Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI) introduced two amendments to the Keystone Pipeline bill. The first asked his fellow special snowflakes to agree that climate change is “not a hoax”. That passed 99 98-1 , with Roger Wicker’s (R-Mississippi Goddam)”No” being the saddest experience you’ll ever know. The vote on Schatz’ other amendment, which stated that climate change was a man-made phenomenon, got a few Republican votes, but “failed” on a 50-49 majority vote. You can click that link to see the 100% Republican opposition to that amendment.
Whenever the topic of Republicans broadening their appeal to the youth comes up, remember stuff like this. The skinny-jeans-wearing, messenger-bag-slinging youth of today (they all look like this) think that climate change denial is an indicator that you’re a fucking dinosaur:
Also, too: Daniel Inouye was a great human being, but it’s nice to see a safe-seat liberal acting like a safe-seat liberal.
Update: The first vote was 98-1. Looks like Lindsey Graham bravely ran away.
cokane
is it just me or is it still sad that 23% still give a positive reaction?
i guess i should be happy at least it’s below 27, but still…
Davis X. Machina
@cokane: Team spirit. There are still New York Knicks fans, for example. And Jacksonville Jaguars fans.
Cervantes
There are 100 Senators. Who’s the chickenshit who didn’t vote?
Catherine D.
@Cervantes:
Huckleberry Graham didn’t vote.
C.V. Danes
Perhaps Senator Brian Schatz can offer a third amendment in which the Senate recognizes that the Republicans are in
paidwillful denial on climate change…Amir Khalid
@Catherine D.:
Does he have a parent’s note to excuse his absence?
mai naem mobile
@Amir Khalid: he was getting married to john mccain now that gay marriage is legal in sc. Not sure how mccain voted.
Gin & Tonic
@Cervantes: Isn’t Harry Reid in the hospital?
Gin & Tonic
@Davis X. Machina: Hey! Hey! Let’s not badmouth poor long-suffering Knickerbocker fans.
mai naem mobile
I don’t understand this climate change controversy. Jeezus, most of it has to do with clean air and improving energy efficiency. People are against energy efficiency? Seriously GFY.
Violet
Don’t see how that’s going to affect votes. Young white people have shown they vote for the White People’s Party. And then there are the majority of young people, the ones who don’t vote.
beth
@Gin & Tonic: I’ve seen photos of him at work this week. News report last night said he’s going to have surgery to try and regain vision in his damaged eye.
Joel
@mai naem mobile: Not hard to understand. Burning fossil fuels, starting with oil, is the primary driver of anthropogenic global warming. Remedies to this problem devalue those assets, which are under the control of powerful monied interests both home and abroad.
NotMax
Sez you.
JPL
@mai naem mobile: Graham is more of a Mitch type, imo.
The second and third amendments failed, since the repubs refuse to blame man for climate change.
C.V. Danes
@mai naem mobile: Basically what @Joel: said.
Note that “people” for the Republicans typically means the Koch brothers and their ilk. So, if you substitute “Koch brothers” for “people” in whatever comes out of a Republican’s mouth it makes better sense :-)
dedc79
@Gin & Tonic: They’ve won two games in a row!!!
CONGRATULATIONS!
Rumor is he was rummaging through his closet.
burnspbesq
@dedc79:
If he’s as smart as he appears to be, Jahlil Okafor will choose to play in Europe if he is drafted by the Knickerbockers.
MomSense
I want to scream every time the issue of climate change comes up. As a mom, it feels like the house is on fire and my kids are inside. This is an urgent problem and we are being screwed over by a bunch of oil and gas whores. The Republicans love them some pentagon war planning unless the pentagon is sounding the alert about a threat of an unprecedented magnitude to all life on our planet that might negatively affect oil and gas industry profits–and then even the pentagon become DFH who must be ignored.
I don’t know what to do about it except that it really doesn’t feel even the minutest bit satisfying to point and mock while the world burns.
Snarki, child of Loki
He soiled his armor, he was so scared!
chopper
now all we need is for these precious self-centered assholes to get off their asses and vote and we might be getting somewhere.
Cervantes
@Catherine D.:
To be fair, Lindsey Graham did vote for the “other” Schatz amendment (the proposition that “human activity significantly contributes to climate change”). Only four other Republicans voted for it: Lamar Alexander (Tennessee), Kelly Ayotte (New Hampshire), Susan Collins (Maine) and Mark Kirk (Illinois).
Not to mention, contrary to remarks above, it wasn’t Graham who missed the other vote; it was Harry Reid.
Rob in CT
@Violet:
Right.
I’d be more optimistic if the Youts voted more.
I get it, they have other things going on. I did too (though I voted in Presidential elections right from the start, I think I missed a mid-term or two). And it’s always been this way. It likely always will.
As they age they will be more likely to vote. This might change things… but only if they hold these beliefs strongly. Only if it’s a priority. Many people care LOT more about taxes, war, ‘bortion, etc.
chopper
@MomSense:
yeah, we’s fucked all right.
WereBear
@MomSense: Perhaps it’s time to change the way we protest.
