Because politicians in a democracy cannot do things unilaterally.

Not all politicians have equal power. In the US, the nominations of important positions, the laws and policies are determined by 20 Senators in GOP.

Those 20 senators (from Alaska, Missouri, Arkansas) are answerable to the demands of their constituents. Those people are not asking for Climate Change Policies. It has nothing to do with money, but the values and culture of the constituents.

It is incredible how HN and majority of the supposedly 'smart' crowd completely fail to understand the dynamics of how policies and laws are passed or made in this country or anywhere else.

It is also incredibly stupid to paint all politicians with the same brush, because if you are an immoral, evil politician you'd exactly want that situation. "All politicians are the same", "All media is the same" is the foundational strategy of bad actors.

It has nothing to do with money? How are the values and culture of those constituents determined, if not through vast sums of money spent on propoganda? Protecting the earth - not shitting where you eat - is an inherently sensical idea. The only way that people can align themselves against such an idea is when they are manipulated to believe it is part of a broader conspiracy to ruin their lives. It takes a lot of money.

Also, so what if the bad actors want us to believe that all politicians are the same? What if it were true that they're all the same and evil? Would it still be "incredibly stupid" to accurately assess the state of affairs?

That can presumably be explained by the fact that there is a federal election coming up in less than a month.

Right? I mean why can't politicians unilaterally change things without convincing the electorate and just fix climate change, the way Kathleen Wynne so successfully managed to in Ontario?

Well we know these actions look good from a public relations point of view. We only need ask if they had any other motivations or if it was only for PR.