Asians Better Hope It’s A Trump Win In 2020

Guest post by Tilak Doshi , originally posted at Forbes

On my first day as president, I will sign an executive order that puts a total moratorium on all new fossil fuel leases for drilling offshore and on public lands. And I will ban fracking—everywhere.” So tweeted Elizabeth Warren, the likely Democratic presidential nominee. (Fracking combines horizontal drilling and hydraulically-fracturing shale rock with high-pressure liquids to force open existing fissures and extract “unconventional” oil and gas.) In the intention to ban all fracking in the US, she joins Senators Bernie Sanders and Kamala Harris, her fellow presidential candidate hopefuls. In the demonization of fossil fuels and support for some variant of the multi-trillion dollar “Green New Deal”, Warren is not alone among the candidates running in the Democratic presidential primary. Nearly every nominee for the Democratic primary, including the other leading contender Joe Biden, has signed on to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s grand plan to save the planet from a 12-year deadline to global extinction.

What the fracking revolution wrought for Asia

The rapid growth in U.S. unconventional oil and gas production is unprecedented in the history of the industry. According to Fatih Birol, Executive Director of the International Energy Agency, “The remarkable ability of [US] producers to unlock new resources cost-effectively pushes the combined United States oil and gas output in 2040 to a level 50% higher than any other country has ever managed. This is an impressive feat, which cannot be overstated. This makes the United States the undisputed oil and gas producer in the world over the next several decades.” The phenomenal surge in US oil and gas production has been transformational in its impact on global markets. It has probably brought about the biggest transfer of wealth in history.

US crude oil production has more than doubled in a decade. By mid-2019, US production was rated at over 12 million b/d, surpassing Russian and Saudi Arabian output as the world’s largest. Academic models suggest that oil prices are up to $40 – $50 per barrel lower than they would have been were it not for the US fracking revolution. Benefits have primarily flowed to China, India, Japan and South Korea which constitute four of the world’s five largest oil importers (the US itself being one of the top five), largely at the cost of reduced oil revenues to OPEC and Russia. Given Asia’s oil consumption of almost 36 million barrel per day in 2018, the region’s consumers would have saved over $325 billion dollars annually if crude oil prices were lower by just $25 per barrel due to the US production boom.

According to consultants IHS Markit, the shale gas revolution in the U.S. “will drive prices down to a level not seen in 40 years and open wider the world of energy export possibilities”. As the US emerges as a major exporter of liquified natural gas (LNG) over the next few years, competing with the world’s leading suppliers Qatar and Australia , it is helping to integrate what were previously regionally disparate markets in Europe, Asia and North America. Benefits to Asian markets for natural gas will also be substantial, not only via lower prices but also in their aims to diversify their sources of energy imports and reduce their dependence on the Middle East suppliers.

Impossible Promises by Democratic contenders in the US Primary

Fanciful policy promises by politicians in the election trial are nothing new. The Democratic Party presidential primary debates to date have more than lived up to such billings. The one-upmanship in issues of climate and energy policy, for instance, has been nothing short of incredulous to any objective observer not fully convinced of an impending planetary apocalypse. But Warren is anything but shy: “Taking bold action to confront the climate crisis is as important – and as urgent – as anything else the next president will face. We cannot wait

Outlawing fracking and imposing a complete moratorium on oil and gas drilling offshore and on public lands, to be sure, will require contentious legislation at various levels of government. They will also spur litigation challenges from investors, oil and gas companies and state governments heavily dependent on oil and gas activity for their revenues and hence votes.

Constitutional limits on the US president’s power are real and binding. For instance, outlawing an entire technology (fracking) might require an act of Congress. If the Republicans retain majority control of the Senate, anti-fossil fuel legislation such as those proposed by Warren would not be passed. But even if the Democrats manage to flip the Senate, moderates in oil and gas states such as Colorado, New Mexico and Texas would find it difficult to knee-cap their own vibrant jobs-providing and tax-paying industries.

Yet, the promises by Warren are spooking investors in the US oil and gas patch. A President Warren could take executive and regulatory actions aimed at ending fracking and all oil and gas activity in federal lands for example. A weaponized Environmental Protection Agency – taking President Obama’s playbook – could discourage the fossil fuels sector in countless ways through administrative and regulatory choke-holds. A climate change-impelled president could “vaporize the oil and gas boom in the United States”, as succinctly put by Bob McNally, head of the Rapidan Energy consultancy.

