• TengoDosVacas@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    This is bullshit. Climate change wasn’t a thing for Gore until he went looking for another job. If he had been president everything would still be the same…militaristic and corporate. And remember that he is a Southern conservative whose wife wanted music banned but had to settle for warning stickers.

    You Enlightened Centrists sure do love selective glorification of the past

  • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Also since Al Gore invented the internet (well not really, but it was something he did care about) so maybe there could’ve been some standards and requirements for inter-operation (which was the direction things were going before Bush) and maybe the internet wouldn’t have become the shithole it is now. Yeah it would still be a shithole, but we might’ve had a shithole that corporations actually had to do a little competition.

      • pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        I am someone who knows how you all act and am completely fed up with it.

        You need to fucking grow up before it’s too late.

        I am going to just leave the U.S. when the shit hits the fan. You are the only ones who are going to suffer. And even if I do, it won’t matter, because you brought this upon yourselves.

  • prettydarknwild@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    is so fucked up that the future of the world depends on one single country, and more exactly, one single person in that country

    • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Gore won both the popular vote and the electoral college, and while a staged right-wing riot caused significant confusion, and ultimately the Democratic party decided that ‘decorum’ was more important than stopping the conservative movement.

      History isn’t inevitable, but nothing has fundementally changed about how Liberals and Democrats view strategy and politics; this should cause to to strongly consider the value or wisdom of statements like Blue No Matter Who, if even when victorious, the refuse to take it.

      Its not a long shot. It actually is the timeline we should be on and Gore was *impeccably clear about climate change being his priority. He won, by both the electoral college final count and the popular vote. The election was stolen from the American people but is relegated to a modern folk tale, in-spite of it actually being reality.

      • rambaroo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Gore absolutely did not make climate change his priority in 2000. That’s just a straight up lie. He campaigned almost entirely on the economy and reforming social security and Medicare. Climate change was NOT a top issue for voters or for Gore in 2000.

  • Jessica@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Whose to say that the Gore Timeline would have brought us to anything better than what we have now?

    I’d like to think that in that timeline, we never got past the point of TFG sticking to his shitty ass TV shows.

    Doubt.

    • PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      No Iraq War, “No Child Left Behind” never becomes a thing, Bin Laden gets caught in Afghanistan if the 9/11 plot even manages to happen since Bush is known to have ignored a report containing a warning about the attacks being planned.

      You really wanna tell me that a world without the war on terror would be exactly as bad as the one we live in today? Especially one without the war on terror where the century kicks off with a president who takes the climate crisis seriously?

      • Jessica@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        You’re taking quite a bit of a leap there about 9/11 being foiled because Gore was in office. I really don’t think that it would have been sunshine and lollipops like what has been suggested. He’s one man. I have a hard time believing one man would have made the difference in terms of 9/11.

        I was 17 during that election, otherwise I would have voted for him. I think he could have done some great things, but I’m not so sure those great things would have made massive waves that would change today.

        🤷🏻‍♀️

        Edit: format more better next time.

        • someguy3@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          One of the key findings was that poor transition because of the election mess led to lack of intelligence briefings, etc and thus lack of decisions.

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Even if that terrorist attack wasn’t foiled, there were many possible ways to respond to it. It’s naive to think that would have unfolded the same way

        • PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Bush ignored an attack imminent report that basically spelled out the intent of Al Qaeda to launch an attack via the hijacking of airplanes. Gore likely would not have, as gore is not as dumb as Bush is well known to be.

    • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Whose to say that the Gore Timeline would have brought us to anything better than what we have now?

      I mean, this is just kinda dummy thiccc reasoning. Looks good from the outside, but vapid and lacking substance.

    • Optional@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      It absolutely, 100% no-doubt, are-you-even-joking would have been better. But my idiot friends all voted Nader to register their displeasure. Stupid fucks.

      • Jessica@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        I disagree. There’s only so much one man would have been able to do. After 9/11, he would have lost all buy-in from the public as the War on Terror started. Who would care about saving the planet if they are worried about terrorist attacks?

        • someguy3@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          We can do two things at the same time you know. And the way industry and electrical grid changes work is over a long period of time. You move the needle at the start and the path change is dramatic.

        • SandbagTiara2816@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          The Kyoto Protocol would have been ratified. Could you imagine if we had an international agreement with legally-binding emissions reductions in place in 2000? The Paris Agreement is the best we have, and it’s simply not as strong as Kyoto would have been

  • aubertlone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    It is befuddling reading the sentiment for the majority of the comments on this post.

    Having a chief executive in office in 2000 who was super concerned about climate change would have made a big difference.

    But hey that’s just like my opinion man

    • arymandias@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Would the world have been different with Al Gore? Probably. But it’s easy to make up perfect hypotheticals. Look at what the Democrats actually did in the years after. They basically all voted for the Iraq war, and then when they had a filibuster proof majority in 08, they did practically nothing on climate change.

    • Nachorella@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      As someone who’s guilty of thinking ‘both sides are the same’ I think you’re definitely right.

      For context I am Australian and while I still think our labor party is better than our liberal party the differences are small, which is why I always vote for our further left party whose votes ultimately go to labor anyway.

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Australia has ranked choice voting, does it not? I’d vote for the farthest left option too if the US had RCV.

