Now we just see a probably illegal power grab by an executive which kills a bunch of popular and needed projects while very publicly demonstrating that Democrats can’t fucking deliver.
https://scri.siena.edu/2019/03/18/2-3-of-voters-say-amazon-c...
More recently
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/poll-congestion-pric...
they found 23% of people opposed the decision to suspend, and about 45% of voters supported it and that support was not very different for D's, R's and I's.
But it's not a new concept, and it turns out that people like being able to drive easily, having quieter streets, and tax money for other services. Once you go from fear of the unknown to seeing the results a lot of policies get more popular and in every other example we have that absolutely applies to congestion pricing.
And again, my point is that it will remain unpopular until it’s implemented, but it will almost certainly become popular once it’s put in place.
All you’re saying is that they turned what would probably be a non-issue by the election into something that people will remember and be upset about. That seems like a horrible political strategy.
I know I for one am much more likely to vote for a democracy supporting Republican (if they exist at this point) because of shit like this, and you’re articles says they won’t even get benefit from cancelling it
It is not so much that I think they should have banned or not banned nuclear energy but that the process they went through to do it was damaging to legitimacy.