Asians can only wait and see

A left-wing Warren presidency would curtail US fracking and oil and gas output from federal lands, leading to higher global oil and gas prices. Energy imports are among the largest components in the balance of trade of most Asian economies. Already afflicted by a global economy in the throes of a “synchronized slowdown”, they can ill-afford higher oil and gas prices.

The IMF recently downgraded its growth forecast for 2019 to 3 percent, its slowest pace since the global financial crisis. In this context, significantly higher oil prices would hit vulnerable Asian economies with weak current account balances such as India, Indonesia and the Philippines with inflation, weakening currencies and lower growth outlooks. Even China, with its slowest growth rate in nearly 30 years and an “evaporated” current account surplus, would not be spared from the knock-on effects of higher energy import prices.

It might be argued that a Trump loss in 2020 would help Asia. This outcome, as the reasoning goes, would lead to a more “normal” world without the travails of a transactional US foreign policy and an “America First” approach to international economic relations that have characterized the current administration. Yet, given Asia’s voracious appetite for imported oil and gas, its leaders know full well that it is President Tump alone that stands for a world of energy abundance. The evermore extreme leftward lurch of the current crop of Democrat presidential hopefuls attests to this. Asian leaders should be careful what they wish for.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
November 7, 2019 2:27 pm

If people understand what sacrifices are being demanded, that will be a winnable election issue.

Curious George
Reply to  commieBob
November 7, 2019 2:35 pm

A bad law can have unintended consequences, but this law would cause a collateral damage.

Reply to  Curious George
November 8, 2019 7:51 am

Hmm, isn’t the definition of “collateral damage”: unintended damage? Any damage to my wallet is “collateral damage” in this inane jihad.

Reply to  commieBob
November 8, 2019 5:27 am

Never underestimate the power of propaganda widely applied by a hostile media.

November 7, 2019 2:48 pm

Who knew Warren was a global emergency and when did they know it?

Reply to  ResourceGuy
November 8, 2019 6:29 am

I’ve heard business pundits saying for some time now that if Warren were elected, there’d be a stock-market crash & major depression the day after the election.

Ron Long
November 7, 2019 2:49 pm

Just one more reason to work for the re-election of President Trump. My personal investment account is another reason, than you very much. Meanwhile, stupid is writ large all around the world. This “economic equality” nonsense in Chile is extremely destabilizing. We may not make it to 12 years.

John Tillman
Reply to  Ron Long
November 7, 2019 4:03 pm

I live in Chile. My wife is a Chilean nurse. Income inequality here is not a joke.

Few are more politically conservative than I. Yet Chile suffers from extreme income inequality, which goes far beyond the level needed to create wealth available for investment.

Despite steady increase in the minimum wage, Chilean peso weakness against the US dollar means that current minwage is still only about $400 per month.

Oligarchs can avoid taxes by paying for everything with “facturas”, deductions on the national value added tax, IVA. The only other major source of national receipts is from copper, gold and lithium mining. There is no income nor property tax.

The increase in subway and bus costs which triggered the demonstrations resulted from the out of touch elites’ embrace of so-called “renewables”, as with the Yellow Vest protests in France.

The marches in Chile have at times been hijacked by violent Communists, but the majority are peaceful middle and working class protestors with legitimate claims against the oligarchs, who prosper under both nominally socialist and conservative regimes.

I don’t like the many inconveniences which have plagued my family since the onset of protests, riots and violence, but I understand the anger. I helped defend my local supermarket against the mob which wanted to burn it down, loot its products and break into its ATM, but these thieves are a minority of the demonstrators.

Ron Long
Reply to  John Tillman
November 7, 2019 5:31 pm

Well John, I live in Argentina, and I have worked and vacationed many times in Chile, and I never was outworked by any Chilean. When they saqueo (loot) a supermarket watch what they carry off…food? No, TV’s and such things. The excuse for all this destruction was a U$D 0.04 increase in the Santiago city center bus fare. Dozens of buses were burned and then the riders complained bitterly about the increased waiting time for a bus. How about the two carabiners burned by molotov cocktail? All of this leading up to canceling the UN climate conference and another circum-Pacific symposium, meaning lost revenue for persons actually working. Along the Valpariso-Viña del Mar-Reñaca beach corridor there was in excess of 89% hotel and apartment cancellations. Communists? Where’s Pinochet when you need him?

