Actually, I do. But it is one that is different from what far Left Progressives think the GOP message should be
(Roll Call) Senate Republicans were swept into power vowing to fight the White House’s “war on coal,†but at least one says they need a broader message than “no†in 2016.
“I think there will be a political problem for the Republican Party going into 2016 if we don’t define what we are for on the environment,†Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said. “I don’t know what the environmental policy of the Republican Party is.â€
Graham, who worked on a climate change proposal in 2010 with Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., suggested that what worked in the midterms might not work the next time around.
Of course, there is a big difference between “Climate change” and environmentalism. And, in case people missed it Graham is not particularly popular with the Conservative base.
Exit polling after the elections showed that nearly 60 percent of voters believe climate change is a “serious problem.â€
Of course, when stacked up against other issues, it tends to come in last or next to last.
Former South Carolina Republican Rep. Bob Inglis — who founded the Energy and Enterprise Initiative, which seeks to convince conservatives to combat climate change — agrees with Graham.
“If conservatives plan on winning the White House back, we’ve got to have something on the menu that addresses this felt need for action on climate,†he said.
OK, you have the tenor of the article, all about how the GOP needs to follow along with their own Progressive members and start Believing and Do Something. I could write something with serious proposals, because their is some overlap regarding alternative energy and such, but, I’ve already done that lots of time, so I suggest the GOP message for 2016 is “well, if you Warmists believe so strongly then lead the way by example.”