        • saltesc@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          It works pretty well, too. Sure there’s still a two party situation going on, but recently the amount of votes not going to either is making it clear they’re slowly losing voter confidence as the older generation fade out.

          I think younger voters actually understand how important the senate is too and how powerful ranking it with some detail can be.

    • Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Except that the Republicans would shit-can any legislative initiatives - because they controlled both chambers - and would hamstring any executive actions. Hell, they’d probably have impeached Gore for it.

      Our system of government is simply incapable of dealing with a problem on the scale of climate change.

    • rambaroo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Cool, then explain what he could have done that Obama and Biden didn’t do already. You’re massively overrating the impact one president has. It’s not like he even campaigned on climate change in the first place. He didn’t pull that schtick until after he lost the election.

      There’s no chance whatsoever that an Al Gore presidency would have averted the climate crisis. Absolutely none. I’m actually shocked that any adult could be this naive.

      • icydefiance@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Progress is cumulative, and it happens slowly.

        Even if he didn’t accomplish anything other than preventing the regression that happened under Bush, it would have allowed Obama and Biden to make more progress than they did.

        If he did manage to accomplish anything, no matter how small, then Obama and Biden could have made even more progress.

    • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yeah. Seeing them come out of the woodwork to say “Yeah Gore was just another rich white blah blah Lieberman blah blah center-right, all the same” really throws it into sharp relief how little connection there is to reality there.

      It would literally have changed the world.

      • someguy3@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        I get the same message that people think capitalism under Biden is the same as capitalism under Trump. It’s honestly bizarre.

      • azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Defeatism and cynicism are very effective defense mechanisms, and the internet has made some people absolute experts at both.

        All we can do is keep loudly pointing out how daft and counter-productive these behaviors are. Even if it’s true, saying “x is useless” is also useless unless you propose to do y instead.

          • azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            Who said cynical opinions are always factually incorrect? You’re making up an argument.

            Thank you for illustrating my point brilliantly; you have contributed nothing of worth, but your feeling of superiority.

  • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    And then Obama won and he fixed the climate crisis and didn’t start any wars. Good thing we finally learned to vote for Democrat! Both sides schmoth sides!

    And Genocide Joe of course is fixing every single issue right now. Such as killing all Palestinians which is the most important issue as all the Democrats focus goes to keeping israel’s Genocide going.

  • Jeanschyso@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    There would still be a problem because while the USA have a big responsibility in the fight against climate change, they are far from the only country that needs to do something about it. It’s an us problem, not just a U.S. problem.

    • Miaou@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Of course, but a country with the means the US have should lead by example. They don’t have a “big” responsibility, they have the greatest.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      It seems like most other developed countries have been taking it more seriously. We could have been part of that group

      In developing world, think of all the energy projects since then, that could have leapfrogged the technology directly to renewables. Heck, the extra decade or two of “free” energy could well have altered their economies

      The thing is this is China too. I do buy their point that in many ways they have still been a developing country, they still have had so much population to bring forward, so much progress to make, while also being the worlds manufacturer. And when they’re in, they’re all in. Yeah they’ve continued to build coal, and maybe the US being serious about climate change could have influenced that for the last few decades, but everyone needs to remember that while they continued to build coal, they also were taking the worlds biggest steps in Renewables. This could have happened earlier.

    • xantoxis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      As the world’s financial powerhouse, the United States has both an outsized effect on climate change relative to our population, but also power to do something about it that extends far beyond our borders. Both treaties and commercial agreements can be used to lever other nations into responsible climate policies; we’ve been doing this with just about everything else for our entire existence. You ever wonder why weed is illegal everywhere in the world at about the same time? Or copyright laws that destroy the public domain? We did that. We could use that power for good, as well.

  • niktemadur@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    There would also not have been an invasion of Iraq, things like Isis would have probably remained an unkicked hornet’s nest.
    License to torture at will would not have been granted to government goons.

    The threat of hijacking airplanes and smashing them into iconic buildings would have been taken seriously. Which opens up the possibility that 9/11 could have been averted. Then maybe the mouth-breathers at TSA would not have been given the power to profile and harass at airports.

    The list goes on: Katrina and New Orleans; the neutralizing of the Consumer Protection Bureau; the typically republican financial free-for-all that led to the collapse of Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac.

    But since so many smug lazy assholes stayed home on Election Day bOtH pArTiEs ArE tHe SaMe LoL aMiRiTe, everybody got a succession of utterly preventable shit sandwiches.

    • Resol van Lemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I keep comparing Casablanca to New York City. One reason is that they’re both the biggest cities in their respective country without being the capital, and that they suck, but also because before 2001, they both had twin towers (the ones in Casablanca are still standing btw).

  • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Centrist Democrats will always blame progressive discontent for their losses, even if their losses are caused by the Supreme Court undermining democracy itself.

    Quit moving to the right, and we’ll quit pointing it out.

  • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Climate Commitment. We’ve been screwed since the ‘90’s. Gore may have mitigated the warming, but a certain amount of warming would have occurred regardless, and will continue even if we achieve net-zero emissions. There is an amount of latent heat already trapped in the atmosphere. The warming we are experiencing now is from the early 2000’s.

    I know. I suck. But the science is clear. We done screwed up. Much love to all.

  • CultHero@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    I was so disappointed as a Canadian to see Gore lose. That stolen election was stolen from all of us not just America.

    Imagine how different the entire world would be now if Bush/Chaney had never happened.