Perhaps we should have a Climate Change Fax Day. Everyone can post their local reps’ fax numbers — state & federal — and fax a simple message about it on that day.
We should choose a significant day — Earth Day is in April, for instance. That will give everyone time to look forward to it, and plan.
Cervantes
@Catherine D.:
@CONGRATULATIONS!:
Wrong. It was Harry Reid, nor was he running away.
Mike in NC
That hipster in skinny jeans needs a goatee and an iPod.
ruemara
@Violet: this. All of this. I have no more fucks to give for all the supposed liberal subgroups who refuse to vote or vote like liberals.
Swishalicious
Just for accuracy’s sake… the “hoax” amendment was a Whitehouse amendment. The 50-49 was indeed Schatz, and it said that human activity contributes to climate change.
Cervantes
@CONGRATULATIONS!:
Making “closet” jokes about Lindsey Graham may seem funny and sophisticated to you — but it’s neither of those things. I’ll spare you my opinion of what it really is — but I’m almost sure you can guess.
Hank
I see what you did there.
Cervantes
@Swishalicious:
Well, if accuracy is what you want, you need to add the word “significantly” to your paraphrase of Schatz. If you look at the actual debate — the amendments offered and the votes taken — you’ll find that the word was, indeed, significant.
There was a different amendment without the word “significantly” in it and more Republicans did vote for it.
catclub
@mai naem mobile:
INteresting point. I think there was some evidence that the lower temps in the late 50’s and 60’s were due to particulates – burning dirty coal comes to mind – and that effect slightly countered the overall warming effect. Remember when giant volcano eruptions caused a year without summer (1815). Same idea. Actually cleaning up the air has made warming more obvious.
I am not suggesting burning dirty coal as a solution. Instead! nuclear explosions in volcanos! What could go wrong?!
Marc
@cokane: The other four percent refused to answer because “courageous” wasn’t an option.
jonas
Wasn’t Inouye revealed to be the senior senator who played a little grab-ass with Kristin Gillibrand when she was new to the Hill?
catclub
@WereBear: How about a telegram?
Seanly
@mai naem mobile:
Yes, because liberals might have a preference to conservation. Look at the stupid rolling coal phenomenon.
Another part is that considering the feelings, wants, needs or personal space of others, especially outside of one’s own enclave, is a sign of weakness and unChristian (in their minds). Considering the future and leaving resources for others is also weak and all the good little boys & girls will be Raptured up soon anyway,
mdblanche
I find Wicker being the lone no vote on the hoax amendment extremely demoralizing for personal reasons. When a classmate of mine graduated she got a job working in his office on scientific issues. When I teased her a little about that she insisted that Wicker was one of the few pro-science Republicans out there. So now I’m left wondering. Did my friend lie to me? Did Wicker tell her a flimsy lie that she swallowed? Is Wicker pandering to an electorate so terrible that the rest of us really would be better off if they all drowned in a storm surge? No matter how I look at it, I’m left feeling that Republican voters are dumb, mean, or both and it’s time to stop caring about them as people.
Cervantes
@jonas:
Alleged to be, perhaps.
“Revealed” may be too strong, not least because Gillibrand has refused to comment in public (as far as I know). In her book what she wrote was that a senator held her waist and said “Don’t lose too much weight now. I like my girls chubby.”
voncey
@Catherine D.: Graham voted yes. Harry Reid didn’t vote — he’s still out with injuries.
Cervantes
The Two Cervantes problem again arises. Not sure what to do about this. Perhaps we can adopt suffixes?
Marc
@Violet:
The white under-30 vote in 2012 was 51 Romney-44 Obama. But hey, keep voicing your scorn – I’m sure it will become self-fulfilling.
Cervantes
@Cervantes: I also note that I am distinguished by the handle being hotlinked, but maybe that’s not good enough.
Cervantes
@mdblanche:
Did your class-mate lie to you, you ask. As far as I can see, she can have had no good reason to believe Wicker is “pro-science.” Perhaps she was lying to herself in order to justify taking the job — I have no idea.
Re Wicker’s voters … being disgusted or disappointed is one thing but to “stop caring about them as people” is quite another. Take care.
El Cid
There is no global warming because the Sun is Hot, and no dang ivory tower ‘scientist’ ever knew that so there.
Cervantes
@Cervantes:
“Problem”?
If one Cervantes is a good thing, surely two is better!
Frankly I don’t think it’s a problem. To a first approximation no one cares. Anyone who does care can distinguish us easily enough — the linked name, as you say, but also … other aspects.
I don’t worry about it, and wouldn’t if I were you.
Cheers.
Randy P
@catclub: Larry Niven (whose fiction I still kind of like despite the fact that he, like Orson Scott Card, turned out to be way off the right end of the nutcase scale) wrote a novel along similar lines. It seems that when the scientists succeeded in ending global warming, it opened the door for the ice age that was being held off. The glaciers came in and wiped out most of the cities in the Northern Hemisphere.
I don’t remember much else about the novel except that there was a small population stranded in space because the world went anti-science and killed all space programs, and what is left of civilization is saved by Sci Fi Fandom, now kind of an underground who are the only science supporters left.
