies, they are wins on paper but have little to no impact on voters daily lives.

      It’s not new either.

      Biden makes big promises, fails miserably, makes a token gesture, and then people claim he’s the best ever…

      At a Glasgow climate summit in 2021, the Biden administration offered a commitment to the world: The United States would stop the public financing of oil and gas projects. There would be no more American tax dollars for new natural gas pipelines or wells, the White House said

      The pledge drew praise from climate change activists. But there was one big problem—it was an empty promise.

      In the years since Glasgow, the US has continued to finance fossil fuel projects around the world. The latest example came Thursday, when the US Export-Import Bank finalized a plan to guarantee part of the financing for a $4.2 billion revitalization of natural gas production in the nation of Bahrain. The move—which comes just weeks after the Biden administration triumphantly announced a freeze on the domestic development of new projects designed to export liquified natural gas—will include the construction of dozens of gas wells and 450 new oil wells. It will bring online as much as 5.2 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, or about five years of additional gas production at Bahrain’s current levels.

      https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2024/03/biden-promised-not-to-finance-fossil-fuels-so-why-is-the-us-backing-a-huge-gas-project/

      To quote Kendrick:

      The audience not dumb

      Shape the stories how you want, hey, Drake, they’re not slow

      Biden, his campaign, and his supporters don’t realize people can just fact check this shit from their phones in two seconds. Voters aren’t as stupid as they keep acting we are.

      If we were, we’d probably be voting Republican…

      • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        It’s crazy how you start recognizing usernames. Every time I see some anti Biden baseless bullshit, it’s one of a handful of idiots vomiting it out.

        US Trade Bank Defies Biden to Expand Oil Drilling in Bahrain

        You think Biden personally financed this fucking deal? He’s not a king. He doesn’t like it. He’s opposing it. So are Democrats. But he’s not a goddamn king, and you know that, and more importantly you know that poorly informed voters don’t know that, so you talk your bullshit to try to sway them.

        This is the answer to the article’s question. Why don’t people know about Biden’s wins? Because people like you are intentionally misleading them.

      • Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        5 months ago

        That’s probably why they don’t seem interested in advertising Biden’s “accomplishments”… Instead just beating that Trump bad drum all day everyday

      • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        5 months ago

        we were, we’d probably be voting Republican…

        Its clear from how Biden has managed his 2024 campaign he’d rather Republicans as supporters, so that tracks.