"Tea Party Liberal" Promises to Bring in a Blue Wave from West Virginia

"Take away coal from other places that had nothing else"

So you're correctly blaming natural gas for that right? Democrats didn't have shit to do with coal getting wrecked, fracking did. Hence my question what break they're looking for. Unless you plan on subsidizing coal further (a daft proposition), the ship sailed.
That’s not why all the plants shut down
 
That’s not why all the plants shut down

So if one plant shut down because of regulations, it invalidates that coal got mollywopped into life support by natural gas?

Regulations didn't kill coal country, sorry to say.
 
We're talking coal right?

Is this pre or post natural gas explosion? If after, they're shooting at the way wrong barn. Everyone took a bath then.

If before, they may very well be right. I'd love to see the evidence.

Coal is the big one, because it's so ingrained into the local psyche down there. Natural gas and other competing industries obviously factor into it, but there definitely is a perception that the government actively helped facilitate that. I recall Obama had a few unfortunate soundbytes which undoubtedly cemented that perception.
 
Coal is the big one, because it's so ingrained into the local psyche down there. Natural gas and other competing industries obviously factor into it, but there definitely is a perception that the government actively helped facilitate that. I recall Obama had a few unfortunate soundbytes which undoubtedly cemented that perception.

Ok, I get you.

What they gotta realize, and I know they hate hearing it, is that the "work in a coal mine for 20 years and retire" life is dead. Dead dead dead. I say the same to inner city black people who think that manufacturing is coming back. It's just a reality that has to be addressed somehow. If paying respect to the reality of the situation is putting them against Democrats, then it might just be a loss. I'd love to get them on healthcare, with job training, short term support, all that. But if they think it's gonna end with coal mines opening, they're just gonna have a bad time.

Basically, i'm sympathetic to their plight, but they don't want to take the hand that's being offered. And it's not even a backhand, I think it's pretty altruistic myself. I'll gladly pay more taxes so all their kids can go to the hospital and not put them in the hole, but they gotta make it happen. Can't do it for them.
 
You're going to have to elaborate on that, especially when Democrats are talking about unconditional healthcare and schooling and Republicans are talking about work requirements for welfare and tax cuts for the rich.

Well, the same people talking about universal healthcare and free college are also typically pitching open borders, Christians are bad, grab the guns, men are sexist, PC newspeak, etc. So in that sense, "universal healthcare" and "free college" is perceived as redistribution to people who hate them. College is an especially tough sell these days because it hasn't led to the economic opportunities its proponents promised.
 
Last edited:
Well, the same people talking about universal healthcare and free college are also typically pitching open borders, White people are privileged racists, Christians are bad, grab the guns, transgender bathrooms, men are sexist, PC newspeak, etc. So in that sense, "universal healthcare" and "free college" is perceived as redistribution to people who hate them. College is an especially tough sell these days because it hasn't led to the economic opportunities its proponents promised.
None of that is accurate, but people have been conditioned to believe it by the right wing noise machine.
 
Coal mining is a terrible job that kills people, there has to be way to replace it with better opportunities for the workers. Trying to prop up a harmful dying industry is just plain stupid.

West Virginia gets none of my sympy because when offered free jobs training for new careers, a majority of out of work miners chose to enroll in classes for COAL MINING.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...meback-miners-reject-retraining-idUSKBN1D14G0

NONE OF MY SYMPY



At this point is clear they feel entitled to their coal industry and absolutely refuse to join the rest of the country in moving forward.
 
"Taxes are immoral because Jesus tells us to give from the church" and all that.
And all what? I've never heard this argument before, from either conservatives or liberals. Are you saying you think this is a widely held belief?
 
Well, the same people talking about universal healthcare and free college are also typically pitching open borders, White people are privileged racists, Christians are bad, grab the guns, transgender bathrooms, men are sexist, PC newspeak, etc. So in that sense, "universal healthcare" and "free college" is perceived as redistribution to people who hate them. College is an especially tough sell these days because it hasn't led to the economic opportunities its proponents promised.

That sounds like you're being a little hyperbolic to prove a point. The policies you named are gross distortions of what was actually said about them. So yeah, if you're getting gassed up by Sean Hannity, you probably think Democrats hate you and are the devil. If you're actually reading the policy statements, how do you come to the conclusion that Democrats hate these conservative people? Especially since they're supposedly not republicans to begin with. If they're "working class people looking for a chance", then the economics of the situation should be readily apparent.
 
