Will The Climate Crisis Be The Deciding Factor Of 2020?

The 10 most recent polls that measured the public's feelings about voting for Congress next year all came up with the same conclusion-- that the Democrats have this one. The polling average is about 6 points in the Democrats' favor with a Morning Consult poll from this week showing the Democrats ahead by 12 points, enough the flip the 50 seats we're looking for. Going all the way back to January, there have been 63 polls asking this question and only one showed a tie. The other 62 showed the Democrats ahead.

In part this is being pushed by an expected voter-turnout tsunami. If Bernie is the nominee... what's bigger than a tsunami? Other than Bernie, Trump fuels the eagerness for voters-- in this far out-- to get to the polls. And most have only one goal: to vote him and his Republican enablers out of office.

Most Democrats have nothing to offer other than "Trump is bad; we're not as bad." Conventional wisdom journalist Ron Brownstein reported in The Atlantic that "signs are growing that voter turnout in 2020 could reach the highest levels in decades-- if not the highest in the past century-- with a surge of new voters potentially producing the most diverse electorate in American history... In a recent paper, the Democratic voter-targeting firm Catalist projected that about 156 million people could vote in 2020, an enormous increase from the 139 million who cast ballots in 2016... [A]s many as two-thirds of eligible voters may vote next year. If that happens, it would represent the highest presidential-year turnout since 1908, when 65.7 percent of eligible Americans cast a ballot, according to McDonald’s figures. Since 18-year-olds were granted the vote, the highest showing was the 61.6 percent of eligible voters who showed up in 2008, leading to Barack Obama’s victory. And since World War II, the highest turnout level came in 1960, with John F. Kennedy’s win, when 63.8 percent of voters participated... [T]he clearest sign that high turnout may be approaching in 2020 is that it already arrived in 2018. In last year’s midterm, nearly 120 million people voted, about 35 million more than in the previous midterm, in 2014, with 51 percent of eligible voters participating-- a huge increase over the previous three midterms. The 2018 level represented the largest share of eligible voters to turn out in a midterm year since 1914, according to McDonald’s figures. Catalist estimated that about 14 million new voters who had not participated in 2016 turned out two years later, and they preferred Democrats by a roughly 20-percentage-point margin."

OK, now here's the important part:

The nature of the population eligible to vote is evolving in a way that should indeed help Democrats. McDonald estimates that the number of eligible voters increases by about 5 million each year, or about 20 million from one presidential election to the next. That increase predominantly flows from two sources: young people who turn 18 and immigrants who become citizens. Since people of color are now approaching a majority of the under-18 population-- and also constitute most immigrants-- McDonald and other experts believe it’s likely that minorities represent a majority of the people who have become eligible to vote since 2016.

The generational contrast in the eligible voting pool is also stark. States of Change, a nonpartisan project studying shifts in the electorate, projects that Millennials (born, according to the organization’s definition, from 1981 to 2000) will constitute 34.2 percent of eligible voters next year. Post-Millennials (born after 2000) will make up another 3.4 percent. That means those two groups combined will virtually equal the share of eligible voters composed of Baby Boomers (28.4 percent) and the Silent and Greatest Generations (another 9.4 percent).

These shifts have enormous implications because of the generational gulf in attitudes toward Trump and the parties more broadly. His approval rating has consistently lagged among the more racially diverse, socially tolerant younger generations. Though Trump and the GOP have shown some signs of weakness recently among seniors, he has generally polled much better among voters older than 50, in part because a much larger share of Americans in that cohort are white.

