Maybe it’s jiujitsu? Like, making sure basic infrastructure isn’t supported by fossil fuel consumption but instead by taxes on billionaires is not a terrible idea when gasoline demand is basically inelastic for the rural and suburban working class.

Shared this thread with a friend in the investment space (no greenie!), and here’s what he had to say: “In ten years, no one will buy a house without thinking about climate change-induced risks and costs … It is a future that is rapidly coming into focus.” Exactly.

How are words misused and weaponized to maintain our reliance on the fossil-fuel economy? In this episode of Authors on Climate Words we speak to Dr Genevieve Guenther (@doctorvive.bsky.social) author of The Language of Climate Politics: Fossil-Fuel Propaganda and How to Fight It. Link below.

Regarding the whole "don't talk about climate" shtick.

Do many people know that the ICC judges, once sanctioned by the US, almost immediately lost access to credit cards, google, amazon & microsoft cloud, etc. www.ft.com/content/4c3a...

Oh and PS. OP says "The Searchlight Institute found that 59 percent of voters in battleground states are “bothered that climate change has become such a political issue,” " Because they think caring about reality should be bipartisan, not because they think it should go away, you silly donut.

Lastly C) the people who said they do care about climate are not who the article just blithely assumes they are. The stereotype that greens are affluent latte-sipping white Brooklynites is nonsense. Ackshwally.... Poor Black people care most about climate. /15 www.brookings.edu/articles/bla...

Couple issues here. A) When you are running for office, you pursue PEOPLE YOU CAN ACTUALLY GET. The three categories I tagged red above - energy system, climate, environment - are important to 36-45% of voters. That's the D base +up to 10% indies. The Ds are open to a green+left climate message. /12

You can dial the climateness in that up or down depending on audience. Sure, don't do it in Montana, per article. But don't assume there's no audience. The bigger issue is a) weak messengers (Biden) and b) demented media ecosystem, per @volts.wtf and others' repeated point... /8

I'm a climate expert. I know 1000s of climate experts. One fact we all know: poor people care about climate more than rich people. Hardly surprising when you can't afford AC, work outside, etc. A few issues in the article... /1

"Progressive Funders Need to Reassess the #BreakthroughInstitute ...It’s significant that the Koch-aligned Stand Together Trust is a recent addition to the donor list. Clearly Breakthrough was doing things the Koch network liked." via @cleantechnica.bsky.social: cleantechnica.com/2026/03/29/p...

Please read this @nickkristof.bsky.social article. It is one of the most upsetting things I’ve ever read — so prepare yourself. But please do not look away. Gift link: www.nytimes.com/2026/05/11/o...

Climate politics is a shitshow, but my son watercolored me this bouquet of flowers for Mother’s Day, which feels like a Good Thing. There is that!

" #climate change denial is collectively reinforced by our governments and politicians, who promote the cycle of “implicatory denial” as a way to ensure social cohesion and stability" - Kari Marie Norgaard www.sydney.edu.au/sydney-envir...

What is the best book about the 2008 financial crisis? Thx in advance.

Love all the people claiming that Biden got brought down by climate, people are sick of climate framing etc when the whole programme was called the *checks notes* 'Inflation Reduction Act'

Leaving aside campaigning in red states, the argument that Democrats should drop climate is wrong. 1) It is dumb to drop a platform that the majority support & that your opponent is absolutely terrible on. 2) We do need to get to net zero now in order to halt heating at a relatively safe level. 🧵

Sure would be cool if we could fix the climate without ever having to do politics about climate. Maybe technology will save us! Or the enlightened self-interest of the energy industry! Or elected Dems, having never been pressured to make any commitments! Ah, well, nevertheless.

The implicit theory-of-change in this article is that we can accomplish all the work of averting the climate crisis without ever mentioning climate on the campaign trail. If you don’t buy the premise, then the argument is functionally identical to “the climate crisis will go away if we ignore it.”

At this point, solving climate change is cheaper than not solving it -- not only on some grand 50 year time horizon, but tomorrow, today, immediately. Soving climate change *is* affordability. Maybe Dems should tell voters about that.

Yes, but the BTI has his picture up on their website as if he’s affiliated. They do this with anyone they like who has ever interacted with them in any way. (Yes this is weird and fundamentally dishonest, but that’s par for the course with them.)