And all what? I've never heard this argument before, from either conservatives or liberals. Are you saying you think this is a widely held belief?

Talk to some christian libertarians, guarantee it comes up. The crux of it is that Jesus says to give to those in need, not have it taken from to you to give to them. They see taxes as immoral in themselves because of the "coercion" involved (a mainstream Republican position) but also redundant because churches and private donors will fill the gap. This isn't really a fringe position, it's actually fairly widespread.
 
Hey, I'm all for shaking up the politics, especially of deeply entrenched both red and blue regions

Dude has the look, has the military background, he should get some attention and maybe some open ears if he can completely stay away from the identity politics side of the Dem party

Would his equivalent be a flaming homosexual republican in San Francisco running for office?
 
Talk to some christian libertarians, guarantee it comes up. The crux of it is that Jesus says to give to those in need, not have it taken from to you to give to them. They see taxes as immoral in themselves because of the "coercion" involved (a mainstream Republican position) but also redundant because churches and private donors will fill the gap. This isn't really a fringe position, it's actually fairly widespread.

I know a lot of Christian libertarians. Hell, I know several Christian libertarians who live in West Virginia. I've never heard it. I'm not saying no one says this, but you are claiming that it is a common mindset, and I'm not persuaded that it is.

Can you point to any non-fringe preacher or pundit who says this?
 
I know a lot of Christian libertarians. Hell, I know several Christian libertarians who live in West Virginia. I've never heard it. I'm not saying no one says this, but you are claiming that it is a common mindset, and I'm not persuaded that it is.

Can you point to any non-fringe preacher or pundit who says this?

You've really never heard this? They usually try and soften it by tying it to welfare, but tax cuts always seem to follow.

Michael Tanner wrote an article at Cato a while back about it, i'll see if I can find it. Reagan for one was really huge on it as a concept.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=44337

Part of that economic package also includes budget cuts. Now, some of these cuts will pinch, which upsets those who believe the less fortunate deserve more than the basic subsistence which the governmental safety net programs provide. Well, the fact is, I agree. More can be done; more should be done. But doing more doesn't mean to simply spend more. The size of the Federal budget is not an appropriate barometer of social conscience or charitable concern.

Economic problems or not, isn't it time to take a fresh look at the way we provide social services? Not just because they cost so much and waste so much, but because too many of them just don't work? Even if the Federal Government had all the money it wished to spend on social programs, would we still want to spend it the way we have in the past?

In all my years as Governor, and now as President, I have never found an agency, a program, a piece of legislation, or a budget that was adequate to meet the total needs of human beings. Something is missing from such an equation. I believe that something is private initiative and community involvement-the kind the NAB exemplifies.

There is a legitimate role for government, but we mustn't forget: Before the idea got around that government was the principal vehicle of social change, it was understood that the real source of our progress as a people was the private sector. The private sector still offers creative, less expensive, and more efficient alternatives to solving our social problems. Now, we're not advocating private initiatives and voluntary activities as a halfhearted replacement for budget cuts. We advocate them because they're right in their own regard. They're a part of what we can proudly call "the American personality."
 
Ok, I get you.

What they gotta realize, and I know they hate hearing it, is that the "work in a coal mine for 20 years and retire" life is dead. Dead dead dead. I say the same to inner city black people who think that manufacturing is coming back. It's just a reality that has to be addressed somehow. If paying respect to the reality of the situation is putting them against Democrats, then it might just be a loss. I'd love to get them on healthcare, with job training, short term support, all that. But if they think it's gonna end with coal mines opening, they're just gonna have a bad time.

Basically, i'm sympathetic to their plight, but they don't want to take the hand that's being offered. And it's not even a backhand, I think it's pretty altruistic myself. I'll gladly pay more taxes so all their kids can go to the hospital and not put them in the hole, but they gotta make it happen. Can't do it for them.

