Staff Contributors
Guest Contributors

Success

Posted by David Roberts at 2:12 AM on 18 Nov 2007

The Grist presidential forum on climate and energy went off without a hitch and was a huge success. I'll have much more to say about it tomorrow, but for now I just want to thank, again, all the groups that worked to bring it together, the wonder-working production crew at the venue, and the candidates who participated.

As for me, the adrenaline from the event has worn off, but the subsequent alcohol intake has not, so I believe I'll go to bed. More later.

Presidential Forum Global Warming LA 11-16-07

Wow.  Loved the format today.  How refreshing to offer the candidates an open mic for 10 minutes with a specific topic, then give them time to answer well thought out questions from an intelligent panel.  Good work.  I was loving Kucinich until one minute after Senator Clinton came out with her already presidential gravitas and composure. She walked a tightrope for us, addressing us as postmodern thinkers while warning us of our country's traditional voting block and their lack of ability to discern the imminent danger global warming brings our species.  After today's discussion, I am well impressed by all three of these candidates.  Kucinich is wonderful - pure postmodernist (but only about 5% of the population will "get" him), Clinton a combination of modernist and postmodern (45%), with Edwards not speaking so much to us, but staying his course by appealing to the "sacrifice" and "hard work" that the traditionalists are so fond of, and that he will bring salvation to D.C. if elected.  That's a whopping 55% of Americans he's reaching with that talk.  Think about it - how many times have we heard G.W.B. talk about hard work (for everyone but himself, of course, but whose noticing...)?  After today, I'm thinking a Clinton/Edwards ticket could win, and unfortunately it may have to be an Edwards/Clinton ticket to seal it (not that I have anything against Edwards).  I'd like to see if he can clean out the lobbyists and corporatists, while we have Clinton's hard-won expertise in the political game of chess.  After today I have hope for our future and planet again.  

Thank you Grist, NDRC and all sponsors, and panelists!  I will attend again when/if you can get the other candidates.  I'm impressed by all the democratic candidates in one way or another, and think we have some great leadership on the way.  I trust they will put egos aside when the time comes and serve in whatever capacity our country needs them.  What a great team of leaders American and the Globe have coming up!


So

Got a link to a recording of this event?

-David Ahlport
Forum

David,

It was a good time! Nice work up there. Where is the webcast? Has it gone to pod?

Marky48

What was missing.

When I looked at the format for the meeting, I was surprised to see that there was no mention of a Green Party candidate, not even Cynthia McKinney, the most well known.  If there is one party where you would think that everyone would have a well thought out position on this issue, it is the Green Party.

Just to start, candidate Kent Mesplay is eminently qualified to respond. He holds a Ph.D. in the sciences (wouldn't that be original) and works with the Air Quality Control Board in San Diego.

In the discussion of "centrist" positions that you had with Andrew Revkin, there was an concern over inside the beltway, policy wonk thinking.  Was that the reason why the choices were exclusionary, that the only people invited were those that the major parities deemed to be worth?


Wes Rolley CoChair - EcoAction Committee Green Party US

Interesting showing

Yep, I agree about Kucinich.  He had me at "vegan diet" (in the opening minutes) and then pretty much lost me after avoiding a specific answer to anything.  He is a great cheerleader and environmental speaker, and provides challenging points in the general debates. However, this was an audience (presumably) well informed on the issues and proposed solutions.  Many, maybe even most, having already read the entire (new) IPCC report. This was an audience who came to hear specifics.  It was a single topic, for heaven's (earth's) sake! If you are going to preach to the choir, you better be prepared to do more than just sing the chorus.

Hillary Clinton's checklist of specifics was impressive and refreshing.  Her proposals seem progressive.  (But would she allow them to be dilluted by opposition; willing to settle for "something".) The best thing that I heard her say is that one minute after being sworn into office, she would sign an executive order requiring every federal facility (department?) to be carbon neutral.  That a was bold, specific, and decisive commitment.

I have not been a big fan of hers, but I thought that her performance was very good.  (That being said, she's too conservative for me on other issues.)

