21
Sierra Club Endorses Tom Steyer for California Governor (www.sierraclub.org)
submitted 2 months ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
3 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 3 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] andrewrgross@slrpnk.net 5 points 2 months ago

This isn't a surprise to me, but it is a mistake, imo.

The Sierra Club, imo, has a long history of myopically focusing on conservation through a narrow, neoliberal perspective. I think truly protecting nature and fostering unity between humans and nature requires an ecosocialist approach. Backing people who buy elections is like supporting left-wing authoritarians: the message might be right, but the outcomes are never going to work out of you degrade the democratic systems that hold power accountable.

[-] derek@slrpnk.net 3 points 2 months ago

I've been surprised by several people and institutions I trust backing Styer. Dr. Leah Stokes, who I deeply respect, is excited by Steyer: https://fed.brid.gy/r/https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:qigftpfjt2mrkq23skrcuedw/post/3mjwxari5w22h

From a policy perspective I like what I hear. If only he weren't a billionaire self funding his campaign... At any rate, not my election to vote in.

[-] andrewrgross@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I totally understand it. It's very hard to resist someone who tells you everything you want to hear.

But we should ask what the effect of someone winning is likely to be, not what they say they're going to do. Gavin Newsom ran on single payer healthcare too. Someone running on it doesn't mean it's going to happen.

In Newsom's case, it wasn't going to happen because he was a lying snake. In Steyer's case, it takes policy expertise and political acumen, and unfortunately, he's spent the equivalent of 2,000 UCLA bachelors degrees trying to obscure the fact that he's not actually qualified to do politics.

I wish more people could see this. I'm not just voting against him because I resent him for being rich. It's because he can't spend enough to convince me that he's actually capable of delivering, because the skills it takes to do so are the same skills it takes to get elected without buying elections, which means his money is just proof that he can't actually get things done.

Also, frankly, I have no reason to trust him too, but that's not even the biggest problem.

this post was submitted on 06 May 2026
21 points (100.0% liked)

Climate

8825 readers
154 users here now

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world. About 1C of total warming. Second chart: about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability. Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases. About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
silence7@slrpnk.net