Strangely, most of the people responding that they want more action do not do much, if anything, in their own lives voluntarily
Most in US want more action on climate change: AP-NORC poll
Nearly two-thirds of Americans think the federal government is not doing enough to fight climate change, according to a new poll that shows limited public awareness about a sweeping new law that commits the U.S. to its largest ever investment to combat global warming.
Democrats in Congress approved the Inflation Reduction Act in August, handing President Joe Biden a hard-fought triumph on priorities that his party hopes will bolster prospects for keeping their House and Senate majorities in November’s elections.
Biden and Democratic lawmakers have touted the new law as a milestone achievement leading into the midterm elections, and environmental groups have spent millions to boost the measure in battleground states. Yet the poll by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research finds that 61% of U.S. adults say they know little to nothing about it.
Then they aren’t paying attention, and the news is doing a terrible job. But, let’s face it, most Americans care more on the latest from Kanye, the Kardashians, and all sorts of inconsequential stuff
While the law was widely heralded as the largest investment in climate spending in history, 49% of Americans say it won’t make much of a difference on climate change, 33% say it will help and 14% think it will do more to hurt it.
Well, those aren’t good numbers for the New Green Deal, er, IRA
Americans are generally more likely to support than oppose many of the government actions on climate change included in the law, the poll shows. That includes incentives for electric vehicles and solar panels, though relatively few say they are inclined to pursue either in the next three years.
So, people aren’t interested in paying through the nose for solar panels and EVs for themselves? Weird
Overall, 62% of U.S. adults say the government is doing too little to reduce climate change, while 19% say it’s doing too much and 18% think it’s doing the right amount.
Democrats are more likely than others to think the federal government is doing too little on climate: 79% say that, compared to 67% of independents and 39% of Republicans. About three-quarters of Black and Hispanic Americans think there’s too little action, compared to about half of white Americans.
And about three-quarters of adults under 45 think there’s too little action on climate, significantly higher than the roughly half of those older who think that.
They can take action in their own lives, right? Oh, right, they want some of that sweet, sweet, redistributed cash, never considering if it will be their own cash.
The poll of 1,003 adults was conducted Sep. 9-12 using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 4.0 percentage points.
What’s also weird is there’s no link to the poll. I wonder why? 79% of Dems think not enough action, 67% of independents, and 39% of Republicans say the same. If we dig into the toplines, though, we see a D/R/I skew of 45/36/19 (page 20). That is one hell of an oversample.
This is also interesting
Looks like a lot of Warmists are upset that Other People are not willing to reduce their use of energy, not investing in solar and wind, and pay more for energy. Should have asked the questions “are you willing to reduce your own energy usage?” “Are you willing to pay more for energy?” “Are you willing to invest your own money in “renewables”?”
Yet another pseudopoll designed and conducted for the express purpose of supporting an agenda. NOT for determining how real people actually feel.
Yet another poll that does not represent the wishes of the citizens of the US. The best poll is reflected in the results of voting. That is unless we have massive voter fraud as in 2020. FJB.MAGA.
Our madcap commenter from Missouri wrote, on July 4th, “The real Independence Day is next November 8.” While we ought never to count our chickens before the eggses have hatched, I am cautiously optimistic that his statement is exactly right!
Our distinguished host concluded:
Nope, not right. Rather, the media should have asked, “Have you reduced your own energy usage?” “Have you been paying more for energy by purchasing offsets?”, and “Have you invested your own money in “renewables”?”
It’s too easy to ask if someone is willing to do something, because you have no idea if they’ll keep such commitments. Rather, ask if they have already done the things they wish to impose on other people.
The US government could all by itself reduce America’s carbon footprint. It could fire 50% of it’s employees, shut down half of their buildings, save all the vehicle traffic and travel costs of those employees and all the activity they would be doing. Our government is millions of people, scurrying about wasting carbons. A government that does less has a much smaller carbon footprint.
Don’t hold your breath on that one.
Dana the question has always been “are you willing to reduce your carbon footprint”
And of course the answer is, yes.
Americans have reduced their carbon foot print 25% since 2005.
I expect this will continue at about the same rate which will be a reduction of 50% before 2050
Has this reduction caused anyone significant pain either emotional or financial?
No, John, because it was mostly done through fracking, not driving electric vehicles or “carbon offsets”.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/10/25/goldman-sachs-jeff-currie-3-8-trillion-of-investment-in-renewables-moved-fossil-fuels-from-82-to-81-of-overall-energy-consumption-in-10-years/
Keep Johnny away from sharp objects…..
BIG DEBATE LAST NIGHT:
https://commoncts.blogspot.com/2022/10/kathy-hochul-and-lee-zeldin-spar-over.html
https://commoncts.blogspot.com/2022/10/full-video-john-pennsylvania-senate.html
Just remember that the Russians and the Chinese have been caught funding PACS that are designed to destroy America’s fossil fuel industry.
I have no desire to see Exxon get richer. But I feel the same way about Pfizer.
Yet these corporations are necessary for the world not to mention the USA. The world’s culture will collapse if we continue to let the AGW people destroy humanity with 1000 paper cuts. A percent here, a percent there until there is nothing left of the West, and China, the Middle East, and Russia have all the power.
AGW IS A SCAM! You are being scammed by China and Russia and the sad fact is that those doing the scamming actually believe the bullshit they are being fed by Russia and China.
Now you even hear DOWD trash-talking MUSLIMS. A dozen years ago he was defending those same people.
Political expediency. 60 years ago the right defended Israel and today we defend Israel despite their continual shift towards extreme liberalism in their own country. There is no political expediency
Of course, we did not trash talk Muslims, but continued to trash talk nuConservatives/
MAGAts/tRumpists.
Stop lying.
BTW, the Earth is warming rapidly because of the CO2 that we humans have added to the atmosphere. So AGW IS real. How, or even if, to respond is a political issue.
There are rumors that Putin has covertly funded fossil fuel opponents to increase Russia’s share of the global crude and natural gas markets. It seems reasonable and is consistent with the clumsiness of Putin’s modus operandi. Ironically, the US STILL produces more oil and gas than Russia.
And yes, conservatives are consistent, it’s kinda their thing. On the other hand, MAGAts follow the whims of PedoDon tRump. If an Israeli PM were to insult PedoDon, the MAGAts will turn on Israel, just as they now refuse to criticize Putin ’cause PedoDon.
BTW, the earth’s rate of warming is no different than earlier in the Holocene, and there’s still no empirical evidence that it’s CO2. J takes after our Johnny by thinking simply repeating something will make it true.
And all our Jilly does is deny, deny, deny… but that’s what deniers do.
Jill: the earth’s rate of warming is no different than earlier in the Holocene
Earlier than when in the Holocene? Can you be a bit more specific? Thanks.
What “empirical evidence” of CO2 causing warming would you find probative?
Well, Rimjob, you asked.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/09/09/empirical-evidence-shows-temperature-increases-before-co2-increase-in-all-records/
What’s it like to be so absolutely stupid, dumbass?
#Galera
Bwaha! Lolgf