politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
58% of PA voters want to ban fracking, but don't expect either candidate to bring it up.
https://www.wvia.org/news/pennsylvania-news/2024-10-10/pa-voters-split-on-fracking-but-show-widespread-support-for-stronger-regulations
And while most want to ban it:
Virtually all agree that it can't continue the way it has been:
Unfortunately for voters in PA, both candidates for president and their Senate seat are fully behind fracking.
Yet people are still scratching their heads like nothing can be done to motivate PA voters.
This is why. In the unlikely event that all 19% end up swinging to pro, we're talking about almost 70% support for it. That not only included moderate Republicans that potentially can be won over, but some conservative Dems that we can't afford to lose.
The 58% is meant to represent "likely voters" but the problem is that if there are enough single issue folks, we may see unlikely voters vote on the issue beyond the lone poll's expectations.
Normally we want to get the vote out, but adopting an explicit anti-fracking stance could energize folks to vote GOP who otherwise would never vote Dem and would stay at home.
There is some hope here though:
So be pro-fracking but also pro-disclosure, pro-monitoring, and pro-setbacks.
Based on, https://www.npr.org/2024/08/30/nx-s1-5096107/what-is-fracking-explained and https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/energy-execs-say-they-believe-vp-kamala-harris-is-indeed-open-fracking-2024-09-17/
It looks like Harris was against it before joining the Biden ticket + administration. Also it only gets buzz during election years. And sadly it also looks like going against the industry would be free cannon fodder for Trump.
Basically it's not worth actually being a campaign issue, and no one actually cares about it outside of elections, so Harris is just taking a pass. Obviously Trump doesn't give a shit and Harris doesn't see it as worth the risk.
It's a shitty situation to be in. On the plus side the numbers you mentioned mean it's close to being unavoidable. Continuing to push is the way forward. Local politicians might also have better luck. Maybe it can get midterm traction.
On the plus side it doesn't seem like Harris is throwing any Hail Mary's, so she must be confident with the current strategy, and hopefully winning the state.
On a post about how important PA is....
And for the record, lots of people heard about her tie breaking vote in support of fracking 2 years ago.
Just because some people only care every 4 years, doesn't mean that's everyone else level of involvement