But it isn't just racial diversity and social tolerance that's working against conservatives. Among Millennials, the existential danger of Climate Change is the single most important issue and they're aware that Republicans-- and to a lesser extent conservative Democrats-- are not paying attention-- or worse-- to a world hurtling towards disaster. Earlier today we looked at the elections between 1928 and 1936, where Republican majorities in the Senate (56 Republicans to 39 Democrats) and House (270 Republicans to 164 Democrats) flipped to 74 Democrats, 17 Republicans and 4 Democratic allies in the Senate and an astonishing 334 Democrats and 88 Republicans and 13 Democratic allies in the House. In 4 consecutive election cycles the House Republicans went from 270 seats to 88 seats. That's when the Democrats knew who they were and what they were offering voters, long before they decided to go with flaccid, meaningless non-leaders like Pelosi, Hoyer, Bustos, Luján, Jeffries, Schumer and the rest of the garbage the Democrats have calling the shots.

The Green New Deal inspires millennial voters the way the turgid and lesser-of-two-evils Democratic Party couldn't hope to-- at least not under the geriatric and visionless leaders now guiding it. Pelosi is so clueless that she is openly fighting it-- as are the most clueless of the presidential candidates. That video up top was made by Action Network. Lauren Windsor was ta the Democratic Party State Convention a couple of weeks ago, interviewing politicians of all stripes about banning fracking and ending spending on fossil fuel infrastructure. "Democrats," she wrote, "historically have embraced the so-called 'bridge' fuel as a middle-ground approach to solving climate change, but methane leaks wipe out the emissions advantage over coal, and fracking pollutes water tables and causes earthquakes... Natural gas is a bridge fuel to nowhere in terms of solving the climate crisis."

First up was the easiest-- Washington Governor Jay Inslee, who is 100% there. Second looked like he might eb trouble. Adam Schiff is a Blue Dog who turned New Dem and who has been a career-long conservative... but one who has been moving with the times. Schiff told Windsor exactly what he's been telling his constituents. He signed on as an ordinal co-sponsor of AOC's Green New Deal Resolution and he supports a ban on fracking, which he said he "strongly" opposes. Cory Booker avoided the question clumsily but Katie Hill, reticently admitted she supports all the right anti-fracking measures. Mike Levin was more aggressively anti-fracking and "absolutely" agreed that we're in a climate crisis which he was comfortably able to expound upon. Same for Ro Khanna. It's interesting to watch politicians who are comfortable talking about the topic-- like Khanna and Levin and Hill once her handler got out of the way and let her be herself-- as compared to politicians less sure of themselves on the topic. It's kind of wonderful when you don't have to pressure politicians to do the right thing because they want to do the right thing. Her last interview was with the only real asshole she had to deal with Colorado's ex-Governor John Frackenlooper. "John Hickenlooper, she told me today "is known as 'Frackenlooper' by environmental activists for his love of natural gas as a bridge fuel. He once drank fracking fluid to prove that it was safe. Now that he’s running for president-- and climate change has become a focal point of the race due to the Green New Deal-- he’s tap dancing around that position by supporting essentially an 'all-of-the-above' energy strategy."

Jay Inslee Wants You To Think Of His Presidential Campaign When You Think Of Climate Change

"I'm Jay Inslee; I'm running for president because I'm the only only candidate who will make defeating climate change our nation's number one priority." So who is he? H was elected governor of Washington in 2012. He was elected to the state legislature in 1988 and then to Congress in 1992 where he was defeated after serving one term. He was reelected though in 1998 in a bluer district and was reelected 6 times (as a New Dem) before being elected governor. He was a Green New Deal proponent before anyone came up with the name Green New Deal.

He announced his candidacy, just as Hart Research announced the results of a new poll they had done of likely Democratic primary voters in California, Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina for the Environmental Defense Action Fund, the League of Conservation Voters and the Center for American Progress. Their survey shows that only universal health care coverage is more important to these voters than address the climate crisis. A key finding seems tailor-made for Inslee: "Taking action on climate change is a key motivating issue for Democratic primary voters in early states. Having a plan to address the climate crisis is seen as essential and is a driver of vote choice... [C]limate change is a top tier issue in four of the five early states, including 55% of voters in Iowa naming as important to deciding which candidate to support, 54% in New Hampshire, 49% in California and 46% in Nevada. Only in South Carolina does climate change fall out of the top tier of issues and even then, 27% still say it is important in their decision-making."

