Thread by @drvox

1. I don't understand the climate movement's approach with Biden. He's already got a plan that is wildly more ambitious than anything that will be possible to pass in 2020. But the movement's sole focus seems to be on forcing him to commit to even more ambitious plans ...

2. ... with even less change of passage. We are already out in la-la land here, the land of wishes & dreams. What is the point of going even farther out? Biden might say more stuff if activists demand loud enough, but none of it is germane at all to getting things passed.

3. Insofar as the goal of the movement is to *get climate policy passed*, it seems to me now is the time to turn efforts 100% to getting Biden & as many D senators elected as possible. The quantity & quality of policy passed will rise in linear fashion alongside those numbers.

4. A crude analogy:

Climate policy needed: 500
Biden's climate plan: 100
What's possible in 2020: 5

The movement seems focused on doubling Biden's promise to 200, but it seems to me a smarter focus would be doubling that last number to 10.

5. Doubling the last number is entirely about getting the maximum number of Ds elected & removing as many of the structural barriers to action (filibuster, etc.) as possible.

It has ZERO to do with bullying Biden into promising even-more-impossible things.

6. And yes, to all of you DMing me, I am aware that I'm likely to deeply regret getting into any of this. But the world is falling apart around us and YOLO, so. </fin>

Well, internet, I've enjoyed arguing with you all day, but I gotta go clean the kitchen. You may continue yelling at me in the thread; I'll come back to it later.

One more quick addendum before I go do some Real Work. I wrote a post about what would have to happen to get large-scale, enduring action on climate in the US in the next 5 years or so. It would benefit everyone to be specific about how to achieve these. vox.com/energy-and-env…