We've been focused on the major angles and rhymes of Tuesday's election, from a new GOP governor in Illinois to Governor-Elect Abbott winning 44% of the Hispanic vote in Texas.

However, there was another interesting angle to the election.  It was a bad night for "global warming," "climate change," "environmentalists," or whatever you want to call them these days.

According to The Hill, there weren't a lot of "environmentalists" giving victory speeches last night:

The nation’s top environmental groups including the League of Conservation Voters, the Sierra Club, the Environmental Defense Fund, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and billionaire Tom Steyer’s NextGen Climate spent at least $85 million on six Senate races.

Out of those six races, only two candidates willing to take action on climate change won their races.

The "environmentalists" had two problems:

1) Most of them were liberal Democrats, and that was the wrong thing to be on Tuesday; but more importantly,

2) The evidence is at best confusing, as Melanie Sturm wrote a few weeks ago in her wonderful column, "Inconvenient truths denied by climate faithful":

To pass a secure, prosperous and clean world to future generations, shouldn’t we encourage, not constrain, the scientific inquiry that informs and unleashes boundless human creativity?

Like ObamaCare, and so much of the liberal agenda, the environmentalists have been hit very hard by reality.  The movement faces the reality of a slow economy and that many Democrats aren't playing ball on this topic.

P.S. You can hear CANTO TALK here & follow me on Twitter @ scantojr.