When asked about seven different issues, 84% say it is “very important" that a Democratic candidate for President have a clear plan on “taking action on climate change crisis and moving the United States to 100% clean energy” including 42% saying it is “essential.” This is on par with “ensuring equal rights for women” (91% very important; 43% essential) and “combating racism and promoting racial justice” (87% very important, 42% essential). A plan for acting on climate change was tied with “achieving universal health care” (84%) and was closely followed by “raising wages and incomes for working families” (83%), “passing stronger policies to prevent gun violence” (81%), and “providing a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers and other immigrants” (74%). Moreover, having a presidential candidate who has a clear plan to address the climate crisis is slightly more important to Latinx voters (87%) and voters under age 35 (87%).

The profile of early primary voters who say that having a plan to address climate change is essential for a presidential candidate (42% percent of the voters in early primary states) is reflective of the broad Democratic universe, rather than being some niche group. The likelihood of rating addressing climate change as essential for a Democratic presidential candidate increases the more liberal the voter and the higher their educational attainment. That is, the most liberal and best educated voters are the most likely to say that it is essential that a presidential candidate have a plan for addressing the climate crisis. Importantly, these voters are largely up for grabs as 73% say they have not really narrowed down their choice for president even though 80% are previous primary voters/caucus-goers.

Sizeable majorities view the Green New Deal favorably (74% favorable; 54% very favorable) as well as Moving to 100% clean energy by 2050 (82% favorable; 62% very favorable). This chart shows the breakdown of how important it is to voters that a candidate support the Green New Deal (which Pelosi is still making fun of and probably feels as alienated from as Trump and other septuagenarian and octogenarian DC insiders):

Referring to the book he co-authored with Bracken Hendricks in 2007, Apollo's Fire: Igniting America's Clean Energy Economy, he likes telling people he "wrote the Green New Deal ten years ago. Welcome to the party. I'm very happy that some other candidates are talking about climate change. It's a good thing." Bernie, Elizabeth Warren, Tulsi Gabbard, Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, Kirsten Gillibrand, Eric Swalwell and even Amy Klobuchar are co-sponsors of the Green New Deal resolution in Congress. This promotional clip for Apollo's Fire was made in 2007:

Starting the New Year Badly and Well

BREAKING: Gov. Jay Inslee to offer pardons for thousands with misdemeanor pot convictions https://t.co/EesejA88hz via @seattletimes

— Jim Brunner (@Jim_Brunner) January 4, 2019

by Thomas Neuburger (aka Gaius)

As we gear up for the full blast of the next new year, I want to offer a selection of items for your consideration. All are important, some are related, all show the kind of year we're determined to have.

First, a bit of good news.

Correcting a Massive Injustice

This should have been done ages ago, and should have been promised by every pro-marijuana legalization presidential candidate in 2016:

Gov. Jay Inslee offers pardons for thousands with misdemeanor pot convictions

Under the plan, Washington state will pardon anyone who has an otherwise clean criminal record but with a sole conviction as an adult for misdemeanor possession of marijuana.

Gov. Jay Inslee will offer pardons to thousands of people with misdemeanor marijuana convictions, in an effort to help them move on from minor criminal records that can hinder housing and job prospects.

Under the plan, Inslee will pardon anyone who has an otherwise clean criminal record but with a sole conviction as an adult for misdemeanor possession of marijuana in Washington state. ... “We shouldn’t be punishing people for something that is no longer illegal behavior in the state of Washington,” Inslee said[.]

Let me offer an analogy. Before the 1960s, the Catholic Church had declared that eating meat on Friday was a mortal sin which, if unforgiven, would send you straight to hell. In 1966, the Church in its infinite wisdom reversed that stand, saying that eating meat on Friday would no longer by itself be cause for damnation.