John Tillman
Reply to  Ron Long
November 8, 2019 4:30 am

The 30 peso fare increase was on top of a 20 peso hike in January. My bus in Valpo costs 100 pesos more this year than last.

A min wage worker in Santiago takes the Metro twice a day. It adds up. The increases were because of the government’s commitment to “renewables”, not because of fossil fuel costs. The strong dollar has also hurt.

In my neighborhood, they looted the local Santa Isabel supermarket of food. It had no TVs on offer.

As I said, I oppose violence, but peaceful protest is warranted.

John Tillman
Reply to  John Tillman
November 8, 2019 5:32 am

I agree that Communists have kept the protests going.

The girl who flushed the tear gas out of my eyes in Vina del Mar was wearing a red neckerchief with black hammer and cycle.

Despite the examples of Venezuela, Bolivia, Cuba and North Korea, plus Chile under Allende, there’s a lot of support for communism among the urban young.

One can only hope that they wise up by their 40s.

Reply to  John Tillman
November 7, 2019 6:06 pm

This kind of income inequality is always caused by government intervening on behalf of the well connected.
The solution is never making government more powerful.

Ron Long
Reply to  MarkW
November 8, 2019 2:45 am

MarkW, have someone explain the Bell Curve to you.

John Tillman
Reply to  MarkW
November 8, 2019 4:41 am


In Chile under both socialists and “conservatives”, the oligarchy is protected. They write off their value added taxes (19% IVA), which the poor can’t do. Here, sales taxes are regressive.

The supposedly conservative government should have cancelled the socialists’ “climate change” program.

Taxi drivers, hotel and restaurant workers and the rest of the tourism and hospitality industry suffered from cancellation of two huge international conferences. Everybody who does his or her own shopping or who commutes has been hurt by the looting and burning. Our house sale is held up because the municipalidad building in Quilpue was set fire. The local supermarket reopened yesterday, but only for cash and without bags. BYOB. Have to enter one at a time through a side door.

But the fact remains that wages and pensions are too low and taxes too high for the working poor and even some middle class families. There are also too many underemployed. Although it’s worlds ahead of Argentina, Chile needs more and better jobs. Investment in manufacturing would help. It has gotten by on mining copper, gold and lithium, construction, fishing, ag and timber, but now needs further development beyond extraction of natural resources and building infrastructure.

John Tillman
Reply to  MarkW
November 8, 2019 4:43 am

PS: The bus fare increase was from 350 to 450 pesos, on top of last year’s 50 peso hike.

Ron Long
Reply to  John Tillman
November 8, 2019 7:15 am

John, the increase reported on Chilean TV was from 800 to 830 pesos, or U$D 0.04. This report was qualified as related to the downtown Santiago fare.

Mike of the North
Reply to  John Tillman
November 8, 2019 7:32 pm

I lived there for three years and pretty much all the ‘urban young’ do is smoke pot and bitch about capitalism. There’s a lot of resentful, jealous people there, and if you stay long enough you’ll know that the country is screwed because of all the dishonesty. If you want to find out who to blame ask any Chilean. Just don’t expect the answer to involve himself.

John Tillman
Reply to  John Tillman
November 9, 2019 6:20 am


As noted, the rush hour fare was increased 20 CLP in January, then again by 30 pesos. For a commuter making $14 per day, paying 19% sales tax on all purchases and already suffering from inflation, thanks to the strong dollar and low natural resource prices, an extra 100 pesos (14 cents) per day matters.

While small, it was a camel’s back-breaking straw.

My bus fare increase was proportionally much more.

John Tillman
Reply to  John Tillman
November 9, 2019 6:26 am


During my eleven years here, I’ve met a lot of pot-smoking young artists and musicians. But there are also young Chileans like my wife, a 32-year-old mother of one, who works two or three jobs, as a nurse-anesthetist by day and as caregiver to a paralyzed Alzheimer’s patient or bartender by night, the latter with her younger sister, a physical therapy student. She’s too busy to join any protests, but sympathizes with the non-violent ones.

