It benefits a few corporations in the short term but not America in general. And if the oil prices rise and stay high, there will be demand destruction. US sits on top of the capital food chain and will be hurt.
When an officer has reasonable suspicion that a civilian poses a threat to his life, he can shoot them. Once police start shooting they are trained to continue shooting until the target is incapacitated. That's the law. Whether the recent shootings you saw meet that standard is up for debate.
Younger generations are probably more racist than their parents but not their grandparents. There are a lot of reasons this probably happened, and it wasn't something done to infants, but transpired over the last 10-15 years.
It wants Hyundai's investment and it wants to create American jobs and also have Hyundai follow the laws. The extremity of the right is fueled by an apparently prevalent reluctance to enforce any rules.
Humbly, I think this thinking is part of the problem. The incumbents were crushed because they mostly all copied each other and are seen as part of the same system. There are Western parties which have behaved differently and were not crushed. It wasn't just a meteorological event.
Many actually do not seem to know this, especially in the political/think tank class. There are highly placed Democratic officials who blame inflation and point to this research.
I think whatever the surveys said, the egg prices/inflation actually had little to do with Trump victory and the left shouldn't be misled by this. People vote now for emotional reasons, reasons of identity, and these rational reasons are mostly cover--something you tell a pollster but not the real truth. Take note of anyone you know who gave this reason and see what they say about 6 months of manufacturing decline, slowing job growth, or about the inevitable inflation from tariffs...I bet most defend it in some way.
The right is now split into a faction that rejects foreign interventions and wants to withdraw, if not total isolationist then something in that direction, and another faction. At the elite level this other faction is ascendant. The lesson they have drawn from US military failures from Vietnam to GWOT is different from the former faction. In their view the problem is that we were not aggressive enough, we were too constrained by overly legalistic and conservative rules of engagement and various ideological goals which polluted the prosecution of the wars and prevented us from "winning". They DO want a more cruel, more aggressive force posture. They admire and defend Israel in large part because they see it as a model of a force which really believes in "winning". A substantial portion of the voter base is attracted to this, enthused by the prospect of aggressive campaigns in Latin America with relaxed rules of engagement, and sees the renaming to Department of War as a "based" declaration of this doctrine. The country is moving more in this direction and the more isolationist (kind of "Buchananite") wing is getting purged again, but with some concessions made to them.
I am not sure the left has any answer to this right now because it has discredited itself with so many, especially losing a lot of younger men (those under 21 heavily favor Republicans), and generally the country may simply be moving in this direction. I think be clear eyed what you are facing.
Thank you for the correction regarding the reduction goals. I wasn't aware the targets were new, or that Covid had changed the picture from articles I read last year. Still, I think my point stands that the numbers can be taken two ways. If you compare France which has a heavy reliance on nuclear---it has something like <10% contribution from fossil fuel sources. It could be that if Germany had increased its nuclear contribution, along with trying to increase the other renewables, the coal/gas numbers would be even lower.
These numbers can be looked at two ways. Germany actually failed in its efforts to get off the coal so far, I think. Just from these numbers you could as easily be making his point as yours.