IMO talking about climate change as a matter of inflating green asset values didn’t resonate with voters and the Democrats talked relatively little about climate change itself during the Biden administration

I can barely think of an elected Democrat who has said the words "climate change" out loud in the last two years, but of course the "Dems must eat shit" takes never stop, never change.

but most of all bsky.app/profile/john...

Good thread…

Environmental concerns, including climate change, are still even fairly supported across parties--even with one party actively and massively propagandizing against it!

In the presidential campaign climate was also dwarfed by abortion and middle class tax cuts. I don't think anyone would suggest that was a climate election! americaforward.us/tvcongress/2...

This gets the problem wrong. Voters don't connect policies to jobs and savings because 1) the media ecosystem is broken 2) Dems don't do enough to provoke conflict and attention around their messaging frames. But you can't get an oped published with that argument. www.nytimes.com/2026/05/09/o...

Media coverage of climate change is at a record low. But if we work together we can bring this down to zero! Come on people, it's like we're not even trying to erase this issue from human discourse! It helps to make a jar where you deposit a coin every time you catch yourself mentioning climate

A current or past "Breakthrough Institute" affiliation is a red flag #NewClimateWar

ALL prices were high, and Biden would get angry if anyone said this to him and insist, publicly, that the US economy was the best in the world. Then there was Gaza, Biden as a muttering corpse in the first debate, and Harris’s feckless campaign. Plus nobody knew anything about IRA anyway.

Also, climate policy was not an issue in the 2024 campaign!

“There’s a reason the biggest climate bill ever didn’t have climate on [sic] its name.” Yeah and that reason was Joe Manchin. Schumer literally let Manchin name the legislation to try to flatter him into giving his vote. (And of course Dems should talk differently in red states, that’s my point?)

That thing the government has been trying to eradicate from public discourse by banning it from federal labs and stop funding people from researching it? Well of course the best political strategy for the opposition party is to never mention it again ever.

if you can’t talk about climate and make it relevant to people’s lives, that seems like a you issue not a climate issue.

Real-time information on the steadily rising costs of the Iran War. This is costing the US vastly more than *any* Dem social or economic proposal of the last 50 years. It would have paid for the entire original Build Back Better proposal.

🤔

yes, especially given Trump's unpopularity and how easy it would be to tie his behavior to his climate denial and rising prices to illegal oil wars and just fossil fuels in general

Leaving aside campaigning in red states, the argument that Democrats should drop climate is wrong. 1) It is dumb to drop a platform that the majority support & that your opponent is absolutely terrible on. 2) We do need to get to net zero now in order to halt heating at a relatively safe level. 🧵

If politicians want to water down their language about climate change because they think it's more politically salable that's fine, but it remains true that we're deranging the planet at a pace that has virtually no analog in the fossil record, even for a planet with a very volatile climate history

"It’s a once-in-a-lifetime chance to win the goodwill of communities that have understandably lost faith in politics and don’t trust either party, especially on AI." I think this is understated in general so i'm glad to see it here.

Wait what’s going on in the left? (Also: kudos to the graphic designer for trolling this screed.)

Oil and gas “investment into low carb technologies and projects” is not really part of fossil-energy R&D — it’s a line item in the industry PR budget. If they don’t need to greenwash — to pretend to care about climate in order to extend their social license to operate — they don’t spend the bucks.

"Absent." "An embarrassment." "Not an effective HHS secretary." It looks like California voters may learn the hard way what many of us already know about Xavier Becerra: incompetent, spineless, weak. Remember: We told ya! www.politico.com/news/2026/05...

Hammering "Trump's war is creating an oil and gas crisis, so we need emergency renewables+transit investment" isn't hard! The CEO of the Port of Long Beach just did it w/ CA's last Hormuz tanker in the frame. Politicians should be lining up to film the same shot! www.youtube.com/shorts/EwADM...

"The unexpected boom in home batteries and the equally surprising surge in rooftop solar installations means that Australia’s target of 82 per cent renewables by 2030 – long dismissed as a lost cause by some – is now very much within reach."

This is, of course, not the first time that Holly Buck’s arguments have echoed those of the industry she claims to oppose. 2 pages of receipts 👇

“Though published in a leading socialist magazine, Holly Buck’s article sounded remarkably like a recent Washington Post op-ed by two executives from the Trump-aligned surveillance technology giant Palantir, which argued that slowing down or stopping datacenters would only hurt the working class.”

A bunch of extremely beautiful pictures of wind farms in China - all photographs by Weimin Chu e360.yale.edu/digest/china...