Joe Campbell
Reply to  John Tillman
November 8, 2019 9:54 am

John: Thanks for the input re: Chile. But, I was astonished to read that Chile, with its attendant limitations, could be pulled into the AGW-trap, including getting wrapped-up into the “renewables” game…

John Tillman
Reply to  Joe Campbell
November 9, 2019 6:44 am

Twice former president Bitchelet, whose MD is from East Germany, is BFF with Hillary Clinton. She’s now a human rights official with the UN, and wants to investigate her twice successor, billionaire Pinera.

Since his early “at war” gaffe, the military and carabineros (national police belonging to the armed forces) under Pinera’s command have been restrained in imposing peace, order and security, despite frequently being pelted with bricks, rocks and other missiles. Banks, stores and public offices are reopening, amid continuing, but less violent, demonstrations.

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  Joe Campbell
November 20, 2019 4:44 am

John Tillman November 9, 2019 at 6:44 am

Twice former president Bitchelet, whose MD is from East Germany, is BFF with Hillary Clinton.

Bitchelet is

1. Huguenots

2. East Germany

Reply to  Ron Long
November 8, 2019 3:33 am

Sorry, but it’s now 11 years. AOC’s 12-years-left declaration was made in November, 2018.

Kevin kilty
November 7, 2019 3:04 pm

The Democratic party has apparently decided that authoritarianism is a winning strategy. Rather than merely ruining the economy should they enact these foolish policies, maybe they will divide and fracture the country.

Samuel C Cogar
Reply to  Kevin kilty
November 8, 2019 4:09 am

None of the Democrat POTUS candidates are the least bit concerned or give a damn about “ruining the economy” or “enacting foolish policies”.

Their only interest is to “out-promise” their competitor candidates for the “votes” of the “troughfeeders”, …. the “couch-potatoes”, …… the “illegal immigrants”, …….. the “looney left liberals” …… and the misnurtured, miseducated “brainwashed” adolescent minded between the ages of 18 to 35.

K. Hunter
Reply to  Samuel C Cogar
November 8, 2019 1:14 pm

The left’s attitude is plainly that they will destroy the nation, if necessary, to win control while believing that they can fix whatever was broken once in power. It is a stupid, often disproven philosophy throughout the world.

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  Samuel C Cogar
November 20, 2019 5:02 am

Bob Lyman November 8, 2019 at 5:54 am

Actually, the “twelve years to apocalypse” claim was made in (incorrect) reference to the forecast in the IPCC Special Report 15 as to the actions that the countries of the world had to take by 2030. 2030 arrives on January 1, 2030, so the world has only 10 years and one-and-a-half months left! Oh my God, head for the exits! –>

Bob Lyman
Reply to  Kevin kilty
November 8, 2019 5:54 am

Actually, the “twelve years to apocalypse” claim was made in (incorrect) reference to the forecast in the IPCC Special Report 15 as to the actions that the countries of the world had to take by 2030. 2030 arrives on January 1, 2030, so the world has only 10 years and one-and-a-half months left! Oh my God, head for the exits!

November 7, 2019 3:08 pm

If Warren bans hydraulic fracturing, will Texas secede from the USA?

Could get interesting.

John Tillman
Reply to  joe
November 7, 2019 3:44 pm

Pennsylvania might join Texas.

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  joe
November 7, 2019 6:18 pm

Alaska wouldn’t be happy either. Their big fat oil endowment fund pays them every year a nice check that most there look forward to. A President Pocahontas, under directives from both her Eco-terrorist wing and her GreenSlime masters, would do everything she could to not only close-off ANWR exploration but also close the AK-pipeline, thus stranding the remaining oil on the North Slope and halting most the revenue inflow to the Alaskan Endowment.

Reply to  joe
November 7, 2019 6:25 pm

It is said that President Trump was elected by 85% of America’s geography. link If Texas goes, it should take the whole middle of the country and the south with it. Perhaps Alberta and Saskatchewan should be welcomed into the fold. I have a hunch that the northern part of California would be delighted to get rid of the southern part.

Really, for most Americans, it’s a matter of survival.

Every issue plays out this same way, and people on the Right will only accept this kind of abuse for so long. Sooner or later, the left-wing rage mob will start coming for the careers (and lives) of any normal American who sees things differently. link

It’s about thirty years since the Berlin Wall came down. After that we learned that brothers and husbands were ratting out their families to the secret police. Nobody could feel safe saying anything to anybody. The social justice warriors make me feel the same way. They have cost many people their careers. If they think you’re a Na*i they’re OK with killing you. It doesn’t take much to make them think you’re a N*zi.

