To be clear: there’s a night-and-day difference between Biden and Trump, with the former having actually taking significant action, and being likely to take more if reelected. Trump will look to maximize both extraction and consumption of fossil fuels in a way that Biden simply didn’t and won’t.

  • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    there’s a night-and-day difference between Biden and Trump, with the former having actually taking significant action

    I would personally define the word “significant” in such a way that excludes actors who do not take action which meaningfully prevents or lowers the risks of the upcoming climate apocalypse. Biden has not done this IMO. He has done some things which are okay for the environment, but just as many that worsen the situation. At the end of the day, both candidates are content to make policy which does not stop the world from boiling. It is counterproductive to pretend otherwise.

    • hglman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      You’re correct. Anyone spinning the “lesser of two evils” about climate change does not understand the risks. Inaction today will kill millions. Biden’s half-measures are fundamentally inadequate, and as you said, pretending otherwise is delusion or malice.

      Climate change is the most severe threat to the safety of everyone everywhere. To treat it with anything other than total urgency is to promote harm. If you cannot find it in you to call out the short fall of the Democratic party on this issue you are part of the problem.

      • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Voting for the lesser of two evils can still be part of a strategy that acknowledges the inadequacy of mainstream political solutions. But it needs to be combined with other, more activist political activities.