WereBear
@catclub: Nice and dramatic, but not nearly as accessible.
There’s no longer any point in actually writing our government since the anthrax attacks, and emails are basically ignored.
But a blizzard of faxes will get noticed. Which is the point of any protest.
Cervantes
@Marc:
Yes, down from {54% Obama, 44% McCain} in 2008.
Also comparing the two elections:
He did not lose much support among under-30 women: 69% vs. 66%.
He did lose support among under-30 men: 62% vs. 53%.
He did also lose support among under-30 African-American men: 94% vs. 80%.
Frankensteinbeck
It doesn’t matter what they believe about the issues. The GOP is driven by ‘fuck you, nigger-loving liberals’. As long as they know liberals want to stop climate change, Republican voters of every age will vote to block us – even if they, themselves, think climate change is a problem. Cleek’s Law, guys. It’s a remarkably consistent model for predicting conservative behavior.
mdblanche
@Cervantes:
I admit that was another thought I had. But since she had just finished earning a degree where one of the biggest lessons learned is the importance of not falling into that trap, that possibility seems even worse to me than the others.
That’s probably just the metaphorical gut-punch I took from this talking. But I think we do risk letting Republican voters off too easy. We want to cling to the myth of the 99% so we lie to ourselves. We say that they’re just dupes of the 1% when really they know what they’re doing is wrong but they choose to do it anyway.
Villago Delenda Est
@mai naem mobile:
Dick Cheney, for one.
The Dark Lord has earned that name.
monkeyfister
Damn, if that good ol’ 27% doesn’t factor in perfectly here, eh?
73% say deniers are crazy or ignorant… the rest?… the 27%.
Marc
@Cervantes:
Typo, or sample size problem? There is just no way Obama’s numbers were that low for that demographic.
These exit poll numbers suggested Obama had 91% support among all black voters under 30. If the men only voted for him at 80%, then black women under thirty must have voted for Obama by… 102%?
OH, SHIT! O’KEEFE WAS RIGHT! ACORN! BENGHAZI!!!1!
EthylEster
I believe that climate change is mostly driven by human activity.
But the poll of the under 35s is not on this question.
The poll is on the question that the overwhelming majority of GOPers agreed with….that climate change exists.
So that undermines the point of your post a bit.
What is the definition of “climate change denier”?
Is it “someone who asserts that cc is a hoax” or is it “someone who asserts it is human caused”?
IMO it means the former.
Maybe anthropogenic should be prepended.
Cervantes
@Marc:
Neither. See here, not only for this detail but all the others I mentioned above.
Well, look at the article.
Yes, I’m sure.
Marc
@Cervantes: Yeah, that looks like a sample size problem. Under-30s are a fraction of the electorate (19% in 2012) and African Americans are an even smaller fraction (13%). Combine the two and you’re looking at such a tiny slice (about 2.5%) that some outliers are bound to turn up. This post describes some of the problems exit polls have with the minority vote.
I mean, it’s possible that one in five black men under 30 voted for Mitt Romney. But to believe that you’d have to believe that Obama bled more support among young black men (-14 points) than he did among young white ones (-11). And while that would provide a delicious counterpoint to Violet’s attempt to write off an entire generation of white voters, it doesn’t seem too likely.
Cervantes
@Marc:
Believe things such as the following, perhaps:
Which “section above” includes the following:
The data are the same as previously discussed; and the analysis is by the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement. You can find the entire discussion here. Make of it what you will.
As for this:
Why precisely do you say this doesn’t seem too likely?
Marc
Because Obama’s support among black voters (the racial demographic with his strongest support) has been considerably more resilient than his support among white voters, and I see no reason to assume this would change only among the under-30s (the age cohort with his strongest support). For that matter, I see no reason why the gender gap among young black voters would be more than twice as large as the gender gap among young white voters!
All the analysis you shared is premised on the same exit poll data, which means it’s subject to the same problems if the exit polls got an unrepresentative sample, as they tend to do with minority voters and subsets of minority voters.
And this subset is one of the smallest. I did make one mistake above: I estimated the black under-30 vote at roughly 2.5% of the electorate, but I forgot that black men under 30 would be less than half that. Probably substantially less if the weighting in that poll is any guide.
If black women under 30 voted for Obama at 98%, and men at 80% (according to these exit polls), and they averaged out to 91% support, then men made up about 40 percent of their sample of black under-30 voters. That comes out to just one percent of the total electorate, a size that is ripe for sampling error. If they chose the wrong precincts or made some weird weighting assumptions that would throw everything off. I wouldn’t put a whole lot of stock in those subsamples, especially when the results are so far out of sync with voting patterns.
Cervantes
@Marc:
OK, I think the article I cited goes into possible reasons for the drop-off — but that’s not to say it’s correct.
Yes, I pointed this out above.
Yes, this is true enough, I agree.
MMM
Well, at least Senator Capito is consistent. She said in a debate that she did not believe in climate change or science. One point for Capito for consistency, WV and the rest of us lose.