I thought that Edwards did a good job, too.  He stayed on point for the most part, and returned to point when he strayed onto "another aside". He did not offer as many specifics -- no cohesive plan -- but at least offered some specifics.  He certainly appears to be a more straight-shooter, but he is a lawyer.  Being a good debater is as much about what you do not say. Dramatically make the arguments that you can win and avoid the rest.

I've wondered about a Clinton-Edwards ticket -- could be a good balance. (IMO, Clinton would never take 2nd billing. But, I think that Edwards would -- willing to wait his turn.) It always seem crazy to me that presidential candidates wouldn't consider other candidates as running mates, given the huge amount of exposure and support that've already garnered.

At this point, I would not even consider Obama, because he didn't even bother to show up.  Tells me that he does not prioritize environmental issues, as do I.

NoPunProductions.com ~ AmericaTheGreen.org

You almost lost me, Dave.

I gotta say, Dave: when you started your humorous analogy about "it's a lot like eating your vegetables" (referring to something unpleasant), I gave you an Astro "RooUrr??"  [did you hear it?]

I'm a veg*n! Eating my vegetables is what I love!

Otherwise, you did a fine job. Especially chastizing the rude audience members. (And so builds the intrigue for those who did not see the forum.)

NoPunProductions.com ~ AmericaTheGreen.org

Presidential Forum

I watched most of this online last night.  I agree with the panel about problems with the media and how to get the message out there.   I also agree with John Edwards that there is a problem with media consolidation, which is one issue.   Al Gore had to make a movie to get the attention of the pols and public alike to get through.  

Dennis Kucinich is very easy to like, but I agree with another commenter that he didn't have many specifics to offer.

As to Barack Obama being invited and turning down the offer, some Grist readers may not know that he has declined to come to special forums and made that clear in August.   I doubt he would want to answer questions from this group about his supporting liquid coal technology or that he supports nukes.    There's a good reason for that at the moment: he's from Illinois a state that has more nukes for power and also one that uses coal for power plants as well.   What I am not clear about is if he will evolve on the issue of Global Warming, just as John Edwards did.    

Hillary Clinton gives a lot of lip service.  It's too bad no one on the panel asked her about the burning of tires for energy at International Paper in upstate NY in 2005 and why she did nothing to stop it, and hundreds of employees got very sick. I think I know the answer, but still, that doesn't represent my progressive views about Global Warming.   Moreover, I don't quite understand why  Clinton couldn't commit to a position about the Lieberman-Warner bill.   She tapped danced around that one.

The one candidate that could have also benefited from speaking at this forum is Bill Richardson.

Overall, it appeared to me John Edwards understood the complexity of the issue and how it ties in with poverty, infrastructure, national security, food insecurity, etc.  He was the first to offer a plan about Global Warming.    

BTW, Edwards drives an American hybrid: the Ford Escape.

Thank You Grist...

for providing something beyond the usual Wolf Blitzer-orchestrated circus of soundbite questions, "raise your hand if..." questions, and "yes or no" questions.

Dave, I couldn't notice that your shoes were old and I wasn't questioning your exercise regimen. However, I did notice that you presented eloquent and thoughtful questions. I honestly think that some of your questions were so sharp, and 'on it', that the candidates did not always answer them -- I think because they are all so used to stumping that they kept slipping into off-topic soliloquies.  

Finally, Barack Obama did not help his cause here in the Western states where enviro/energy issues are very salient. I agree with Greta that Sen. Clinton did offer some substantive specifics, but they were partially obscured by her pandering to the Hollywood environmental elite.

Tim Hurst

ecopolitology

Red, Green, and Blue

Kucinich

It was so refreshing that Kucinich had as much time to speak as Hillary and Edwards. In all the debates he is marginalized but he spoke clearly and resoundingly and will have the most environmentally conscious administration of any of the others. He is not just saying these things now while he is a candidate but has been there throughout his career. I don't understand how anyone could come away with a good feeling about Hillary, She is all that's bad about politics as usual. Is is any wonder she gets big bucks from all the lobbyists. Does anyone really believe these big money people are for change? How can they be? Only Kucinch can bring about the sea change needed for our country and world.

To nuke global warming.

