[beach43ofus]

Hmmm...crickets chirping after beemers last post about Nelson voting for big sugar. The facts don't lie. Eat more Stevia!

[chopchop0]

Originally Posted by bmw335xi

Nelson voted for big sugar along with Rubio in 2012.

Scott would not only do the same, he would remove any regulations regarding water quality. He already has

https://www.politifact.com/florida/s...oridas-water-/

I'll take less damage than more, personally

[bmw335xi]

Originally Posted by chopchop0

Scott would not only do the same, he would remove any regulations regarding water quality. He already has

https://www.politifact.com/florida/s...oridas-water-/

I'll take less damage than more, personally

We know Nelson votes in support of big sugar. That isn’t a guess or assumption. It’s recorded fact.

Chop did you watch the debate? Can I ask why did Democrats choose Nelson as the nominee. I cannot picture a worse candidate. At least Gillum comes off as charismatic and passionate. Nelson literally has no proposals, solutions, suggestions... he talks at a snail’s pace and only talks about Scott. Like how did he win the nomination?!

[chopchop0]

Originally Posted by bmw335xi

We know Nelson votes in support of big sugar. That isn’t a guess or assumption. It’s recorded fact.

Chop did you watch the debate? Can I ask why did Democrats choose Nelson as the nominee. I cannot picture a worse candidate. At least Gillum comes off as charismatic and passionate. Nelson literally has no proposals, solutions, suggestions... he talks at a snail’s pace and only talks about Scott. Like how did he win the nomination?!

I didn't. No need to. We have 2 terms of Scott to look at. An hour debate won't change Scott's record on the issues

[bmw335xi]

Originally Posted by chopchop0

I didn't. No need to. We have 2 terms of Scott to look at. An hour debate won't change Scott's record on the issues

Then there is no point discussing this with you since you refuse to hear them speak or look into Nelson's record.

[chopchop0]

Originally Posted by bmw335xi

Then there is no point discussing this with you since you refuse to hear them speak or look into Nelson's record.

The records speak for themselves. Nelson was less destructive on net than Scott was for the environment. He didn't try to kill water quality regulations. Scott did.

[bmw335xi]

Originally Posted by chopchop0

The records speak for themselves. Nelson was less destructive on net than Scott was for the environment. He didn't try to kill water quality regulations. Scott did.

Nelson voted in support of big sugar

[aridon]

It isn't so much the support of sugar. It is the removal of any type of environmental protections and refusing to allow agencies responsible to even talk about major environmental issues.

There is a huge difference in voting in support of a bill that allows sugar to thrive vs a vote in the same direction but also anti environmental.

Sorry you can't see the difference. There is a big one. I personally don't want big sugar to go away, I do want our environment to be something other than a dumping ground though. You can have responsible industry in a state, you don't have to bend over an allow unfettered access to the state's rectum.

[bmw335xi]

Then what is the solution to prevent pollution from big sugar from going into our waterways?

Scott got funding to do a massive overhaul of the dam at Lake O. Scott gave funds to effected communities.

What is Nelson proposing? Anything specific? What has Nelson done to address pollution from big sugar? The answer is nothing.

[aridon]

Originally Posted by bmw335xi

Then what is the solution to prevent pollution from big sugar from going into our waterways?

Scott got funding to do a massive overhaul of the dam at Lake O. Scott gave funds to effected communities.

What is Nelson proposing? Anything specific? What has Nelson done to address pollution from big sugar? The answer is nothing.

What has Nelson done? Well here is one thing:

https://www.news-press.com/story/new...ch/1058476002/

"Sen. Bill Nelson's similar measure, which was not included in the bill, would:

Set aside an additional $110 million over five years for research into the causes/control of large algae blooms and hypoxia, which is when oxygen levels are low, often because of algae, making it difficult for sea life to breathe.
Give the heads of NOAA and the EPA the authority to declare a severe algae bloom as a "nationally significant event," which would make federal resources available to those affected by the outbreak.
The Senate unanimously passed an identical measure as part of a bill Nelson sponsored in September, but the House has not heard it.



A lot of the issue is water being diverted away from the Everglades, septic system run off and other agricultural run off. Again, this comes about due to lax environmental regulation, which Rick Scott and the plethora of Republican governors, house and senate members of the state have opposed.

I'm terribly sorry that decades of environmental abuse are causing issues to the state. You can't keep ****ting in the middle of your yard and then complain it smells like ****. I'm not about to give Rick a pass on it either as he had championed lax environmental regulation.