Imagine the scene in hell when that announcement takes place. What, one wonders, would go through the minds of those damned forever for committing this "sin" as they watched others do what they did with no consequences at all? If you were in hell for eating meat on Friday, what would you be thinking at that moment?

Now take yourself to an American prison, where millions languish for the "crime" of using recreational marijuana and watch as these laws are repealed in state after state. Imagine the cruelty of keeping these men and women in the hell that is America's prison system.

Every pro-marijuana candidate in the U.S. must make it a corollary policy to release these people, with full pardons, immediately.

Hubristic Democrats Committing Suicide

In response to this...

"Hours after Rep. Rashida Tlaib made headlines for being sworn in as one of the two first Muslim female members of Congress on Thursday (alongside Minnesota’s Ilhan Omar), she told a cheering crowd about her mission against Donald Trump: 'Impeach the motherfucker.'"

...former Democratic leader (and ex-Congressman) Joe Crowley said this, as repeated and amplified by current NBC (and former pro-Clinton) reporter Andrea Mitchell:

.@JoeCrowleyNY on Tlaib: Recognizing the right to free speech, and express one self and the temperament starts from the top. If President sets the agenda, tone, and the language that he used – she pales in comparison to what he has said. #AMR

— Andrea Mitchell (@mitchellreports) January 4, 2019

This fire died quickly soon after it was lit, but it burned brightly. The Bipartisan Washington Consensus has identified several new House members, including Occasio-Cortez and Tlaib, as enemies, and leadership Democrats (and their media amplifiers) are leading the charge against them.

How is that good for the Democratic Party and their chances in 2020?

More Democrats Committing Suicide

Parsing the unparsable, Nancy Pelosi weighed in on Black Lives Matter:

Speaker Pelosi on Black Lives Matter:

"I support the recognition that black lives matter, for sure, and I have incorporated that in many of my statements. All lives matter... we really have to redress past grievances in terms of how we addressed the African-American community." pic.twitter.com/igbCqyceIJ

— MSNBC (@MSNBC) January 5, 2019

"Black Lives Matter" and "All Lives Matter" are code for two very opposite movements. The first says, "Cops should stop murdering black people." The second says, "Stop criticizing cops." Pelosi either mindfully wants it both ways, or mindlessly doesn't understand the difference.

I'll bet black people though, who mainly vote Democratic, know the difference, and they may remember that difference in 2020.

By the way, "past grievances," Ms. Pelosi?

Police change explanation — again — after killing black man they mistook for an active shooter

Alabama police have backtracked further from their claims about Emantic Bradford Jr., who was initially described as an active shooter after an officer killed him in a suburban Birmingham shopping mall on Thanksgiving evening.

In a regretful statement the next day, police said the actual gunman had apparently escaped the Riverchase Galleria — but still maintained that Bradford, 21, “was fleeing the shooting scene while brandishing a handgun” when an officer shot him in a corridor outside the JCPenney store.

In a third statement Monday, police raised doubts about whether Bradford even had his gun out when officers encountered him.

And so it goes.

Even More Dems Committing Suicide

The top priority for Democrats in the new Senate seems to be support for a bill, not to open the government or do any of a dozen good things for this country, but to protect another country, Israel, from criticism by Americans:

U.S. Senate’s First Bill, in Midst of Shutdown, is a Bipartisan Defense of the Israeli Government from Boycotts

When each new Congress is gaveled into session, the chambers attach symbolic importance to the first piece of legislation to be considered. For that reason, it bears the lofty designation of H.R.1 in the House, and S.1 in the Senate.

In the newly controlled Democratic House, H.R.1 – meant to signal the new majority’s priorities – is an anti-corruption bill that combines election and campaign finance reform, strengthening of voting rights, and matching public funds for small-dollar candidates. ...

But in the 2019 GOP-controlled Senate, the first bill to be considered – S.1 – is not designed to protect American workers, bolster U.S. companies, or address the various debates over border security and immigration. It’s not a bill to open the government. Instead, according to multiple sources involved in the legislative process, S.1 will be a compendium containing a handful of foreign-policy related measures, a main one of which is a provision, with Florida’s GOP Sen. Marco Rubio as a lead sponsor, to defend the Israeli government. The bill is a top legislative priority for AIPAC.

The bill, which punishes companies that take part in any boycott of Israel, could sweep up individuals as well, and is widely considered unconstitutional:

In the previous Congress, that measure was known as S.170, and it gives state and local governments explicit legal authority to boycott any U.S. companies which themselves are participating in a boycott against Israel. As the Intercept reported last month, 26 states now have enacted some version of a law to punish or otherwise sanction entities which participate in or support the boycott of Israel, while similar laws are pending in at least 13 additional states. Rubio’s bill is designed to strengthen the legal basis to defend those Israel-protecting laws from constitutional challenge.

Punishment aimed at companies which choose to boycott Israel can also sweep up individual American citizens in its punitive net, because individual contractors often work for state or local governments under the auspices of a sole proprietorship or some other business entity. That was the case with Texas elementary school speech pathologist Bahia Amawi, who lost her job working with autistic and speech-impaired children in Austin because she refused to promise not to boycott goods produced in Israel and/or illegal Israeli settlements.

If it passes, it will be with Democrats' — and Chuck Schumer's — support:

With the seven Democratic co-sponsors, the bill would have the 60 votes it needs to overcome a filibuster. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. – who supported Sen. Cardin’s far more draconian bill of last year and is one of the Senate’s most reliable AIPAC loyalists – also plans to support the Rubio bill, rather than whip votes against it, sources working on the bill said. Schumer’s spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment. [emphasis added]

Not the best look coming into the new year. Expect more stories like this.

Another Deadly Obesity Disease

This tale is indirectly about the food industry. Directly, it's about a new disease — condition, actually — that affects obese American. It's on the rise (as you'd expect) and it lurks undiagnosed. Usually, by the time it's discovered the only way to save the patient is with a liver transplant.

The $35 billion race to cure a silent killer that affects 30 million Americans

At the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Florida, the liver transplant group is busy handling an onslaught of patients who have come from all over the country in hopes of a chance at life. For many, a liver transplant is their last hope, after being diagnosed with a deadly disease sweeping the nation at epic proportions. People crowd the unit and undergo scores of testing and evaluation in an effort to get on the hospital's coveted transplant list. It's a program with a 94 percent survival rate after liver transplant, one of the highest in the nation.

For many the culprit is a serious form of fatty liver disease called nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, also known as NASH. An outgrowth of the obesity epidemic in the Western world and around the globe, it causes scarring and inflammation that can lead to liver cirrhosis, cardiac and lung complications, liver cancer and death. Yet few people know about it.

Across the United States, millions of people of all ages suffer from this silent killer that slowly morphs from nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, a condition that now affects 89 million in the U.S., according to the Center for Disease Analysis. The National Institutes of Health estimates as many as 30 million people, or 12 percent of U.S. adults, now have NASH.

Much of the rest of the article is about the money some company could make if they find a cure — "Industry experts estimate the global market for these new drugs is $35 billion" — but that kind of pathology is what you'd expect from CNBC. The pathology of NASH, the condition itself, is our point.

I said this is a story about food. Americans are obese because of their food, especially the modified corn starch–loaded fast food eaten by the poor and middle class. In that sense this is an economic story, just as the opioid crisis is an economic story. Expect more like these as well.

The New Year

This feels like a birth of sorts, the start of this new year — for myself, no longer authoring as "Gaius," and for the world. I'm encouraged by the first story. Not so much the rest.

We're coming into campaign season for 2020, the last presidential campaign, in my estimation, that can elect a candidate who can make a real difference in the trajectory of the nation, and indeed the species. Those alive today will see what comes as we read the start of the last chapter of the final book most of us will be characters in.

Welcome to the New Year, all. It could be a bumpy ride.