Nothing. It's only collective action that will solve anything, and whatever culture that pops up will get a near equal reaction from the other side. The US is trending to splitting down the middle on everything, just like our political system, a fact which is sadly getting more entrenched every day. Only thing I can think of is find a way to support independent local government officials and slowly kill the bipartisan system.

Democracy has been proven a failure now that oligarchs have figured out mass propaganda. It will be dueling billionaires from here on out. Which is how government worked throughout most of history. The best we can hope for is a wise, benevolent king. Though unfortunately those were the rare exception.

Regarding this "other side."

Isn't there an asymmetry here?

I mean, aren't the people who see climate change as a DEFCON 1 emergency way more motivated to support environmental causes than the... um people who think it's a hoax are to oppose it?

Are there people (not oligarchs) who really oppose environmental causes? Or isn't it just bundled up with all of the GOP's other value propositions? And the constituents just include it because tribalism?

edit: my point is that it's us versus the oligarchs. This is not something like guns or abortion or hell even fiscal policy where individuals are going to dig in their heels. This issue is less partisan in that respect. I don't think it's a big deal to the right beyond being a part of their caricature of the left. Sure, some have bought the narrative that the economics are somehow bad for US. But that's a weak and indirect point, and one that just isn't going to activate grassroots opposition.

The opposition does not oppose climate because they are anti-environment. In their minds, as I understand, climate change is a _pretext_ for more government control, taxes, and intrusion, and those are indeed reasons that make the people dig in their heels.

They've been conned. Burson-Marsteller developed the basic strategy, and Philip Morris implemented it as the National Smokers Alliance. It worked well enough that the Koch Brothers worked with them on The Tea Party.[0] And now we have Trump. Ain't life grand?

0) http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/23/4/322

It's an issue that needs resources and priorities assigned to it, and in a democracy that means there must be some agreed upon basis for which to act, or the action is not taken. Worse, we switch action for anti-action every election cycle

When the next election comes up, vote for whichever candidate is willing to ditch FTPTP and make third-party candidates mathematically viable. Even if the only candidate who does so is Trump (as long as you expect him to keep that particular promise).

Considering that such a change would likely involve a constitutional amendment, the correct target for such voting would be the legislature (both state and federal).

Call your Representative every day about matters of importance to you. A single call may not make a difference but thousands make a huge difference.

Also, find a local group that supports the same policy aims that you have. There are lots to find, especially compared to just 100 days ago. Join up with them and see how you can help amplify each others' voices.

Same as democracies everywhere. Organize and vote out the reps in the next elections. Americans are unique in how frequently you get opportunities to vote out leaders (2 years for Congress and 4 years for president) but you rarely do.

Sorry to nitpick, but the senate is 6 years (and the senate is part of the congress).

But about a third of the Senate is up for election every two years[1], so technically the original statement was correct. The voters of the states who elect senators in a particular year may have the opportunity to change which party has a majority in the Senate.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate#Term

The original point being made was about turnover and being able to correct for bad choices, and no voter (unless they move) gets to vote for the same senate seat every 2 years.

I'm wondering if there's a better designed version of the IPCC climate change reports. Good information but presented in a massive PDF file which doesn't really lend itself to being referenced or browsed easily.

Honestly, the only thing I can think of is to spend money out of your district or state.

Build a dome. Don't invite these people into the dome. Watch them cook, drown, or freeze upon retirement (if you have the luxury of retiring).