The worst was one person on a megaphone at the front saying a few words of a sentence and the audience repeating the same words...for an entire speech. What the hell was that all about?

It's a means for amplifying a message without electronic equipment. It isn't mindless chanting. It makes it possible to address a large audience without special and costly equipment.

But where I was there were only about 200 people in attendance so the necessity to do it seemed irrelevant.

They are defending their beliefs that God controls climate and storms; they are defending the GOP, whoever the candidate may be. They don't care about science, and the are racists.

the phrase "climate change" was not uttered even once-- by either candidate, in the three presidential debates. why is that I wonder?

That you cannot both reduce emissions from burning fossil fuels and grow the economy by burning fossil fuels.

Maybe this is the real inconvenient truth, and in fear of staking out an official position against fighting climate change (or reducing jobs) its much easier for both candidates to pretend this little problem doesn't exist (and not bring up the subject).

The Republicans as a whole are standing in the corner of extinction, calling for more jobs. The Democrats as a whole are believing a fairy-land world will allow them to have both, defying the laws of physics. No one is really willing yet to go to bat for the planet.

wow, finally found a critical thinker here...

My point is the Dems are playing the typical political game in this election (again) with the starry eyed dreamers here and elsewhere saying "well yeah, but let's just get the democrat elected, THEN we'll addess the climate change problem, really, we promise this time".

Uhhh, I hope people here realize I've been hearing this "rationale" for decades now... and now our problems have grown into Frankenstein level monsters-- with Manhattan under water and tens of thousands of people without power, food, water, etc.

FAIL.

It's going to take a lot of getting in people's faces to win this fight.

Probably a resident of Doswell, VA. Entered the lion's den and stood up for what he believed in. He had his sign torn up, was ejected, and is currently unidentified.

who sometimes contributes to their site: http://grist.org/politics/romney-grins-awkwardly-as-his-audience-shouts-down-climate-activist/



http://www.tedglick.com/

I have recently come up with a theory on one reason the far right bashes man made global warming so that nothing is done:
The coastal areas that would be mainly affected by rising sea levels also tend to vote democratic and would be more affected economically than the red states. That could also mean more dollars going to republican candidates. This would be a long term strategy since sea level rise is slow.
forward4freedom

but at the least they've noticed and realize an ancillary benefit.

From the other end, coastal inhabitants also see the effects firsthand, so they would be more inclined to accept the science. It would be interesting to see a climate-change poll of coastal Republicans versus heartlanders.

Welcome to DU forward4freedom!

Thanks for the welcome.
forward4freedom

Federal money is given to the red states that is produced in those coastal regions. Besides, this theory doesn't account for Virginia south down to the Texas, which is all coastline and traditionally Republican (though much trending purple these days)

except for Florida which is purple and the bluest part of Fl is the Miami area which may be the most vulnerable area of the country. New Orleans is a purple or blue area also.
forward4freedom