John Tillman
Reply to  commieBob
November 9, 2019 6:50 am

Not just northern CA, but its whole long interior. The whack jobs are concentrated in coastal counties. I would welcome their secession from the rest of the state and the Union, although the US would need to keep some military bases. We could cut off the water from Hetch Hetchy to SF.

Reply to  joe
November 8, 2019 12:48 am

Not possible , Joe . To quote from a Wiki article:
-“Current Supreme Court precedent, in Texas v. White, holds that the states cannot secede from the union by an act of the state.[2] More recently, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia stated, “If there was any constitutional issue resolved by the Civil War, it is that there is no right to secede.””-
To attempt to secede would be a revoltionary act.

Samuel C Cogar
Reply to  mikewaite
November 8, 2019 4:26 am

“If there was any constitutional issue resolved by the Civil War, it is that there is no right to secede.

Mikewaite, ….. I thought you knew, …….

It was President Lincoln himself who violated the Constitution by a Presidential Edict declaring the succeeding of “western” Virginia from the State of Virginia (June 20. 1863)

“DUH”, Lincoln needed control of the B&O railroad to the Ohio River …. and dats why he did it.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Samuel C Cogar
November 8, 2019 6:38 am

What does “succeeding” have to do with “secession”?

Samuel C Cogar
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
November 8, 2019 8:38 am

Well now, Jeff, ….. I hafta assume my MS Word decided that there had ta be sumpin “succeeding” iffen there was sumpin a “secessioning” …….. and my proofreading didn’t catch it.

John Endicott
Reply to  mikewaite
November 8, 2019 6:11 am

mikewaite, that will only be true until a critical mass of states wish to secede. Either they will succeed or there would be another civil war the outcome of which would either decide the matter (secession succeeds) or hold the status quo for a time (until the next large secession attempt). Revolution is what started this country and it may well be what ends it.

John Tillman
Reply to  John Endicott
November 9, 2019 6:52 am

Secession might succeed if the federal government doesn’t fight it.

In the case of coastal CA, I hope that the US would let those counties go.

Forgot to mention below LA’s as well as SF’s water supply.

November 7, 2019 3:13 pm

The Chinese Communists are actively supporting the Democrats in the US! Just shows how STUPID they are!!

Reply to  RockyRoad
November 7, 2019 4:36 pm

It shows that they are smart and doing what’s best for themselves. They know that any Democrat in power, especially among the current crop, would be to the detriment of the US which is to their benefit.

Reply to  co2isnotevil
November 8, 2019 6:51 pm

…not if the world can remove the Central Bank plague! Then all countries will benefit from free trade and abolish all sorts of civil and economic conflicts used by the Central Bank to keep themselves in control! A surprising percentage of the world’s GDP is wasted on armaments and military, which contribute nothing to the wealth of nations or individuals!

Steve Z
November 7, 2019 3:17 pm

China would probably relish a Democrat winning in 2020, in order to end the Trump tariffs, since China has a lot of influence with Iran, and could buy Iran’s oil which it has trouble selling to the West due to sanctions.

American allies in Asia, such as Japan, South Korea, and India would probably prefer that Trump be re-elected.

Jeff L
November 7, 2019 3:27 pm

On the flip side, if Warren were elected & managed to enact said proposals, this would be a self correcting situation … with time.

If these proposed actions were taken, the economic pain would be evident & felt by all …. and so the pendulum would swing back as at the end of the day, people generally vote their pocketbook.

To a certain extent, I think a cold dose of reality is the only way a certain portion of the population to understand that these proposals are not rooted in reality.

William Astley
Reply to  Jeff L
November 7, 2019 4:22 pm

The problem is the consequences of a 180 degree turn towards chaos (shutdown industries and make electricity very expensive) at time when …

…all of the money is gone, we are borrowing more and more every year because entitlements are growing faster than revenue, …

The more interesting question who will win the nomination, Warren or Bidden?

Joel O’Bryan
Reply to  William Astley
November 8, 2019 5:52 am

neither… Crooked Hilly.

Andy Mansell
Reply to  Jeff L
November 7, 2019 10:07 pm

I think the same here in the UK. These spoilt snowflakes have no idea what it was like in the 70s with the unions dominating Labour, insane tax levels, power cuts, 3 day working weeks, bodies piling up because of strike action, etc. We were an economic basket case, going cap in hand to the IMF and we were known as the sick man of Europe. Mrs T somehow dragged us out of this and now these lunatics want to plunge us back into it because they have absolutely no idea what it was like. It would be a nasty shock for them if they got their wish for a Coco the clown let government and it might do them some good.

