Should our next POTUS only be concerned with climate and national security?

[Anonymous]

If you believe, as I do, that we have no choice but to stop burning carbon as soon as possible, do you think that it should be the primary agenda of our leadership outside of national security.
This week is the first week that I’m beginning to think that we might not make it as a species.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you believe, as I do, that we have no choice but to stop burning carbon as soon as possible, do you think that it should be the primary agenda of our leadership outside of national security.
This week is the first week that I’m beginning to think that we might not make it as a species.

I honestly think that's probably the best (and only) outcome for the planet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you believe, as I do, that we have no choice but to stop burning carbon as soon as possible, do you think that it should be the primary agenda of our leadership outside of national security.
This week is the first week that I’m beginning to think that we might not make it as a species.

I honestly think that's probably the best (and only) outcome for the planet.

Not helpful

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you believe, as I do, that we have no choice but to stop burning carbon as soon as possible, do you think that it should be the primary agenda of our leadership outside of national security.
This week is the first week that I’m beginning to think that we might not make it as a species.

I honestly think that's probably the best (and only) outcome for the planet.

Not helpful

+1
Plus we have already killed so many plants, animals and ecosystems that even if we collectively died today, I’m not sure what nature could salvage in our absence.

As the years roll by and global warming gets worse and begins to affect even the Republicans who think it’s not real, it’s just natural cycles, it is going to become more and more important, but no. The government can’t just focus on two things. It’s a government, not a person.

[Anonymous]

You all know that radical governments in Europe are shutting down farms producing food. Why is China still allowed to buy up our farm land? Bill Gates doing the same thing. The crazies want to starve people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you believe, as I do, that we have no choice but to stop burning carbon as soon as possible, do you think that it should be the primary agenda of our leadership outside of national security.
This week is the first week that I’m beginning to think that we might not make it as a species.

I honestly think that's probably the best (and only) outcome for the planet.

I agree and don’t think there’s anything we can do to significantly slow it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you believe, as I do, that we have no choice but to stop burning carbon as soon as possible, do you think that it should be the primary agenda of our leadership outside of national security.
This week is the first week that I’m beginning to think that we might not make it as a species.

I honestly think that's probably the best (and only) outcome for the planet.

Not helpful

Not helpful because it’s too late. Mother Nature needs to wipe humans off.

-np

[Anonymous]

Yep I agree with that but am doubtful the corporate greed will.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you believe, as I do, that we have no choice but to stop burning carbon as soon as possible, do you think that it should be the primary agenda of our leadership outside of national security.
This week is the first week that I’m beginning to think that we might not make it as a species.

No. Not at all. One issue people will mess every issue up even their issue.

There is no way to stop buring carbon in the next 20 years. After that maybe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you believe, as I do, that we have no choice but to stop burning carbon as soon as possible, do you think that it should be the primary agenda of our leadership outside of national security.
This week is the first week that I’m beginning to think that we might not make it as a species.

I honestly think that's probably the best (and only) outcome for the planet.

Not helpful

Humanity needs to be seriously bottlenecked in the next century of the planet is to survive. We need a 95% reduction in population, for starters. Then a gradual decline from there going forward.

Yes, I regret having my children, and I wouldn’t have them if I knew then what I know now. I will urge them not to have children of their own though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you believe, as I do, that we have no choice but to stop burning carbon as soon as possible, do you think that it should be the primary agenda of our leadership outside of national security.
This week is the first week that I’m beginning to think that we might not make it as a species.

You first.

Then China. Then India. Then the entire continent of Africa. (The US President is powerless to compel this, by the way.)

I seriously don’t get all you doom and gloom types. If you’re screwing around on DCUM from your air conditioned million dollar home with fresh water at the sink and a fridge full of food, you’re doing fine. It’s been BEAUTIFUL out lately. Football’s about to start. You can listen to any piece of music ever made played by world-class virtuosos and the press of a button.

No, the President shouldn’t focus only on climate and national security.

Touch grass.

[Anonymous]

Climate IS national security. The longer it takes us to figure that out....