Here are a few choice quotes from Obama on the subject of the coal mining industry:



Now I know what you're going to say about that first quote, and how the coal market got upended by this spontaneous "explosion" in demand for Natural Gas during Obama's terms. Fact is, we've been extracting natural gas as an energy source for a long time (almost 200 years in the USA), and it's not like we just discovered it. Something drove its sudden surge in popularity beyond cleaner/efficient processing. A lot of people believe it was the EPA's overt attempts at killing the coal industry, and other complimentary government efforts like tax incentives, which both burdened producers of coal and incentivized non-coal energy consumption. One might notice that as the world's demand for energy continued on a fairly predictable course, natural gas filled a void in the market previously occupied by coal. All of that happened relatively suddenly over the last decade – coinciding with Obama's terms. Many suspect that the real thrust of all this is the "climate change industry" and their goal of reducing CO2 emissions. That's all fine and dandy until you start killing off an industry which an entire region depends on. I'm not saying manmade climate change is 100% false (or true), but when there are almost 500 billion tons of coal in the ground, we ought to be damn sure we don't need a coal mining industry.

I digress somewhat in that I did not mean to get into a substantive debate about coal, clean/green energy, and climate science, etc. That topic probably deserves its own thread. I am merely pointing out that Obama really did create a perception that the government was actively trying to rid Appalachia of one if its cherished industries. Whether it was caused by a "natural gas explosion" or EPA regulation (or both), West Virginians do have legitimate reasons for believing the government worked against them.
 
Here are a few choice quotes from Obama on the subject of the coal mining industry:



Now I know what you're going to say about that first quote, and how the coal market got upended by this spontaneous "explosion" in demand for Natural Gas during Obama's terms. Fact is, we've been extracting natural gas as an energy source for a long time (almost 200 years in the USA), and it's not like we just discovered it. Something drove its sudden surge in popularity beyond cleaner/efficient processing. A lot of people believe it was the EPA's overt attempts at killing the coal industry, and other complimentary government efforts like tax incentives, which both burdened producers of coal and incentivized non-coal energy consumption. One might notice that as the world's demand for energy continued on a fairly predictable course, natural gas filled a void in the market previously occupied by coal. All of that happened relatively suddenly over the last decade – coinciding with Obama's terms. Many suspect that the real thrust of all this is the "climate change industry" and their goal of reducing CO2 emissions. That's all fine and dandy until you start killing off an industry which an entire region depends on. I'm not saying manmade climate change is 100% false (or true), but when there are almost 500 billion tons of coal in the ground, we ought to be damn sure we don't need a coal mining industry.

I digress somewhat in that I did not mean to get into a substantive debate about coal, clean/green energy, and climate science, etc. That topic probably deserves its own thread. I am merely pointing out that Obama really did create a perception that the government was actively trying to rid Appalachia of one if its cherished industries. Whether it was caused by a "natural gas explosion" or EPA regulation (or both), West Virginians do have legitimate reasons for believing the government worked against them.


We have been extracting natural gas for a long time, but once fracking took off it increased production literally tenfold.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/10/161007105548.htm

The data show the drop in those years to be correlated with the shale revolution, as natural gas production increased by a factor of more than 10 and its price dropped in half, the researchers say. And, due to the continuing -- and in some cases accelerating -- technological and economic advantages of gas over coal, the decline in coal is expected to continue at least decades into the future.

Their study is published in The Electricity Journal.

"Some people attribute the decline in coal-generated electricity to the EPA's air-quality rules, even calling it 'Obama's war on coal,'" said Mingguo Hong, associate professor of electrical engineering and computer science at Case Western Reserve and co-author of the study. "While we can't say that the EPA rules have no impact -- as, for example, discouraging the building of new coal power plants because of the expectation that tougher air-quality rules will clear the courts -- the data say the EPA rules have not been the driving force."

A glut of cheap gas and more efficient extraction is what did them in, the EPA honestly didn't have anything to do with it.

I get what you're saying, perception can be reality. But when the perception is so far off the actual reality that it's a total red herring, I start questioning people. If this is the battle we're fighting, can they even be brought around? Can Democrats really be blamed for saying people are voting against their interests when the evidence is so striking?
 
None of that is accurate, but people have been conditioned to believe it by the right wing noise machine.

FWIW, you're one of those people whom they see as opposing their interests. You're an ambassador for your political platform. I don't think you've reflected deeply enough on how your political rhetoric is received among people who don't share your perspective.
 
Coal mining is a dead career, and to be frank anyone who thinks it is coming back is probably too stupid to be reached.
 
Coal mining is a dead career, and to be frank anyone who thinks it is coming back is probably too stupid to be reached.

You should have been a Clinton speech writer during her 2016 campaign. lol
 
Back
Top