5 ms·

This just feels so ... petty. Do republicans really want to destroy the environment at any cost? Do they really want dirty air and rivers that are on fire due

• colejohnson66 7y ago
  It’s the “any regulation is bad regulation” thoughts
  • stochastic_monk 7y ago
    No, that’s just the lie they sell it with.
  • Ozumandias 7y ago
    That's how it's sold. It's really payback-politics. Obama admin did this? Don't care what it is, revoke it.
• jgwil2 7y ago
  Even if they believe the economic benefits of loosening regulations to be a worthwhile tradeoff, I'm shocked that they don't seem to have any consideration for their political future and the damage they are doing to their brand among young people who overwhelmingly support increased environmental protections.
  • georgemcbay 7y ago
    Until young people actually start voting who gives a shit what they support? Not politicians. I don't say this because I like the current status quo, just because I recognize the reality of the situation. I wish young people (in the US, the country of my citizenship) would actually vote in significant numbers, but all the data says they just don't (yet).
    • lambdasquirrel 7y ago
      Young people do grow up. Younger liberals and conservatives are fairly solid on this category of issues. This isn't a case where people are going to grow up and lean Republican. People are going to remember who wasn't there for them when climate whiplash destroys their home.
      • georgemcbay 7y ago
        Why should any current politician care if they remember? They will likely be out of office when the shit really hits the fan, especially if President. For better or for worse (for worse, IMO) there was a big shift sometime around the late 80s early 90s where politicians in the US by and large stopped caring about "legacy". As long as they get elected in the next cycle, its all good (for them).
      • munk-a 7y ago
        Can we please attack this problem in some manner that doesn't involve letting the world burn to a crisp just so we can say "I told you so"? I agree, if climate change goes unchecked there will be ample opportunity for "I told you so"s but I'd rather check climate change - and it's important enough to do that I'm willing to give up gloating rights and say "Hey look, we all came together and solved this issue."
    • Dumblydorr 7y ago
      Young people voting probably didn't enter Trumps mind. To me this feels like signaling pro-fossil, anti-regulation in one swoop. It probably will have a minuscule effect in actuality, its just Trump loving manly oil and powerful industry. Keep in mind this man is likely mentally unfit, looking for rationality is a fools errand.
    • Natales 7y ago
      Sadly, you bring up a very good point. I'm 50 myself, but I work in the software industry where I interact with a lot of young programmers, and more than once I've heard "nah, I don't vote. No reason". The argument of "hey, if you don't vote, other people will make decisions that will affect your life anyways" doesn't seem to resonate, and I really don't know how to get through.
  • tobr 7y ago
    I believe we have to start using the term “crimes against humanity” when we talk about these things. They need to understand that they will be held personally responsible for their actions in a near future.
• useerup 7y ago
  Not just destroy the environment. The US car industry will have a hard time developing and manufactoring cars which can be exported. Practically every other market will have stricter norms. China is betting big on electric cars, setting domestic restrictions forcing the Chinese car industry to innovate. Then, the US will argue that the trade deficit is "unfair", while the real reason that markets will not buy US goods is that the products are anachronistic, sub-standard junk.
  • pard68 7y ago
    fwiw, cars made for the US market are generally only sold in the US market and it has been this way for quite some time
  • mywittyname 7y ago
    This is already kind of the case. The biggest selling vehicles in the US -- pickup trucks -- cannot be exported outside of North America. Due to both regulatory and practicality reasons. Even if you could buy an F150 in Asia, it's impossible to actually drive and fuel one unless you're wealthy. Ford and Chevy (and Honda, Toyota, VW, etc) already divide their product lines between USDM and global markets. There is some overlap, but the USDM does receive a lot of unique vehicles.
• rconti 7y ago
  It's not for any real practical real-world purpose. It's a combination of personal spite from the president, and sending a message to voters. (the latter, to be fair, is quite common in politics, though it has progressed to the point of absurdity).
• roywiggins 7y ago
  It's not that they want to destroy the environment, it's that it "pwns the libs". Any effects on the environment aren't even part of the calculus.
• annoyingnoob 7y ago
  To me, it seems like they just want to undo anything the last president did. If the last president touched it then its toxic, get rid of it - seems to be the mentality.
  • opencl 7y ago
    The California exemption doesn't even have anything to do with Obama, it's been in place since the EPA was created in 1970.
    • annoyingnoob 7y ago
      CA is the only thing blocking the full repeal of Obama era EPA regulations. So far CA has been able to side-step the repeal at the EPA level and CA has automotive industry support. CA is the last brick in the wall.
• phil248 7y ago
  There is no reasonable justification and I find it nearly impossible not to view this decision as either a petty jab at California and Obama, or some red meat for the base, or both.
• sharadov 7y ago
  The Republican party has become petty, they have no philosophy and stand for nothing. All they want to do is roll back Obama-era regulations and stand for backwards thinking ideas - even when market economics and fiscal policy indicates otherwise.
• war1025 7y ago
  The justification I've heard is that if you want to sell vehicles in the US, then you need to defacto comply with the California emissions standards, which basically makes the Federal emissions standards pointless. If Federal emissions standards are to matter, California needs to lose its special status.
• louwrentius 7y ago
  The definition of winning according to the republicans is for you to lose. Everything democrats stand for will be destroyed. Pettiness is the point.