Republicans Win Control Of US Senate
For Tom Steyer and other environmentalists, $85 million wasn’t enough to help Democrats keep the Senate blue or win more than a single governor’s mansion in Tuesday’s toughest races. The billionaire’s super PAC and other green groups saw the vast majority of their favored candidates in the battleground states go down to defeat, despite spending an unprecedented amount of money to help climate-friendly Democrats in the midterm elections. The outcome brought gloating from Republicans and fossil-fuel supporters even before the results rolled in — and raised questions about whether greens can fulfill their pledge to make climate change a decisive campaign issue in 2016. –Andrew Restuccia, Politico, 5 November 2015
Climate Change: This was one of the dogs that didn’t bark in the 2014 election, even after liberal billionaire Tom Steyer spent an estimated $70 million to promote the issue and a new U.N. report Sunday warned of “severe, pervasive, and irreversible” global warming that will worsen without environmental policy changes. Robert Brulle, professor of sociology and environmental science at Drexel University, said a GOP-led Congress is more likely to try to stop Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency from imposing new regulations on power plants than endorsing any additional steps to reduce U.S. carbon pollution. Said Brulle: “I am not an optimist about us doing anything – I think it looks bad for political action on climate change in any way.” –Will Bunsch, Philadelphia Daily News, 5 November 2014
The $12 million that the United States Senate has allocated to UN climate agencies is expected to be among the first casualties [after] Republican take control of the chamber following Tuesday’s midterm elections. The current Senate bill on funding for state and foreign operations includes $11,700,000 for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Control (IPCC) and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC). However, the House version of the bill passed by a Republican-controlled sub-committee, states that “none of the funds in this Act may be made available for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change/United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.” –Denis Fitzgerald, UN Tribune, 4 November 2014
The Keystone XL pipeline won big Tuesday night. Following an election night that saw anti-Keystone Democrats replaced by pro-Keystone Republicans, the oil-sands pipeline project now appears to have at least 60 supporting votes. That means legislation forcing approval of the long-delayed project may be headed to President Obama. Before the election, at least 57 senators could be counted on to support pro-Keystone legislation, but that was never enough to beat a filibuster from the project’s opponents. Tuesday night’s results appear to change that. –Clare Foran, National Journal, 5 November 2014
The expected Republican majority in the U.S. Senate after Tuesday’s mid-term elections is likely to seek to roll back federal regulations on power-plant emissions, approve the Keystone XL pipeline, expand oil and gas development on federal lands and work toward ending the 40-year ban on U.S. crude oil exports, energy experts said. “The Republicans will go to Obama and say, look, ‘We’ve got to get this done; your own government is saying this is fine. The election is over so you don’t have to worry,'” Lynch said. –Jon Hurdle, The Street, 4 November 2014
President Obama will continue to take action on policies to fight climate change whether or not Republicans take control of the Senate, the White House said. White House press secretary Josh Earnest told reporters Tuesday that Obama plans to keep using his executive powers to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change. “The president will use his executive action to take some additional steps.” –Timothy Cama, The Hill, 4 November 2014
Thanks to Dr. Benny Peiser and The GWPF for this summary
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The election had everything to do with Obamacare and not much to do about climate matters. People are pissed off about the effect Obamacare has had on their insurance. Climate stuff is way down on the list of concerns.
From the outside I thought that was the point.
Despite massive funding to promote Green issues – it just doesn’t register with the voters.
So is that funding worth continuing?
If it gains Steyer some hip cred with the leftist echo chamber he runs in then he will continue until it actually hurts. To him and other billionaires, $20-100 million is play money. If it draws in more leftist money to his hedge fund it is even a good investment for him. There are a number of very wealthy people who are geniuses at what they do, who feel guilty about their success and its impact, so they assuage that guilt by limiting the ability of others to obtain their level of success to “SAVE THE PLANET”. Why they think their success has caused damage is beyond my ability as an amateur psychologist. (trained in physics – much more straight forward than peoples’ brains/psyches!) What their guilt leads to is investing in anything “GREEN” and his funds are more than happy to provide corresponding investment products. I would almost go so far as to say that his very public expenditures on GREEN politics could be a good PR game for his funds.
I disagree. I think they were pissed off about Obama, period, whether it was Obamacare, Obamaclimate, or any other of a hundred things.
S’truth!
Only a hundred?
S’truth, indeed! That’s how it looked to this outsider.
While that may be the leading issue, I think there were / are enough other issues for it to be a collective impact. The recent revelations about Obama’s complete disinterest in Iraq and how that is a major factor in what is happening now in that country. The criticism from Hilary and Panetta regarding his (lack) of leadership skills. Throw in the growing image of a President more interested in vacationing and his golf game then the grind of comming to terms with Congress and the taint of Benghazi and at a minimum you get folks who figure it is not worth the effort to vote.
Hope returns as change has occurred
From CNN
=========================
Washington (CNN) — A majority of Americans are dissatisfied or angry with President Barack Obama’s administration and GOP leaders, according to exit polls released Tuesday and analyzed by CNN.
And about 8 in 10 Americans disapprove of how Congress is handling its job, according to a survey of voters outside of polling places on Election Day.
What’s the impact of a republican win? Who are the midterm spoilers?
Nearly six in 10 voters are either dissatisfied or angry with both the White House and Republican leaders in Congress. Less than a third of Americans are satisfied with the Obama administration and GOP leaders.
=========================
http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/04/politics/midterm-exit-polls-1/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
Triumphal narratives from republican supporters have to be interpreted along with the does of reality described above
Sorry – “a dose of reality”. I don’t know what a “does of reality” is but it can’t be good.
Does of reality are what makes the buck stop here.
Consider the source …
The RFK jrs and Gores and U.N. flunkies have alarmed themselves into irrelevance. Anyone remember a boy and a wolf? The chief difference being the boy didn’t economically ruin his neighbors with his wolf cries.
Yes he did — all the sheep he was watching was a common herd and the wolves got all of them.
The Environmental Protection Agency falls under the purview of the Administrative branch of Government. That means POTUS, who, in keeping with his totalitarian bent, rules by edict and decree. When you see someone stepping hard on the EPA, that will be the time to rejoice.
Hear, hear!
POTUS is the executive branch, not administrative. The three branches are executive, legislative, and judicial.
Mark
So right. Words failed me 🙂
Actually the part of the problem is that the bureaucracy has gotten so large as to be a branch of government unanswerable to anyone. You really think the EPA cares who is in the White House? Obama plays on this problem when declaring he only finds out what is happening in the government by watching the evening news.
Expect the Green Organization to start accusing Big Oil and the Koch Brothers of manipulating the election. With their money tree threatened the rhetoric will get cranked up. Same with the UN and the IPCC. With their livlihood threatened they will also start. Any day now.
They were doing that all along…well before the election.
I recently saw a statistic regarding political donations. Between 1989 & 2012 Koch Industries donated a bit over $12.6 million to political entities. During that same time, the biggest 20+ unions donated over $600 million.
……start accusing Big Oil and the Koch Brothers of manipulating the election.
Any day now
How about now:
“How much does it cost to buy the U.S. Senate? $1Billion, apparently.
#KochMachine #CitizensUnited
Guess who?
https://twitter.com/MichaelEMann/status/530006927737364480
I don’t follow US elections, but I thought that Republicans took the Senate 4 years ago. Or maybe they merely increased their seats but didn’t reach a majority.
No. Democrats have had a firm control on the Senate. Harry Reid has earned the Senate “The Most Do-Nothing” Senate ever…having blocked almost every piece of legislation put forth.
That was the first major legislative hurdle. Now that it’s been overcome, the next real hurdle is the Pres.
‘Pres’ or ‘press’?
Let’s go with the PRESS for now.
They took the House then.
Yes, the House.
No. The Republicans took the House back in 2010 and they have held their majority since, including this election in which they made some additional gains. It was the Senate they took in this election cycle. Thus they hold 52 out of 100 seats with the strong likelihood for 2 additional pickups. Democrats will hold 46. There are 2 Independents (although they tend to caucus with the Democrats).
The good news is Senator Inhofe will now be back as Chairman of the Environment and Public Works committee.
Hopefully he will expose the GISS and NOAA’s temperature manipulations
YIPPEE! Imhotep in the saddle. Fire all the liars in the National Climate Control organizations, just as Australia did, and end any thoughts of Carbon Credits or COP AND TIRADE agreements.
…and make public the skeptical arguments, and include the benefits of CO2
I hope that they remember this:
Indeed this election WILL have consequences !!
The drubbing the Leftists took in the mid-terms sets the stage for a 2016 GOP Presidential win and perhaps even holding (barely) both Houses through the next elections.
The key to the GOP holding on to power is to thwart Obama’s coming Executive Order granting blanket Amnesty to 10’s of millions of illegal aliens. If Obama is successful in unconstitutionally granting amnesty, the Left will hold control of all three branches of government for the next 100 years.
Such Leftist control will lead to massive CAGW legislation: cap and trade, $trillions in wind/solar subsidies and mega-projects, the death of coal, an end to the Keystone Pipeline, restrictions to fracking, legislation capping CO2 emissions, massive EPA overreach, and a general explosion of the Welfare State.
66% of Americans (89% of REPS) now feel the country has moved too far Left. The Left knows this, and realizes that In order to complete their goal of “fundamentally transforming America”, they are working to unconstitutionally get Amnesty done before Christmas of this year….
The fate of America’s floundering Republic will be decided over the next 2 months….. It’ll be interesting to see what happens…
The key to the GOP holding on to power is to thwart Obama’s coming Executive Order granting blanket Amnesty to 10’s of millions of illegal aliens.
Samurai,
This is the first effort we all must make. It can be done, if we make sure all of our elected officials, families, friends, and neighbors understand that
“Executive action to grant amnesty to illegal aliens is unequivocal treason.”
say it again so it make begin to stick…
“Executive action to grant amnesty to illegal aliens is unequivocal treason.”
…repeat as necessary.
Liberals tried to use climate change as a wedge issue in these midterm elections, thinking it would mobilize their environmentalist base while exposing unbelieving conservatives as anti-science.
The spectacular failure of this tactic suggests that the electorate is about as sensitive to alarmist scare stories as the climate is sensitive to CO2.
Well, this may have been a win for the Republicans generally, but in my own completely unscientific, limited, small-sample-size, discussions with people, my sense is that the elections had a lot more to do with the economy, general political affiliations, and dissatisfaction with Pres. Obama than with anything climate related. I would be surprised if very many people voted for person X based on their stance on climate change.
That’s kinda the point. Climate is not a priority issue for most Americans even though they’ve been repeatedly told it’s the most critical issue ever faced by humanity from advocates for taking action on climate change. The advocates have all but cornered all aspects of mass media, have the grand majority of academics touting the cause as moral and imperative, and politicians parroting and doubling down on the inanity and yet still they haven’t been able to convince the American public that it deserves their attention.
The question is: Why? Is it the rag tag skeptics fighting in the wild west of media venues that the advocates can’t control? Is it some kind of communal BS detector? Is it some psychological mechanism that repulsed people away from the doom mongering? Is it merely that many of the worst projected effects won’t be realized until later rather than sooner and people are more concerned with the here and now?
I don’t know, but whatever it is I’m thankful for it and hope it keeps it up.
Oops. Should be projected effects supposedly won’t be realized. Didn’t mean to suggest that the projections were in any way reasonably expected to actually happen.
+97
Good questions John West. An optimist would say that years of exposure to advertising created a population that resists claims of “sure things.” A pessimist would say that Americans have a short attention span, and climate is a long term subject.
“Is it merely that many of the worst projected effects won’t be realized until later rather than sooner and people are more concerned with the here and now?”
John, I suspect this is the answer. It also explains why alarmists believe they need to yell louder and provide the scariest headlines.
Here’s how good a night it was, from the head of the Sierra Club himself!
“Despite the climate movement’s significant investments and an unprecedented get out the vote program, strong voices for climate action were defeated and candidates paid for by corporate interests and bolstered by sinister voter suppression tactics won the day,” Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club, said on Wednesday.
ROFL!!!
“sinister voter suppression tactics”
Ha ha. Leftist-speak for “telling the truth”
You cannot fly, get on a bus, cash a check, get to see a doctor, get a prescription, adopt a baby, adopt a pet, buy a car, buy a house, or anything of significance that is legal without showing your identification. Yet every time reasonable people in the US want to require identification to vote, Democrats, and other radical leftists defend voting without identification. Obama’s proposed executive amnesty for 34 million illegal aliens is designed to make the leftist and racist Democrats into a single party rule and a leftist and oppressive dictatorship. If the Republicans have any brains and patriotism they will stop supporting illegal immigration and amnesty.
Yes.
A woman called into a local radio show yesterday (Tuesday) afternoon to tell about her voting experience. She walked up to the registrar, gave her name, her last name is evidently very unique and not common. The Registrar mentioned that she sees her husband early voted this year, which was quite a surprise to the woman, who mentioned that her husband had passed away in 2000. Welcome to a blue, blue state. Not the first time there has been charges that the dead vote here in Maryland. I hope governor elect Hogan’s first directive to the state’s attorney’s office is to investigate and prosecute any voter fraud. Then they need to compare voting records and expunge all votes of the dead, and recalculate the results!
Ok, so I like dreaming………
When I went to vote yesterday here in Georgia, they not only asked for my ID but actually scanned the bar code on the back to verify that it was not a fake. I could not have been more proud to live in a state often portrayed as a redneck backwater of little significance on the national stage.
Fun fact: When I rolled out driver’s license scanning technology to retail stores at my last job about 4 years ago, Georgia was the only state in the Union that actually encrypts the information on the bar code so it cannot be easily spoofed.
Maybe true, but if the Republican Party doesn’t immediately pull its collective head out of its ass on immigration reform, they will be locking themselves into this very scenario.
Voting the dead is an ancient tactic of the dems. The local machines would keep lists of names from obituaries and even scout the graveyards for recent burials.Our democratic tradition.
Funny, I don’t recall Republican’s assisting illegal immigrants to vote, nor do I recall seeing reports of voting machines changing votes to Republican or leaving DemoKtraz candidates off the voting list.
“Climate change” is now as toxic as gun control.
I encourage all Lefties to base their campaigns on both those issues.
President Obama If you are going to re invade Iraq and fight the Islamic State and counter Russian Military Expansionism and Chinese Economic Expansionism then you are going to need all the Cheap Fossil Fuel you get hold of.
PS and also stop Ebola.
“counter Russian Military Expansionism”
says a guy from a country that recently bombed Libya.
I do not know that climate change was a huge issue in this election, Senate democrats have been whining as long as I can remember. Event when the held the house, sentate and Executive branch they whined about Bush this, Bush that. When they lost the house, they whined even more. Reid I think lost his mind, he rarely did anything other than to bash private citizens who donated to causes he did not approve of. Who in their right mind thinks that is the primary responsibility of the Senate lead. I think people become fed up with the whining and deflecting of accountability, “the buck always stopped somewhere else” got old. But maybe the most important factor is the economy. Six years after the Democratic take over of power we still have not a had a recovery, it has been a miserable 6 years for working people and young people entering the job market. If you want to continue not getting elected keep blaming Bush or the other side, instead of taking accountability in improving the economic malaise.
So while climate change was a small factor if any in the election, climate change does take a big hit in government and financial support. I can imagine a lot of researchers using global delete to remove references to “climate change” in their research proposals.
It is possible that climate change is not going away as an election issue. There are so many unknowns and possible surprises, as to what will happen over the next couple of years, as to what will or will not be an election issue for 2016. Climate change could come back in a new form, if the sun was the cause of the warming not CO2. I find it difficult to even imagine how the media, public, and politicians would react to global cooling.
It is possible that the green scams could become a sad joke, a subject for discussion in history books. It is possible that we could experience an oil shortage similar to the 1973 and 1979 crisis. It is surreal that the Obama administration continues to block the Keystone pipeline and continues with policies that appear may lead to a middle east war. It seems logical, likely, there would be broad based regional support for a caliphate, a prophetic based Islamic state with sharia law, with equitable sharing of wealth, to people who pray five times a day and who must support 15,000 princes and princesses how are part of a never ending corrupt regime and who are surrounding by fanatical fighters who fight another corrupt regime.
http://www.sharnoffsglobalviews.com/defecting-prince-154/
The oil infrastructure in the middle east is a soft target. We could go from an oil surplus to a energy crisis in a few months. The middle east oil infrastructure would take years to rebuild. The EU and the Obama administration seem to fight purposelessly with the Russians. it appears they are pushing the Russians, providing them with a logical reason, to support a war in the middle east.
The only way in which climate change was an issue in this cycle was the fact Dear Leader Mao Bama seemed to make it a priority, as did some Dem pols running, while most Americans are concerned with wages, jobs, Ebola and videos of ISIS, ISIL, IS Cute and Fuzzy Bunny or whatever they’re called now cutting off heads and massacring men women and children on YouTube.
I respectfully disagree with you Steve, people in coal country are very pissed at this kook president and his chicken-little stooges waging war on their livelihood. Way bigger deal than sadists on the other side of the world.
The Republicans should push rapidly for new energy development legislation except for expensive and unreliable renewables which need to have tax subsidies cut. Additionally they should eliminate politically contrived EPA climate related environmental regulations and massively reduce government funding of climate alarmist universities and institutions.
Our current President who unfortunately believes he was elected “king” will fight all these measures but a record needs to be created regarding reasonable and science based energy and environmental measures which could have been undertaken absent the role of the unelected “king”.
These measures need to be undertaken to help create a better understanding of how these initiatives can benefit the economy and at the same time demonstrate how existing and flawed energy and environmental regulations based on nothing but political ideology but supported by the “king’ have harmed the economy.
William Astley November 5, 2014 at 9:33 am
“The oil infrastructure in the middle east is a soft target. We could go from an oil surplus to a energy crisis in a few months. The middle east oil infrastructure would take years to rebuild. The EU and the Obama administration seem to fight purposelessly with the Russians. it appears they are pushing the Russians, providing them with a logical reason, to support a war in the middle east.”
——-
That is exactly what the libs want. Jack up the price of oil to make the windmills look cheap.
In a region-wide war, one of two possibilities exist for the oil fields of the Persian Gulf. As was seen during Iran-Iraq war of the 80’s, and the First Gulf War in 91, many oil fields get blown up, setting off huge oil fires and oil spills, lasting months to years. Oil well fires are an ecological disaster for the region, and a source of futile CO2. The other possibility is below market privateering to avoid sanctions. ISIS is currently siaid to be selling Iraq oil to blackmarket transporters who pay below market prices, while ISIS pockets the money. Sadam Hussein also sold below market priced oil to avoid UN sanctions in the Clinton years. Iran did the same thing in the 80s, selling oil on the black market.
That solution is a non-starter. Jacking up the price of oil, simply increases the cost of windmills. Ever noticed how you simply can’t eliminate the energy cost of doing something.
It’s the same principle as the minimum wage. If all Union contracts are pegged to the minimum wage, the cost of everything that minimum wage recipients buy just goes up to compensate. Only the government wins, because non-tax payers suddenly become tax payers, and the rest move into higher tax brackets.
As they say, rising seas float all boats.
And there you have put your finger on the unspoken real reason the liberals support a high minimum wage. Many union contracts (particularly those on government bid contracts) dictate that positions will be paid minimum wage plus an offset. The offset is different for each position. Union dues are based on the amount earned, so Democrat Party coffers are immediately filled (since unions are mostly Democrat Party money laundering operations these days). For a hypothetical – the unskilled guys leaning on the shovels at a construction site may be specified that they are paid minimum wage + $10 and hour. The heavy equipment operator must get minimum + $25, etc. If the minimum wage is increased by $3 per hour, all these union guys immediately get a $3 per hour raise. Isn’t life sweet. What they don’t tell you is that stretch of road just went from $20 mil to $30 mil and your gasoline tax will go up to compensate, taking your gas price from $3 per gal to $3.50 per gal. (I know you Europeans are crying crocodile tears over that considering how badly all your governments fleece you on petrol taxes – when I went to Britain for 3 years I first thought the petrol prices weren’t too bad, then I realized the price was per litre and quickly recalculated!) That increase in road fuel tax goes straight into the transportation cost of every product you buy, and thus increases the price of everything else!
Here in Kansas the independent candidate Greg Orman said if elected he would caucus with the majority party. Not many believed him and he lost to establishment republican Pat Roberts. Is there any chance the remaining independents will caucus with majority legislation? I do see some support.
Senator Angus King of Maine is in a tough spot. He will have to caucus with the minority Dems in the 114th Congress. He will not be very welcome if he switches caucus parties.
Orman is a slippery snake who wouldn’t answer direct questions about major issues, except for gun control, for which issue he let slip that he was for “more” gun control. He was a Democrat, through and through.
Bernie Sanders is a Senator from Vermont, calling himself both an “Independent” and a Socialist.
Of course, he has and always will caucus with the Democrats.
@DCA – Especially after Biden said he would caucus with the democrats. Biden was the second best Campaigner for the republicans. The best was Obama – “Make no mistake, while I am not on the ballot this election, my policies are!” – The local representative ran that quote numerous times around here.
There were three races on my ballot that had a Green Party candidate. I was surprised there were that many. For grins and giggles and if I get a spare minute, I’ll have to go see if they even registered a statistical blip in the election results.
Well, I had a minute and the Green Party received 3.3% of the vote for Governor in my state. Interesting. That’s quite a blip. My guess is the college-age vote went to the Greens instead of the Democrats, based on the Green Party Platform document I read. Very appealing to young idealists.
Oh, and while I was looking for the results in my state, one Election Results site I clicked on showed that the total vote for Green candidates in all the elections was 0.3%. That sounds about right for the U.S. and was more in line with what I was expecting in our state’s race.
“The president will use his executive action to take some additional steps.” –Timothy Cama
Concerning the above quote, lifted from this posting, and made by Timothy Carna, may I quote the best statement I’ve heard in relation to this election: “It wasn’t an election, it was a restraining order.”
The Blue idiots followed IPCC off the cliff like Lemmings. Perhaps now the media will allow objective science and opinions to be shown to the uninformed public.
Perhaps now our government will put $ into preparations for the Little Ice Age and fire all the liars like Australia did.
Imagine if Obama suddenly got a clue, realized and asserted what a non-issue climate change is, and turned all his related policies around. This would be his legacy – the first major in-power politician to realize he’s been had, and started the return to efficiency/ecology-based environmentalism (actual economy, and doing things for purely national-economic reasons would be too much to hope for).
Years down the road, most people (except the haters for whom he isn’t left enough) would remember only that.
(It’s a bit like the Red Dwarf time-travel episode where the protagonists accidentally knock out JKF’s assasin, thereby creating an alternate future where he lives, but his transgressions come to light, he is removed from office, the Russians take advantage of the gov’t vacuum, and parts of the US nearer Cuba are abandoned, etc. – After failing variously to undo this change, they visit him while being transported through JFK Airport while under arrest and convince him to travel back in time and be the gunman behind the grassy knoll…. they tell him that in the reality where he dies, rather than being disgraced, he is a “liberal icon” and that airport will be named after him. If Obama would let this piece of ideology die, his messiah reputation might actually live on.)
You’d think somebody *this* interest in his perception by the public would think ahead a little further. “Truth will out”, and all that.
However, it has been pointed out that all these people, from SecState up to POTUS, always very much depend on advisors to inform and advise. Unfortunately, they both have a particularly clueless set of people (from who to send as Ambassador to Norway up to making the oceans recede).
Interesting! But in order to admit that you were duped you need to be smart enough to recognize the nature of the con. That’s asking a lot from someone who can’t pronounce Marine Corps correctly.
Well you may have noticed that he has a speech impediment; he whistles when he lies. Well that is pretty much constantly.
Obama change his mind? His Mother and Grandparents were Communists. His principle mentor was an avowed Communist activist. The person most responsible for bringing Obama into Chicago politics was a violent radical Communist terrorist. L’Internationale was played at Obama campaign stops. Every move he has made has been to bring the US into line with his view of the world. Obama is likely the most blatant example one could find that Green is the new Red.
S’truth!
His dad was also a communist but culturally Muslim.
othercoast
November 5, 2014 at 10:44 am
“Imagine if Obama suddenly got a clue”
“(It’s a bit like the Red Dwarf time-travel episode ”
It is also as likely as that.
Far from irrelevant, the climate obsessed are simply giong to seek non-democratic means to impose their will upon us.
We are in the period of maximum vulnerability: The media has not honestly reported on climate. The President and his small circle of extremist advisors feel embattled. The climate obsessed can feel things slipping away and for them this is a similar feeling as a fundamentalist seeing the Church losing to satan.
The President still feels enabled to continue abusing his Executive powers.
We are from done.
I think you’re right; everything is more dangerous when it senses its survival is on the line. But the more they try to circumvent or even dismantle democracy to impose actions on climate change the more they’ll be seen as fanatics. The more fanatical they look the more people will abandon them. It’s like the 10:10 video disaster (for them) / boon (for us). Every time one of them disparages democracy or praises China’s “system” of government they’ll lose support. Hopefully one day in the not too distant future the grand majority of the populace will see these people for what they really are and stop funding them.