Roughly Half of Republicans Believe in Global Warming

We have often discussed the disconnect of the two major parties with their bases. For Democrats, it is the disgraceful record on civil liberties left by Democratic leadership, including President Obama. For Republicans, it is often the environment. Polls show a high number of Republican voters are in favor of environmental laws that are routinely undermined by GOP leaders. Now a new Pew poll shows that roughly half of Republicans say there is “solid evidence” of global warming — a remarkable jump of 37 percent jump from 2009.

The numbers are still higher in the population at large: 67 percent of all Americans and 48 percent of Republicans. However, the high numbers of Republicans accepting the science is not reflected in their party leadership or platform. The party appears captured by the most extreme elements of its members, including highly antagonistic business and lobby interest in the environmental field.

While many GOP leaders continue to deny the very notion of global warming like Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) , others are moving to a new position: it may be real but we may not be the cause or have any real power to change it. That was the view articulated recently by Rep. Dan Lungren (R-CA) in debate with his congressional challenger Ami Bera (D):

LUNGREN: There is no doubt that there is global change, climate change. The question is who causes it and is it caused predominantly by human activity. It seems to me we ought to take reasonable steps but not steps that so put us in a disadvantageous situation economically that we will have less jobs. There’s those that cry about their concern for jobs and then support the very things that would absolutely destroy jobs. We have an example of that in the current administration that I believe is supported by my opponent to try and basically ruin the coal industry in the United States, losing us tens of thousands of jobs instead of pursuing the cleanest technology in the area of coal. […]
MODERATOR: So you’re suggesting the global warming change may not be caused by manmade sources?
LUNGREN: No, my suggestion is we don’t know to what extent it is and to what extent moves we would take on our own in the United States would have an effect. At the same time I believe it makes good common sense to try and reduce carbon emissions where possible, as I’ve done in the U.S. capitol.

That approach is more nuanced and perhaps more dangerous. It shields the politicians from any responsibility to act while allowing global warming to get worse with the potential for catastrophic impacts around the world.

Notably, this study means that more Republicans believe in global warming than evolution. Some 58% of polled Republicans believe that God created humans in their present form within the last 10,000 years.

Source: US News

105 thoughts on “Roughly Half of Republicans Believe in Global Warming”

  1. If you take eggs, flour, milk and sugar and mix them one way you get a tasty cake.

    If you take the same ingredients and mix them another way, you get a brick.

    Ayn Rand’s cake is one of the worst ever made.

  2. Mike Spindell:

    I live close to the shore or close enough that a 100′ rise in sea level would be a problem.

    I just think there are more important things to worry about.

    Rand is not for vigilante societies. Think the 2nd Treatise of Government.

    You guys have pretty much shown me that Rand integrated the ideas of a number of great thinkers to come up with her philosophy.

    So I am reading those great thinkers instead of having their ideas synthesized by Rand.


  3. Mike Spindell that seems to be the response, by mostly republicans it seems. I don’t care about anything but me, but my time.

  4. Mike Spindell:

    dont worry, you wont see a tidal wave unless there is some sort of earthquake in the Atlantic or the Caribbean. The sea level rise, if any, due to global warming would take years as the ice caps would melt slowly, you will probably be long gone [may you live another 50 years]. And finally, I am pretty sure if there was some sort of immediate ice melt the federal government would pay you for any loses you may suffer. They do it for rich folk who live on the ocean so I would hope they would extend that benefit to anyone who lost property as a result of a coastal storm/flood.

    No one ever seems to reflect on the fact that humans have a very precarious position with respect to the earth, some catastrophic event and we are all toast or at least most of us. A meteor, a huge volcanic explosion, a problem with the sun, the loss of our magnetic field, an untreatable, virulent epidemic, etc.

    Man made global warming is the least of our worries as is a 100′ rise in sea level.

    1. Bron,

      I have children and grandchildren who live in NY. So while I might not see it, they will. As difficult too as you may find the concept, I also am concerned about the untold millions in the future that will be affected by it. Call me irrational but I do care about the future of the human race.

      Also I’m not just talking about Coastal NY, but also about the entire Eastern Seaboard, the entire Western Seaboard and Mexico and the Southern States bordering on the Gulf of Mexico. That isn’t even getting to the effect upon Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia and the major islands in both the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. Global catastrophe, destruction of governments and yes the rise of vigilante societies that Ayn Rand would find attractive.
      But then, you live in the Mid West don’t you……so in that case….never mind.

  5. raff,
    Gene never needs any backup in an argument. His approach to argumentation is as eloquent as Churchill, as logical as Mr. Spock, and the temperament of the Honey Badger.

    I just like to give him plenty of elbow room and watch. Flensing comes to mind.

  6. Thanks, raff, but aren’t all Monty Python clips great? 😉

    They were, however, my inspiration on how to deal with nick. I’m building a bridge out him. Whether it is a bridge of stone or wood remains to be seen.

  7. I’d like to see roughly half of one particular Republican. Without the other roughly half, that is. Any temperature would do.

  8. I can tell you you haven’t explained anything to me, ever, nick. I recall you bleating about being a PI as if that was supposed to impress me. Public, private. No difference other than who pays the bill. You’re still not anyone I’d ever have prep a witness. Then again, I’d never work for the prosecution either.

    Also, I know you like sports, but really, verbal combat (or swords for that matter) simply aren’t your forte.

    Now, there you can think you’ve made a point about me having the last word.

    Call it a gift.

    Maybe in our later conversations, you’ll learn to how to argue better and without logical fallacies. Learn to differentiate your opinions from evidentiary fact and logic. Learn that your people skills really aren’t as great as you think they are. Learn that respect is earned, not due. Learn that the Golden Rule is a reciprocal relationship and you get what you give. Learn that if you’re going to bust balls you sure as Hell better be able to take it. Maybe you’ll learn . . . something. Anything.

    Or maybe not and you’ll continue to be trollish.

    If even Bron can kind of learn, there’s hope for you.

    Also, you can save your “God bless”. I don’t believe in bronze age fairy tales. I find that those who usually say “God bless” are the same kind of people as Southern women who start or end a phrase with “bless her heart”.

  9. Well Dr. Spock, to be accurate you’ve never “heard” me say anything. I can tell you I’ve spoken many times about working for the prosecutor’s office and I remember explaining that to you later one evening a couple months back
    when we were discussing rape on an Elaine post. Remember, you were particularly nasty that night..well that might not narrow it down.

    Good game on and it’s getting to the late inning. Plus, as is often the case, this passed tedious about an hour ago. Good night and God bless, Gene. I look forward to future discussions. You may now have the last word.

  10. By the way, your fallacy there was ad hominem.

    Come on. Demonstrate some more that your style of argumentation is dishonest and illogical.

    Prove my (and BF’s) point some more.

  11. Wow! All I’ve heard you say is you were a PI. As to the rest of my life? That’s simply none of your business.

    Come on, try to make your inability to argue without resorting to logical fallacies about me some more.

    It’s really funny.

  12. Wow! I wasn’t a “private” investigator for the prosecutor’s office, I was a “public” investigator. I filled in the gap from the amount of evidence needed to make an arrest to the amount of evidence needed to convict. Sometimes there were no gaps, sometimes big gaps. I guess you know a lot about prosecutor’s offices since you’re so free w/ an opinion. The prep work I did as a PI was on almost exclusively civil litigation, up to 8 figures. Again, what kind of litigation have you worked? Just what kind of real world experience @ all do you have? You talk about law school, where did you go? Do you even practice? Have you ever practiced? I’ve answered all your questions civilly and taken your nastiness. Why are you so evasive?

Comments are closed.