• Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 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
      ·
      7 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
        7 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
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 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