If Dennis Kucinich is correct that the US government is preparing to commit a war crime against Iran then global warming mitigation may quickly become a distant second priority for the US electorate.

Presidential Forum

My thanks to Grist, the NRDC and other enviro orgs.  Also to the three candidate-attendees, all of whom did a terrific job.  Kucinich was much more effective in person than on television.  Edwards too.  They had moral oomph and both won my heart. But Clinton was indomitable and this is politics, so my head and my vote are with her. With thanks to David for apologizing for all of us for the jerk who heckled her.

Kucinich; Obama

I am very much looking forward to reading the transcript.

As a New Yorker who voted for Hillary in 2000 (I voted for the Green Party candidate for Senate, Howie Hawkins, in 2006, since Hillary was a shoo-in), I of course will support her if she is our nominee.  But not enthusiastically.  Sure, she is very intelligent, and industrious, which is terrific.  But I find her off-putting, and will certainly vote for someone else on the first Super Tuesday, in early February.

That said, I would certainly not heckle her, as apparently somebody did at your Grist debate.  Tsk tsk!  On the other hand, I might very well have smacked anybody in that claque of hers in Las Vegas, who booed John Edwards and Barack Obama.

In defense of Dennis Kucinich, the reality is that his campaign is limited by very small resources, so it is unfair to expect him to come up with detailed policy statements on a number of topics, as the better-funded candidates have done.  After all, those other candidates did not think up their policies all by themselves, did they.  They had advisers, often people with great talent and broad experience, to educate them, to help them articulate their basic values, and to write up the details.  Poor Dennis simply cannot find such high-quality contacts.  Nominate him this Spring, and that will change at once, and he will be as good, or rather better, than anyone else.

And by the same token, the candidates cannot really be expected to have committed themselves to every detail of their policy statements.  What we need to learn from them at this point is, what do they consider to be really important, and why, and what kinds of directions do they think it would be wisest to follow to get there.

On Obama: Too bad he did not come, but not surprising.  He seems more and more obviously to be aiming for a vice-presidential slot.  And that would make perfect sense for him, given his age and relative inexperience.

And I think an Edwards/Obama ticket also would make very good sense.

While Obama himself does not elicit any strong emotion in me, Roger Cohen's recent op-ed in the New York Times, titled "Obama in Orbit," made a very interesting suggestion: that for most observers around the world, our electing Obama as our first black president -- but really multi-ethnic, with interesting extra-American connexions -- would be far more stirring and exciting than our electing Clinton as our first woman president.

It is hard to see Edwards accepting the vice-presidential slot on anyone's ticket, after his having been there in 2004, and after what has transpired in this campaign.

And it is very very hard to see Clinton asking either Edwards or Obama to join her ticket.  But she might very well ask Biden, Dodd or Richardson.  And any of them might be very disposed to accept.

Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.

Clinton Strickland


  Sorry I missed the debate (busy working in a place where I had no net access!).  It sounds great.  Obama is making a mistake by refusing to participate.  The only publicity he gets from this decision is negative.  He is getting bad advice.

  The ticket (baring any major screw ups on her part, and none so far) is likely to be Clinton Strickland.  You heard it here first.

  Popular Democratic Governor of a key swing state (he delivers Ohio).

  And they're in.

patrick in Beijing

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.
sign in
Search Gristmill
Subscribe
  • subscribe via RSSStay updated with the Gristmill RSS feed.
  • Add to My Yahoo!
  • Subscribe with Bloglines
  • Subscribe in NewsGator Online
  • Subscribe in Netvibes
  • Subscribe in Google
Using Gristmill
  • What is Gristmill?
  • Posting rules
The comments of Gristmill users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?

Gristmill is powered by Scoop.

ADVERTISING POLICY


About Grist | Support Grist | Job Board | Archives | Grist by Email | RSS | Podcast
Gristmill Blog | In the News | Ask Umbra | Muckraker | Victual Reality | 'Tis the Season | The Grist List | The Bottom Line



Grist: Environmental News and Commentary
a beacon in the smog (tm) ©2008. Grist Magazine, Inc. All rights reserved. Gloom and doom with a sense of humor®.
Webmaster | Sitemap | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Trademarks