Update: Tonight, we'll find out whether the canditates will break the silence on climate change. Join us at 8 PM EST for an online debate watch party, featuring a live chat and a livestreamed youth town hall.

Here at WeArePowerShift, we have Mitt Romney's best interests at heart.

Really, we do. Let me explain. Together with you and the rest of the climate movement in the US, we've been pressuring Romney and Obama to break the silence on climate change. And it turns out that ending the #climatesilence could do both campaigns a lot of good. Here's why:

Both Romney and Obama can count on the diehards of their respective parties. Looking strictly at the polls, loyal Republicans and Democrats don't decide the election; independents do. Independents tipped the scales in Obama's favor last time around, and Romney knows he must recruit them to his camp if he wants to win.

And guess what? Independents heart responsible climate policy!

According to a survey by Yale and George Mason University, the majority of independent voters agree that global warming is an important issue that should be addressed. More importantly, most independents and Democrats say the candidates' views on climate will be an important factor in their vote.

That's all fine and dandy, you might say, but wouldn't a climate-friendly Mitt Romney alienate his science-denying base? The answer is, not necessarily. According to this survey, at least, a large minority (48 percent) of registered Republicans believe that global warming will harm future generations, and 52 percent say climate should be a priority for the President and Congress.

What's more, Americans across party lines support solutions to climate change:

• Registered voters are more likely to vote for a candidate who supports a revenue-neutral tax shift that increases taxes on fossil fuels while reducing the federal income tax. This is essentially what some proposed carbon taxes do.

• Most voters support holding the fossil fuel industry accountable for "all hidden costs we pay for citizens who get sick from polluted air and water, military costs to maintain our access for foreign oil, and the environmental cost of spills and accidents.

I doubt anyone from the presidential campaigns will read this, but just in case, here's my (unasked-for and not wholly original) advice. Considering how much you need the independent vote, avoiding climate policy and bashing clean energy just doesn't make sense.

#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }