Poll – Trump and the Paris Climate Agreement #ParisAgreement

Emotions seem to be running high over whether trump will stay or exit the Paris Climate Agreement of 2015. Earlier, we reported President Trump will pull the United States out of the Paris climate change agreement, according to several sources on Wednesday.

Since WUWT is read by both sides of the issue, I thought I’d run a poll to ask, so here goes.


newest oldest most voted
Notify of
David A Smith

I got first vote – It’s a 100% consensus!

Bryan A

Here is how to vote for this pole


That has a different readership; your vote may be ‘important’ [is any internet poll ‘important’?] there.
Here 93.35% ‘No’. Might that reflect readers’ opinions more generally?
There – about 52% ‘No’.

It is now 52 to 42 to pull out.


Oh My.
Exit is winning 53% : 42%
Another Global Warming poll goes horribly wrong.


Is it possible to vote a second time here – or there?
Aware that that – if true – it may tend to bias the outcome.
Let’s be fair – were such a poll on Michael Mann’s personal site, and it allowed multiple voting, would readers here accept its outcome uncritically?
Absolutely uncritically?
Even if the result was – say – 97% ‘Yes’??

I just voted in the Accuweather poll… Currently 55% Leave to 40% Stay.


Now 58% say NO!!
Oh dear, oh dear we’ll all be roooooned!!!


Currently 58% No, 37% yes, 5% Undecided at Accuweather.

Not Chicken Little

Accuweather poll now 60% no, 36% yes, 5% undecided (those are the ones bad at math I guess or maybe Accuweather is bad at math!


On this site the majority, at this time, want the Paris Stupidity.

Michael Jankowski

Auto, if Mann had voting at his site, he’d wouldn’t need to allow multiple voting. He’d just ban and erase basically anyone who voted for us to dump Paris.


It doesn’t say how many have voted.

gary turner

From a moment ago:
Do you believe the U.S. should remain in the Paris Climate Agreement?
Total votes: 1065

Accuweather is now 65-31 against Paris.

Brian Adams

I believe heavy WUWT turnout over there at accuweather has skewed their poll a bit. After all, this is the #1 climate site, and accuweather has stiffer competition in their niche. But they’re also warmists, and you’d think the Paris huggers would be doing better.

Bob Morton

Its 66% to leave there as well.


And 67% say No to remain.

Harry Passfield

67% v 29% now. Hehe


Can’t find the poll at AccuWeather anymore. I guess the results did not please them. Also, the AccuWeather disclaimer on climate change favors data from tree rings etc without even a mention of ARGO or satellites. That’s pathetic.


They replaced the article with the poll with an article about the withdrawal. ALL of the comments have gone away.


I tried to vote twice (Chicago Style but not dead yet) and it would not let me. So the accuracy of this poll is not going to be influenced by “packing” but if you ask the fans on the steps of Dodger Stadium about “should baseball be banned?”, you might get a similar response. Not sure of the value of this poll except to gauge opinion of the readers which will certainly favor a “pull-out”.

Lance Wallace

Still 100% after 15 votes


Voted NO!
Not going to support a Trillion $$$ throw away over a piffling change in the wildly guessed temperature change, in the far future.

Hopefully that is the message we can keep hammering away at.
Never mind the complex scientific arguments that 97% of real people don’t understand: just stick with the KISS principle:- trillions of dollars to have an almost non-existent effect on an unmeasurably small change in some wildly guessed temperature. Why would any sane person do that?

Exit in the most expedient way possible.


The most expedient way is to give 12mo notice to pull out of UNFCCCP.
There three legs which matter on this stool : US China and India. Kick one of the legs out and the rest of those sitting on it will find their collective arse on the floor.
Come on Donald J.T. , it’s about time you managed to carry out at least one of your policies. You need a win and this one is down to you. You don’t need congress , dems or reps, SCOTUS or anyone else, so if you flunk out “the buck stops here”.
If you don’t follow through on this one you’re going to be looking like a lame Donald duck.

Yes. UNFCCC exit is 12 months. By article 25, all subsidiary agreements (Paris) automatically also exited. And by US law passed in 1994 (PL103-236), as of April 2016 US cannot offer any support anyway to UNFCCC or its subsidiary orgnizations (Green Climate Fund, IPCC) because it explicitly recognized Palestine as a member state.


Can’t be an accident that the abbreviation reads UNF CCCP.

Dave Fair

Rud, how do we get back the money Obama wasted on the Green Climate Fund after April 2016? Attach his pension?

ristvan, I understand that in the past US Presidents have opted out of treaties (such as UNFCC) that had been in force with Senate consent, and that the Supreme Court did not intervene. Is that a sure thing?

Ron Clutz, some US legal facts. A treaty for US constitutional purposes (Article 2, section 2.2) was definitively defined by Thomas Jefferson as Sec. state before he became president. About 1800: a treaty is eternally binding save by mutual consent. UNFCCC is not therefore a treaty, as it has an opt out so is NOT etwrnally binding sve by mutual consent. It is legally under long prevailing US constitutional law a Congressional Pact, same as NAFTA. Requires only majority passage in both houses of Congress. And under US law, the President can opt out of this Pact on 12 months notice. And that has multiple legal consequences explained in a previous comment.


Cool it, Greg. Trump is not one to take insults lightly. He’s just as likely to defy your demand!


Dave Fair May 31, 2017 at 3:25 pm
That’s peanuts. Clawback his speaking fees.

Dave Fair

Or the $65 million from the book advance.
Or sell his Peace Prize for the metal content.


“12mo notice to pull out”
And a 0 month notice to cut funding.

Samuel C Cogar

President Trump has promised to “exit” or pull out of the Paris climate deal, which he should do, …and then he should immediately issue a POTUS directive to all Department heads and Agencies Directors that no more Credit Card “charges” and/or Expense/Travel Vouchers associated with Global Warming and/or Climate Change will be reimbursable from or paid for via taxpayer funds.


91.43% ‘no’ as I type this.
Let’s try to make the final tally 97%.


Oh No, it must be real, he is using the double finger point


Umm, that’s Cory Gardner, Republican Senator from Colorado. I’m pretty sure he’s not buying in to the “97% consensus”. I’ll have to find the video to get proper context.

Yes, how come the vote isn’t 97% NO? That would be more “equal justice”…

Look at the top of the frame . It has nothing to do with the weather .
Just the mystical 97% injecting itself into all human deliberations .

To be more specific , Gardner was making some point about Gorsuch voting with the majority in 97% of his decisions .

Neil Jordan

53/57=92.98% “no” now. Not quite 97%.

Henning Nielsen

But it MUST be 97%! Hurry up, call John Cook!


Yes. 97% is much more believable. We’ll just make “adjustments” after the poll closes to make it so.


1 vote to staying…must be Nicky ! LOL


I’ll bet it’s Griff.


Sorry, Griff is obviously too young to vote !! LOL


I am!
At least you would think that from my youthful good looks and full head of hair…


I take it the other side is A) off spewing carbon on leisure time, B) working hard for a carbon-spewing organization, or C) seeking company with carbon-spewing activists claiming to be something else.


Crap. I misread the question and voted yes when I meant to vote no…. :S

john harmsworth

Claim it was a hanging chad.

Nice try, Mike Mann.

Michael C. Roberts

MikeM – To correct your wrong, clear your browser history/clear ‘cookies’ then log in once again and vote no to even it out, log out and clear your browser history/clear ‘cookies’ another time, log back in and vote no again – to reflect your true vote!!!!!!!
(Anthony and/or mods – Will this be an acceptable course of action??)

Lars P.

No: 93.95% (202 votes)
Going towards 97% 🙂


“Bennett: Right decision is to pull out of Paris climate deal”

He makes a very valid point in that video. We have reduced our carbon emissions a substantial amount just letting the free market forces do their thing. Governments should stay out of the way, they only ever make problems worse in unexpected ways. It is a clear message that the American public can be proud of without kowtowing to some unelected bureaucracy of elitists too busy virtue signalling to care about the reality of the situation.
My vote is for the solution Ristvan has recommended these past months, pull out of the UNFCCC by enforcing a law that is already on the books. No need to involve congress or the SCOTUS. The president just needs to do his job and enforce the law.


This may be our only chance ever to vote on CAGW 🙂


I think climate bureaucrats should vote “NO” too. If Paris climate deal is void, then there would be something to discuss/propose on the next lavish conference!

Mumbles McGuirck

As if they need an excuse.

94.62% consensus… to leave the Paris Accord #CLEXIT
The only problem I have is that he seems to think he’s still on a TV show and is stringing people out with a variant of “Who shot J.R.”. We do not want to have to wait till next season. Do it already.



victor goldschmidt

It is important that we convey to others the reality that there is no measured data (that I have seen) that demonstrates that CO2 drives the change in temperature. Kuo, showed a slight phase lag in short times data correlating temperature and CO2 showing the probability of temperature changing before CO2, and the Vostok data as first presented shows a notable delay with again CO2 changing after temperature. So the simplest of minds should understand the simple law of cause and effect. We do not have to even address that the models are not validated, under constant adjustment, and with too many empirical coefficients to gamble. By the way, am I not correct that the models are steady state? Adjusted with transient data? (If so not even a MS thesis would have gotten away with that)

Ross King

Victor G;
Pedant Watch notes your:
“…..there is no measured data….”
Data is PLURAL and — to be grammatically correct — it shd. read “…. there ARE no measured data …..”
A common grammatical error, it must be said.


Which way will Trump vote with his pen on this issue?


Bailing out of the UNFCCC is the best path and a two birds with one stone solution.

Fred Purdue

OUT !!!


Solar stocks drop on report of abandonment of Paris agreement.


If you’re in solar stocks, that drop is far from your biggest problem.

Poll now 94.6%. Needs to be 97%. 🙂

Walter Sobchak

Nuke it from orbit, it is the only way to be sure.


Stay in and ignore it. That is what the rest of the world will do.

Cannot stay in. Greens will use lawsuits to ‘force’ the nonbinding Obama commitment to be binding in the US.

Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7

If Trump decides to exit, no doubt Greens will sue in the Hawaii federal court to declare the action unconstitutional.


Ristvan- the greens will use lawsuits whatever the outcome. That is a given. They are unlikely to win there. The only agreement is between Former President Obama and the other dignitaries at the meeting. There is no agreement from the current administration, and as another pointed out, the US has already gotten 1/3-1/2 the way to Obama’s promises. Far better than any other country. This administration can either back Obama, rescind the agreement immediately because it is non binding. They should not go through the withdrawal procedure because that validates that it IS binding in some fashion. As you’ve said, the best option woud be to either stop all climate funding to the UN, or pull out of the UNFCCC.
This appeared on the accuweather replies. Couldn’t post their(I don’t do Facebook, period.) But some might think this is more appropriate:
“God, grant us the serenity to accept the things we cannot change; the courage to change the things we can; and the wisdom to know the difference.”
I prefer this for the so-called agreement:
God, grant me the serentiy to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can change, and the wisdom to hide the graves of all those who pis*sed me off over climate politics.

We want this thing out in the open. We want the “97%” to present their extensive evidence for exactly why the West must suicide over this crackpot hypothesis.

Ross King

11/10!!!!! Beautifully & succinctly put!


Let’s see if we get a flood of poll spotting from the likes of Real Science, Skeptical Science, Huff Po, and others.
Lets keep a running tally of Pro/Con and time stamps.
94% with 440 votes at the 32 minute mark.

R.S. Brown

Hopefully folks will avoid the temptation to vote more than once.


Simple double vote doesn’t work. If you know how (or care) to hide your identity, you vote weights more for sure!

Ross King

Nota bene that the fallacious “97% Argument# effectively ‘gave’ Scientists on the Alarmist AGW side (a tautology????) several ‘double/triple’ votes by means of the scurrilous & tendentious accounting & appalling disregard for sound statistical methodology.


I voted for real science process, fact checking with taxpayer funded measurement systems, model error evaluation, and more observation of message manager gone wild advocacy groups than I ever wanted to. That’s a NO vote and I don’t understand the thinking process for getting any other result.

john harmsworth

Don’t forget keeping election promises!

Ross King

John harmsworth:

Ross King


The following is probably history for many here, but just to review:
Bjorn Lomborg analyzed the impact of the Paris Climate Accord –
Robert E. T. Ward criticized Lomborg’s analysis –
Lomborg answered Ward’s criticism –
Going with Lomborg’s analysis, which he convincingly defended, the following picture seems to show the reality of the Paris Climate Accord:
(RED line is if everybody does NOTHING)
(BLUE line is if everybody fulfills Paris promises)
(GREEN line is if everybody continues Paris promises for seventy more years)comment image?raw=1
Not much impact is there ?
Yet, if we accept this seemingly well reasoned analysis, the Paris Accord would piss away a HUGE amount of money and effort.
Down with Paris !


No way is AD 2100 going to be 4.7 degrees C warmer than AD 1850. It’s ludicrous to imagine such a thing. Preposterous on its face.
How can such an insane prediction possibly be taken seriously?




Average global temperature toward the end of the Pliocene (3.3–3 Ma) was 2–3 °C higher than now, with similar carbon dioxide levels and mean sea level ~25 m higher.

No way is AD 2100 going to be 4.7 degrees C warmer than AD 1850. It’s ludicrous to imagine such a thing. Preposterous on its face.

Who needs imagination, when you have computer models?


Of Course it depends on who controls (manipulates) the data. The actual data set is garbage so if you use it for future predictions it’s easy to get those 4.7 ºC warmer than AD 1850. Garbage In garbage out.


Yes. You’re right. On Planet GIGO, it will be just as hot as “climate scientists” need it to be to keep gaining Greenbacks.

john harmsworth

Important to archive this idiot graph. We can use it to educate our youth in the future as to the foolishness of eco-Socialist conniving politicians and their fraudulent ilk when reality diverges further and further from what our “educated betters” told us was incontrovertible fact. Keep their names as well. We can send them Christmas cards every year with this scientific atrocity on the front and a beautiful snowy background shot taken shortly before!

Ross King

John Harmsworth:
Well said!
We need an updated version of: “Extraordinary popular Delusiuons & the Madness of Crowds” which — inter alia — recorded the Dutch Tulip Mania & the S.Sea Bubble racket. AGW belongs right up there in the pantheon of Manias.

Henning Nielsen

Lots of exits these days, Brexit, maybe Grexit, and now let it be time for Parexit.

93% is close enough to 97%.
This climate science, you know.


Abolishing the (not)Federal Reserve and return to the gold standard would also do the trick. A cancer can’t exist without a blood supply.

John V. Wright

Just voted – 94.22% No at this point 😍! Hope it doesn’t go beyond 97% as no one would believe that…


Musk said he will withdraw from a White House counsel post if the US pulls out of Paris. I hope the door does not hit him on the way out. All funding for his green projects should also be stopped.


Breaking News – Government Subsidy Recipient Likes Government Subsidies, Will Punish Leaders Who End Government Subsidies

No doubt like all those celebrities in the UK who promised to leave if Brexit was successful.
So far, we haven’t got rid of one of the Fu*kers.

Another Doug

Elon Musk is now saying he will withdraw from advisory councils is Trump withdraws from Paris. Win win.

Another Doug

Beat me, Teewee.


Withdraw his tax credit machine from service, now!

Ashok Patel

Elon Musk is now saying he will withdraw from advisory councils is Trump withdraws from Paris. Win win.

It’s electrifying news !
EVs rely on Electricity from Natural Gas.

Michael Bentley

Most folks that look at such things on this webpage have jobs. A few of us retired folks, but most are working stiffs. Wait until they get home.
Anthony do you have a bot filter on ths???

Richard Keen

At 1 hour, still 93%.
Must be Russian Hackers. How else could the Warmers lose an election?

Plus many. Great angled comment.


But how many russians are voting ?

Non Nomen

Cook and Lewandowski just published their most recent results, obtained by using the most advanced copy and paste technology, that 97% of the scientists disagree with DJT.

R Shearer

It’s settled then.

93% at 918 votes. I voted no.

Non Nomen

DJT is about to offer the world a new Paris Climate Accord. This time it’s Paris, TX and it’s his rules now.

Gary Westerman

I vote yes

Will Nelson

Pretty evenly divided I see….
Between ‘yes’ and ‘unsure’ that is.


Next poll: Do you think climate science has suffered from aggressive advocacy and political pressure, yes or no.



9 out of 10 doctors said that in my mental state I am a Scientist. So i voted no. Now I am off to boil some water to make a cup of tea. I really like how all those molecules move around real fast and make steam.

R.S. Brown

I don’t “boil” water for tea any more. Our 300 watt microwave at 99
seconds gets the water (and tea bag) warm. A few dips of the bag
and back in for 31 to 35 seconds gets it to almost boiling and we don’t
have to wait around while it steeps.
Rather than heat a pot on an electric or gas stove, this seems much
more efficient. As long as the ceramic mug is well made, we get good
tea with little waste.
I go through 10 -12 cup a day doing it this way.

Steve Fraser

They go through you…


In Europe we invented electric kettles. They don’t seem to have caught on in the US.


Heathen – that is not the way to make tea.
And Jer0me, we have an electric kettle, just like those in England, and made in the PRC.

R. S. Brown.
Tea making instructions.
1. Buy loose tea, not tea bags full of dust.
2. Buy a Teapot.
3. Buy a Tea Cosy.
4. Boil water, by whatever means you deem fit.
5. Use a small amount of the boiling water to swill round your new teapot to warm it up. Pour away.
6. Add 1 teaspoon of loose leaf tea to the pot for each person, and add ‘one for the pot’.
7. Put the lid on the pot.
8. Cover the pot with the Tea Cosy and leave to infuse for 5 minutes or so.
9. If using English breakfast tea, Earl Grey or most commonly available black tea’s, prepare your cup by adding a little milk.
10. Remove Tea Cosy, (unless you bought one with a hole for the spout and handle).
11. Pour in the tea afterwards (essential the milk is added first).
12. Replace Tea Cosy.
13. If necessary, add sugar (one lump or two vicar).
14. If you are drinking from a mug, it is perfectly acceptable to dunk a plain ‘T’ biscuit or digestive, no chocolate though.
15. Do not under any circumstances let the biscuit go soggy and fall into the cup. A disgusting sludge at the bottom of your mug is unpleasant and uncouth.
16. An extended pinkie is optional, if a bit pretentious, even if drinking from fine bone china. Unacceptable if drinking from a mug as it makes one look like an idiot.
17. It is considered acceptable to buy a Teapot with a removable filter*** enabling removal of the tea leaves after infusion thereby allowing a second raid on the pot some time later.
***Please note, you will be unable to have your future read from the leaves in the cup. A serious downside of the filter. Michael Mann clearly uses a filter (or even tea bags….urg!) as his climate predictions would be more credible if he employed Tasseography
Enjoy. And a second cup beckons if the pot is kept in the Tea Cosy.

@ hotscot
You are clearly one of our dying breed. Leaf tea is ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL to brewing a perfect pot of tea. Bone china (including pot if at all possible) is also preferable, yes, but ordinary china can be excused if in a hurry and if it’s very well-warmed. Leaf tea has an entirely different taste from bags. It’s more flavoursome because it has more tannins, hence the richer orange-brown colour. And it has more kick (I presume from a higher caffeine content). My local supermarket stopped supplying leaf tea two months ago because of low demand.
If you want a traditional cup of tea in England nowadays, it’s either my place or The Ritz

According to Bjorn Lomborg, Trump quitting Paris will be good thing because Kyoto was 15 wasted years and Paris would lead to more wasted years. Instead of all the trillions being wasted on renewable energy crap, he says that money might instead be spent on researching and developing better means of energy generation.


OUT!……for the children


I am of the opinion that the smart thing is to remain and do nothing. That is what most of the world is doing anyway. There is international bad reputation and bad will from exiting.

Javier, International bad will is not a bad thing when the action that resulted in international bad will is one that the Citizens of the nation favor, thus it results in good will domestically. The EU can take a flying leap.


If the US is seen as an unreliable partner, not only by the EU, but by most countries, the backlash could have negative effects for all, including the US. You might not be able to see it but good relations are fundamental for making international business, and Trump is just continuously stepping on toes.

Dave Fair

Yep, Javier; just stick to that suicide pact so people don’t get mad at us.

The EU claim the US is an unreliable partner to the UK only following Brexit. But the US is reliable enough to occupy military bases across the continent. Just too bad if those ‘unreliable’ Yanks pulled out and left European borders to the will of Mr. Putin and ISIS.
The EU have proven over generations to be unreliable in terms of both economic competence and waging two World Wars.
Fu*k em, as a Brit, I’ll take my chances with our US Cousins rather than that mob.


I must respectfully disagree.
When the most scientifically advanced, richest, most powerful and successful country in the history of the planet calls BS on the CACA crock, then it might give other nations’ people reason to pause and consider.

Chimp, you say: “the most scientifically advanced.”
Please tell all of us how one measures scientific advancement?

Also, what is your measure of “success?”……please tell me that having the highest incarceration rate in the world is not what you are using as a ruler.


Many ways. Number of scientific Nobel Prize winners. Number of patents. Number of science PhDs. Number of private and public sector scientists.
Please suggest another country with more and more significant scientific advancements in the past century or 50 years. Why do you think so many foreigners come here to pursue their scientific careers?
I’d have thought it obvious.

Lastly, when you say “richest” are you referring to gross wealth or per capital wealth? If it’s per capita, you might be surprised.

Number of…number of… number of….

Sorry Chimp, of course you forget that per capita would show how backward your country is.


The US doesn’t have the highest incarceration rate if genuine data are used for a number of states, such as North Korea. In any case, using published data, it’s number two.
Other countries, like China and North Korea, kill rather than incarcerate “criminals”. The US rate is inflated by drug laws. And we also have country club prisons compared to most of the world, even allowing for super max.
But what does that have to do with the success of our science programs?


No, David, I would not be surprised by per capita data. The US is high even in per capita, but still dominant in total wealth. And in funds devoted to science, which is the relevant issue.
Why does the truth disturb you so much?

Chimp…..”I’d have thought it obvious.”…….yes, it’s obvious that there are many countries that have a higher literacy rate than the USA, so before you start talking about “scientific advancement” you should think about basic reading and writing.

Thanks Chimp…..first you said “richest” then you admit: ” The US is high even in per capita” so…make up your mind….it is total or per capita?


The literacy rate in the US is 99%.
Note total domination of US in scientific Nobels since WWII:
The US literacy rate is reported accurately, unlike North Korea, which claims 100%. UNESCO doesn’t report a rate for the US, so dunno how you can make a comparison. But we are a diverse, huge country, so in any case comparing us to Andorra is preposterous.


My mind was already made up. When I said “richest”, I meant just that. We have the highest GDP. Adding that it’s also high in per capita in no way obviates that, as should be obvious.
It’s not either or.

LOL at Chimp……when it comes to wealth he wants to use the gross wealth of the entire population and ignore per capita , but when it comes to incarceration, he wants to use per capita and ignore gross numbers so that North Korea is higher. ….
Typical cherry picker

Chimp says: “The literacy rate in the US is 99%.”
Chimp doesn’t say, Finland, Norway, Iceland, Denmark, Sweden and Switzerland have higher rates.


I’m happy to go with per capita, but what matters for science is GDP. Oil rich countries have higher per capita, but it’s concentrated in monarchs’ families and not used to increase wealth.
As for incarceration, I do not ignore gross numbers. China has more people in jail, awaiting execution, than does the US. American figures are inflated by people in jail awaiting trial. In China and North Korea, you’re in jail awaiting execution.
Why do you just make stuff up?


Why is it hard for you to understand the difference between small, homogeneous countries and the US? It’s funny, since you try to go the per capita route when it suits you.
To compare Finland with the US, try comparing Finnish Americans with Finns. There are more Scandinavian Americans than there are Scandinavians.
You’re so funny.

Chimp, what is funny is that you pick the “ruler” you use to measure something so that the results fit in meme of “greatness.” Again, you mention “awaiting execution” while you forget that most prisoners in the USA are not awaiting execution. What happens when the cherry you pick isn’t ripe enough?

It’s pretty simple Chimp, due to your lack of experience with foreigners you’d never know that Chinese students beat Americans any/every time in STEM.

LOL @ CHIMP ==== “There are more Scandinavian Americans than there are Scandinavians.”
That has nothing to do with literacy rates in the USA.
Truth is, the Nordic folks do a better job of educating their children than Americans do.


The number of Scandinavians has everything to do with it. Literacy rates in Scandinavian counties in the US are higher than in Scandinavia, because of all the Isl@mic immigrants.
Compare lutefisk with lutefiisk. If the US is fractionally behind, it’s because of our diversity and enormity.
As to incarceration, it’s because we are a nation of laws. We put people behind bars for actions which are legal in other countries.
I happen to know a genuine Vietnam War hero who has languished in prison for a very long time now because as a member of Congress he took bribes which would have been perfectly legal in Germany. American businessmen have gone to jail because they did what they have to do to conduct business in Asia.
Not that any of this has anything at all to do with the veracity of my truthful statement that the US is the most scientifically advanced, richest, successful and powerful country in the history of the world.

Oh, yeah, Chimp, one more thing about your “greatness” meme…..

Most civilized nations on the planet have done away with capital punishment, so your “awaiting execution” comparison is really sick. You would think that the “richest” most “scientifically advanced” “literate” country in the world would stop the barbaric practice of state sanctioned murder.

2nd LOL at Chimp!!!!
” Literacy rates in Scandinavian counties”

Nice cherry

You should investigate the literacy rates for volunteers for the armed services in the USA!!!

You are funny!!!

Funny. The “great” liberal city of Baltimore MD, long run by liberal-socialists who reject accountability and self-reliance in favor of government-protection and sponsorship of outright laziness and slovenly behaivor, gave their “high school” graduating class a basic literacy test this month.
Not ONE high school attendee (you can’t really call them “students” not “graduates”) passed the basic state test. I’d stack any 100 random Baltimore residents against any 100 US military members on that same test. (Heck, I’d even print the test – the Baltimore voters might not be able to read cursive.)


Besides which, I’m reminded of years ago when I was dating my South American wife and we watched movies and TV together (still do). She once asked me, “American jails are so comfortable. How do you deter crime? Here nobody goes to jail for stabbing and stealing. On ‘Cops’ I see how your police take people down for minor infractions. I wish it were like that here.”


Since I’ve served in the US armed forces since Vietnam, I’m pretty sure I’m more familiar with literacy in our military than you are.
Somehow we have managed to become the only military superpower in the 21st century. It’s not because our service members can’t read.
Do you really not realize what a laughable troll you have the ignominy to be?

Another funny “Chimp-ism”

“powerful country in the history of the world.”

You are historically challenged

Rome was historically more “powerful” than the USA in terms of the percentage of the human population that it dominated around 2000 years ago.

Chimp, your bias is telling.


Your Eurocentric bias is showing.
Rome wasn’t a pimple on the posterior of Tang China. Or the Mongols.
No empire in history has come close to the planetary domination of which the US is capable. Not even the second British Empire.
Please study world history before presuming to comment upon it. That goes double for science, about which you’ve also showed a total lack of understanding.

Vietnam?….you mean like 40 years ago?

LOL again Chimpy boi

Here is a clue 4 U

We don’t have a draft today…..the military can reject volunteers that are incapable of doing long division.

Oh yeah, bone spurs are no longer a problem.

Chimp, ” because of all the Isl@mic immigrants.??????????????????????

Not to pop the bubble you are living in, but they know how to read and write !!!!

Are you Islamophobic?


Please. Your knowledge of moral superiority is no better than mine.

Chimp says: “the only military superpower in the 21st century. ”

Tell me Mister Chimp, why can’t the only military superpower in the 21st century win a war in Afghanistan?


I’ve served since then in the all volunteer military.
I recently retired, after having served in four wars, three of which were all volunteer.
Only the Marines felt that requiring a high school diploma reduced combat effectiveness. But they are elite assault infantry, the best in the world and the best that has ever been. The other services have concluded that higher educational standards have been a good thing.

Chimp: ” planetary domination ”
Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, Syria……yeah……you crack me up with your “planetary domination”
The USA can’t defeat the Taliban…..


David Dirkse May 31, 2017 at 7:01 pm
Because we’re unwilling to kill civilians.
We’ve already won in that there is an elected government in Kabul, not the Taliban.
I served in Afghanistan in 2005. We were winning when I left. The people don’t want the Taliban, but the Kabul regime didn’t come through and the Pakistan-backed Taliban came back.
We weren’t willing to kill the civilians that it would take to defeat them. Villagers, even Pashto, don’t want the Taliban, but government police were hardly better.
It’s a decentralized state, not even a state but an imperial buffer zone. I opposed the idea of nation building in 2001, but the Bush administration opted for it.
Had we gone in with the whole army and stayed there, there would be no Taliban now. But Bush chose to liberate Iraq instead.
If it were up to me, I’d just pay off local warlords. It would cost less and work better.
But still fighting in Afghanistan hardly obviates the fact that the US armed forces are the most potent ever. Alexander and the USSR did worse there than we have done, despite all our mistakes.


Also Genghiz Khan, in one of whose fortresses I spent a lot of time.

Oh, another thing Chimpy……with regards to wealth and superiority, I guess there is one thing you can tout as the greatest…….your country has the greatest debt of any nation in the history of the world.

Chimp: “Because we’re unwilling to kill civilians.”
I have only one word in reply to that statement: Hibakusha


David Dirkse May 31, 2017 at 7:05 pm
What would you call it when you fight literally half way around the world in a desert and mountainous environment without major surface transport for 16 years with a few percent of your armed forces, without losing?
Sounds pretty dominant to me. But what would I know? I’ve just been there in the 1970s, ’80s, ’90s, ’00s and ’10s and speak the two main languages.

Gabro, I will answer your question with a quote from Chimp: “the US armed forces are the most potent ever.”

And Gabro, we’ve been there for 15+ years.

@David Dirske
Europe would likely be a Fascist state now were it not for the intervention of the US, however reluctantly, in WW2.
You can hardly condemn a nation who didn’t want to go to war in Europe, before having their hand forced.
Thank you Chimp, for your commitment in attempting to promote peace by direct intervention. A policy I believe largely supported by most major countries since WW2 as Europe ended up in a conflict thanks to the appeasement of Hitler by Neville Chamberlain, supported by the Leage of Nations which failed disastrously.
Neither direct intervention or appeasement are ideal solutions, but judging by history, appeasement has been the larger failure of the two, by some margin.

Bryan A

David Dirkse May 31, 2017 at 7:12 pm
Oh, another thing Chimpy……with regards to wealth and superiority, I guess there is one thing you can tout as the greatest…….your country has the greatest debt of any nation in the history of the world

David, would happen to know under whose watch (Presidential) this debt was added? …
President Barack Hussein Obama who was also going to strap the nation with further $$Trillons in Klimate Kash Debt
As to which nation is strongest or whatever the argument is about
The USA is definitely the most influential in the world. Prior to America the world was awash with Rulers, Emperors, Kings, Dictators, etc… But since America, Slavery has all but been eliminated, Empires are nonexistent, few Kingdoms survived, Dictators have been overthrown, and Democracy has spread like wildfire. The USA isn’t looking to rule the world like the Alexanders or Caesars or Hitlers of the world. If we were, Japan and Germany wouldn’t exist today, we would have taken them over after WWII. Iraq would be another U.S. state as well. Unlike many people, we’ve learned from the mistakes of history. The world will not be dominated by any one country or religion


My dyslexic finger hit ‘yes.’
Griffy boy, do us a favor and vote ‘no’ so mine cancels out.

Griff would rather be dismembered by a rusty corkscrew than see his mouse inexorably drawn to the NO button. 🙂

Fred Purdue

My son Scott died this past January of cancer and I’d like to do a proxy vote for him. As one of the smartest people I’ve known Scott would say “why are we even having this vote”. He would would not be polite in his vote, “f…king OUT”.


In Australia, cannot see this poll.
Accuwether poll is about 60% for leaving Paris.


“Accuwether” ?


From Wikipedia:
Wether may refer to:
A castrated male goat
A castrated male sheep
A misspelling of weather
A misspelling of whether

Gunga Din

So 60% in Australia don’t want Australia to be be castrated in Paris?
I think the phrase is “Good on ya!”?


61 percent leave at AccuWeather


Problem is Firefox not location. Use Chrome and this poll is visible.

Or try Opera, comes with a good, free, VPN.

Geoff Sherrington

Little Oil,
I have no trouble with the poll. In Melbourne.
What screen do you get?