2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Holes in Clinton's climate plan: no stand on Keystone, fracking, oil exports & Arctic ocean drilling [View all]BainsBane
(53,137 posts)We see truth is entirely inconsequential.
You addressed none of my points because you have no logical argument. If you cared even a little bit about the environment you would discuss actual policy and issues, yet you can't do that because the facts are not on your side. Instead, play to emotion. It's all you have.
Her plan sets ambitious standards for solar energy and reducing green house emissions. If you cared at all about the environment, you would recognize that as important. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/28/us/politics/hillary-clinton-lays-out-climate-change-plan.html?_r=0
The way to get America off fossil fuels is to develop green energy sources. Why should someone who claims to care about the environment object to that?
Of course you prefer no environmental plan than one that focuses on renewable energy. Makes a lot of sense.