The Environmental Voter Project has a unique approach: rather than convincing people to care about climate change, it identifies people who already do, but don't consistently vote, and works to get them to the polls. EVP founder Nathaniel Stinnett discusses how to find these voters, keep them engaged, and measure their impact.
Great episode David, one beef if you'll permit me.
Anat Shenker-Osorio, who we all love, admire and listen to religiously, instructs us to call infrequent voters high value voters and not yet voters high potential voters. The reason is that how voters hear themselves referred to influences their voting behavior.
If they hear low propensity, they'll live up to that expectation. If they hear high value/high potential, they'll live up to that expectation.
It'll be to all our benefits to listen to and follow Anat’s instructions.
Good luck to Mr Stinnett. It continues to be a steep uphill trek to make the environment, let alone the climate crisis a top tier voter — or potential voter— issue. Cheers to Dave Roberts for doing this feature interview.
EVP may not be able to predict election outcomes but may significantly influence them in swing states. So, a good thing. But the claim that politicians consistently behave in accord with voter priorities is demonstrably false. Otherwise, Biden/Harris would not still be sending the hardware that enables Israel's Gaza genocide. SCOTUS (yes, they are unelected politicians) would not have overturned Roe v Wade. Etc. Climate disruption, however, cannot be "solved" by politicians. Renewables are the only card on the table. Serious measures to reduce FF use are not on the table because no legislator or President will advocate using less total energy. That would tank the economy & so is a DOA concept.
I remember the frowny face driving through small towns, and it worked. The idea is to make the prompts in fun ways and I'm sure it has potential for prompting voting. This is a good example of the idea - https://youtu.be/2lXh2n0aPyw
Great episode David, one beef if you'll permit me.
Anat Shenker-Osorio, who we all love, admire and listen to religiously, instructs us to call infrequent voters high value voters and not yet voters high potential voters. The reason is that how voters hear themselves referred to influences their voting behavior.
If they hear low propensity, they'll live up to that expectation. If they hear high value/high potential, they'll live up to that expectation.
It'll be to all our benefits to listen to and follow Anat’s instructions.
Thanks
Good luck to Mr Stinnett. It continues to be a steep uphill trek to make the environment, let alone the climate crisis a top tier voter — or potential voter— issue. Cheers to Dave Roberts for doing this feature interview.
This strategy is not entirely unique. I know of at least one other group using it.
And I'm *BUYING*.
The upcoming election is all about turnout, just like 2020.
EVP may not be able to predict election outcomes but may significantly influence them in swing states. So, a good thing. But the claim that politicians consistently behave in accord with voter priorities is demonstrably false. Otherwise, Biden/Harris would not still be sending the hardware that enables Israel's Gaza genocide. SCOTUS (yes, they are unelected politicians) would not have overturned Roe v Wade. Etc. Climate disruption, however, cannot be "solved" by politicians. Renewables are the only card on the table. Serious measures to reduce FF use are not on the table because no legislator or President will advocate using less total energy. That would tank the economy & so is a DOA concept.
Personally, it's the level of cynicism that I appreciated in this episode... and I mean that entirely positively.
I don't want to make the sign frown!
I remember the frowny face driving through small towns, and it worked. The idea is to make the prompts in fun ways and I'm sure it has potential for prompting voting. This is a good example of the idea - https://youtu.be/2lXh2n0aPyw