Home | About | Donate

Trump Unveils His 'Dumpster Fire' of an Energy Policy and It's Really Scary


Trump Unveils His 'Dumpster Fire' of an Energy Policy and It's Really Scary

Lauren McCauley, staff writer

Republican nominee Donald Trump unveiled his economic and energy plan on Thursday and environmentalists are incensed, equating the infamous climate-change denier's policies to nothing less than a "dumpster fire."


Trump whoa. I want to safely poison everything, energy policy? Or, is Trump on a 5 day drunk, come-on? Help us Mr. Wizard!


Trump has no policies of any worth nor any words that are worthy of repeating. He is a master prevaricator and carnival barker without a scintilla of integrity, compassion, or intellectual curiosity. His modus operandi is a "quick fix" followed by a chain of mea culpas and lies. What a sad commentary on the state of the GOP that their candidate is not even fit to lead a prison gang to lunch.


This shows that whether or not half of his supporters are deplorables all of his supporters are apparently fools. Seriously, it is 2016 and this many people don't believe in science. The Dark Ages are over folks. We know that matter is made of atoms that form molecules. Get up to speed. The media is taking a pass on climate change as an issue and seems much more concerned about every time Hillary Clinton coughs or sneezes. Can she govern with a cold? Who cares if she has an energy policy to transition to green energy. and her opponent wants to out do China in coal burning or something like that. So what if Hillary Clinton wants to implement the Paris Climate agreement and her opponent wants to tear it up. Is she smiling enough to be the first woman president? People around the world can't believe that Americans would ever elect Donald Trump as president. Believe it all you 7 billion or so people out there. Believe it. It may actually happen in only about 7 weeks.


Really, could the choice before us be any more stark, or sobering? On the one hand we have a candidate, Hillary Clinton, who acknowledges global warming, but doesn't have the slightest intention of taking any meaningful action to address it, unless lip service and arm waving count as meaningful action. And on the other, we have Donald Trump, who refuses to acknowledge global warming, and undoubtedly wouldn't lift a finger to stop it even if he did choose to acknowledge it. So voters, please ask yourselves - would you rather listen to sweet nothings being whispered in your ear, or foul nothings? Thank God we have a democratic form of government where We the People get to decide these things.


Why vote?


I do not envy Americans their non choice between the two front runners.

You do have Stein however , who would be an excellent choice no matter where she ran. I really think it will serve the community here well to see less "trump is bad stuff" and more articles on Jill Stein.


Trump is a lunatic.


You forgot to mention that Hillary as SoS and her hubby arranged for 20 percent of our uranium reserves to be sold to Russia, via her friends in Canada. Here's the story, dear Lrx.

Did you forget, or did your campaign marketing tutors order you to pretend it never happened?

And by the way: Hillary had a seizure, not a cold. One doesn't freeze like popcycle and do a mannequin impersonation when they faint.

Facts really don't concern you, do they, Lrx?...not when "it's her turn," right?

"Can she govern with a cold?" Biggest crock of crap you've ever written. Typical Clinton campaign sneering and denial.


She didn't have a seizure. She felt faint. Big difference. Get your facts straight. And, how does uranium contribute to global warming. Nuclear power plants do not emit carbon dioxide. Bogus point. Or, pointless. Where is your sense of humor? Of course she can govern with a cold but why is the press so fixated on her health. FDR governed with polio in a wheel chair. JFK had Addison's disease and chronic back pain. Reagan was shot. And he fell off a horse and hit his head. Hillary Clinton is a non-stop worker. Sometimes that is not a good idea, for anyone. So you aren't going to vote for Clinton and possibly help elect a climate change denier who wants to power the economy with fossil fuels. The whole world is watching.


Sorry but she probably has Parkinson's. Its a brain disease. What is your excuse.


The fact that the Democratic Establishment Machine left voters with a choice between Donald Trump and a candidate who is not actually good enough to defeat him is looking more criminal--and insane--by the day.


No, Lrx, she had a seizure. You and her doctor can spread the disinformation that she fainted all you want, you can have your corporate media and associated goons purge the issue from discussion, but if you want to convince anyone that Hillary is the only person in the world who faints like Wile E. Coyote in a Roadrunner cartoon, you'll fail.

Parkinson's disease is based on medical history and a thorough neurological exam. It is also based on observation of symptoms. There are no lab tests.

You don't have to be a doctor to research this, so don't go flinging that crap in my face. Her own doctor wrote, "The remainder of her complete physical exam was normal and she is in excellent mental condition," which begs the questions:

Her medical doctor is a psychotherapist, also? Did her doctor give Hillary Clinton a thorough neurological exam? Why don't you ask her, Lrx, and then report back to us here?

Finally, what does selling uranium to your worst enemy have to do with climate change? Gee, what is uranium used for, Lrx? Certainly you know the answer. If not, do a search for "nuclear winter".

As long as you keep campaigning here for another Clinton takeover of the White House, as long as you keep using the campaign fear tactic of painting Trump's words as dangerous while ignoring Hillary Clinton's past dangerous ACTIONS, expect flak from me.

As I said in an earlier reaction to you: You helped put Clinton where she's at, so when the s*** hits the fan involving everything the Clintons stand for, everything they do in life to screw this country and the world, YOU and your ilk will be the ones I blame.


Yeah, but the thing is... Clinton is also a denying delayalist. She and the DNC and almost all the Democrats in office persist in denying the speed and direness of climate catastrophe. She, and they, persist in proposing tactics that have no hope of avoiding climate catastrophe. Soon it'll be too late to start programs that do hold such hope. Instead of backing the person running for her party's nomination who had excellent energy policies, would have won in an electoral and probably popular landslide and didn't lie about his opponents and well, everything else, to get power, she insisted on lying, cheating, stealing and winning, and now the entire world is going to lose. If either Trump or Clinton is elected president our chances of saving civilization will drop tremendously.


Hear, hear to the rest of your post but as to your first sentence: Yes, the choice could be a lot more stark. And as to your last: No, we don't have a democratic form of government and no, The People don't decide anything.


No disagreement between us - was simply being ironic, which I realize doesn't always translate well in this medium.


Any energy policy in a capitalist system is a dumpster fire of a policy.


And exactly whom, http://www.commondreams.org/author/lauren-mccauley-staff-writer , is the best candidate on the environment? Who is the anti-dumpster fire candidate? Is it a corporate owned democrat?
Or is it the party whose name is the mission statement: Green?


"Clean Energy" won't save us or even slow down the rate of global heating or any of the other consequences of our massive dumping of C02, methane and other pollutants into the atmosphere. Obama talked the talk occasionally then approved methane fracking and oil fracking and coal strip mining. Hillary talks about solar panels and bicycle paths while plotting wars abroad. It's business as usual and bombs away.


And yet it is still no worse than what the DNC wants to push at us constantly