That is not the same thing as being discussed here. Hybrids have electric motor that can move the car.

You do understand that without oil we can't produce fertilizer, plastics, etc... and "getting by without oil" would translate to billions dead, most notably in the developing world that is not food secure? That is, you are actively calling for genocide that would make Hitler blush.

Nobody credible is predicting runaway greenhouse effect or conditions that would lead to our extinction. FUD that you are spewing is not based on any science.

This was tried before numerous times, every time millions died in gulags, long marches, and of starvation.

They had to go with Ploymarket because the name they wanted was already traken.

Extending empathy to other human being makes sense, as there might be reciprocity. Extending empathy to AI, that is devoid of empathy (because we have not figured out how to code it in) is suicidal empathy. So no, discrimination against AI is perfectly reasonable human action.

Canada has a different system - there are no national leader elections, they only vote for MPs (equivalent of congress). That is, most elections are a lot more localized.

I use this service all the time. Highly recommend!

There are only tradeoffs. How much pollution is acceptable.

Nothing in that regard changed with EPA. Catalytic converters are not going to become optional overnight. What changed is categorization of CO2 as harmful emission. You do understand the difference between soot and CO2, don't you?

I agree in context of Citizens United, that was catastrophically bad decision. However, how would you remove money from politics entirely? Money and political donations are not entirely the same thing.

If you are not willing to compromise, why do you expect Republicans to treat you any different? Also, straw-man right back at you:

Apparently Democrats no long belive in having agriculture, industry, or transportation and want us all to subsistence starve to death to save the planet.

How the fuck am I supposed to compromise on that?

Absolutely. However, hyper-partisanship makes it impossible. Can you see GOP and Democrats finding common ground on this issue in 2026? Democrats are all-in on Net Zero and GOP wants to ban renewables. How can you reconcile these positions?