- Jan 27, 2014
- 6,894
- 8
- 0
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/31/u...m=0_876aab4fd7-480e724e1c-303423917&referrer=
And, as per a Republican adviser;
As well as from an anonymous Republican adviser;
So, we went from: there is no climate change,.. to just ignoring ANY denial or acknowledgement?
I suspect that post elections, they'll go back to denial. Until that time, GOPers are trying to keep as squeaky clean as possible.
Jon A. Krosnick, who conducts polls on public attitudes on climate change at Stanford, finds the phrase perplexing. Whats odd about this Im not a scientist line is that theres nothing in the data weve seen to suggest that this helps a candidate, Mr. Krosnick said. We cant find a single state where the majority of voters are skeptical. To say, Im not a scientist is like saying, Im not a parakeet. Everyone knows that it just means, Im not going to talk about this.
For now, Im not a scientist is what one party adviser calls a temporary Band-Aid a way to avoid being called a climate change denier but also to sidestep a dilemma.
And, as per a Republican adviser;
For Mr. McKenna, the energy lobbyist and Republican adviser, the political future is clear. Were going to keep getting this question until we nail down a hard answer, he said.
As well as from an anonymous Republican adviser;
The general dialogue has been, We have to do something about this, said one Republican adviser who asked to remain anonymous in order to speak candidly. We have to be less head-in-the-sand and acknowledge we are losing public opinion on this issue.
So, we went from: there is no climate change,.. to just ignoring ANY denial or acknowledgement?
I suspect that post elections, they'll go back to denial. Until that time, GOPers are trying to keep as squeaky clean as possible.