Reply to  Andy Mansell
November 8, 2019 12:32 am

Well said, whilst I’m backing BoJo a small part of me wants to be able to watch, and eat popcorn, while the UK burns under an even more far left government than in the 70’s, they have absolutely no idea what they’re voting for!!

Michael Jankowski
Reply to  Jeff L
November 8, 2019 10:11 am

Economic pain means more people dependent on the govt. Need to raise taxes more. And blame it all on lingering effects of Trump.

November 7, 2019 3:36 pm

I don’t believe the U.S. Will become a major gas exporter until they export a lot of gas from their western seaboard.

Bruce Cobb
November 7, 2019 3:37 pm

Not gonna happen. A Trump win is pretty much a lock. He’ll beat the probable dem nominee Biden, handily, and with Warren, it’d be a landslide.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
November 7, 2019 4:46 pm

Likely, but not a lock. Nearly half of the country will vote for the Democrat no matter who it is and will probably not have even paid enough attention to know where their candidate sits on important issues. As always, it’ll come down to narrow margins in swing states.

One small misstep, a misinterpreted tweet or a big lie from the swamp immediately before the election could change the outcome and you can bet the swamp will have some nonsense queued up and ready to go at just the right moment.

Crispin in Waterloo but really in Nairobi
Reply to  co2isnotevil
November 7, 2019 8:59 pm


Have you heard of a broomstick Democrat? It means someone who will vote for a broomstick with a hat on it if that is what gets nominated.

Every party has such supporters. There’s not much to be done about them. Best to concentrate on policies that are effective and implementable. Little by little you get what you want.

Or as they say in Nairobi, “Haba na haba ujaza kibaba.”

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
November 7, 2019 5:49 pm

Trump is accidentally on the correct side of the climate issue only because it fits his current political needs, not because he is educated on the subject. It isn’t like he can be counted on to advocate against alarmism in any meaningful way.

If Americans rediscover their patriotism, dignity and basic moral compass, Trump won’t be around to be re-elected.

350,000th time: CAGW is an issue of science, not politics.

Samuel C Cogar
Reply to  takebackthegreen
November 8, 2019 4:43 am

Trump is accidentally on the correct side of the climate issue only because it fits his current political needs, not because he is educated on the subject.

GOOD GRIEF, ….. Takebackthegreen, ….. one doesn’t have to be educated “in the science(s)” to know that the claims of CAGW are literally “junk science” agitprop.

One just has to have a wee bit of “common sense”, …… a wee bit of ability to “think for themselves”, ….. and to be lucky enough not to be “brainwashed” by the lefty liberal curriculum of the US Public School System.

Reply to  Samuel C Cogar
November 8, 2019 11:33 am

Well Sam, you hit that one out of the park. The US public school system is at the root of how and why our youth have embraced socialism/communism and the climate hysteria. There’s not much difference between the two. I have been shouting from the roof tops to shut all public ed. down. Parents need to be engaged in the children’s education. Let them deal with it themselves for a year or two, while we flush the system clean of the communists running it.

Reintroduce an updated McGuffey Reader and teach the skills needed to balance a check book, multiply numbers over 10, read books from people with facts not opinions, until they can prove they’ve mastered the skill of independent thought or think for themselves. Teach them their history from the beginning, leaving out the political indoctrinations. Explain to them that there are no perfect governments on our planet, but they are living in the best the world has produced. That’s why the world it breaking into not out of our country.

I know, it will probably take a complete collapse of our Economic system to see the day this happens. Sad, but it’s the lack of education and critical thinking skills that have led us to this point. Just ask anyone under 40 when the civil war started and ended and what it was about. They have no history to measure or compare to anything they hear or read, so they believe the loudest cryers (their teachers) are the experts. No education, no God, no sense of responsibility for themselves, if you want it, it’s a right, and common sense is so rare, it’s considered a super power.

CAGW is a hoax and a march to a one world Gov. Any independent thinking person knows that correcting the fictitious CAGW ills of our planet, would require a global response. That can only be achieved with a central command and control global government or simply put, a dictatorship. Yes, I’m sure that will work out great for everyone. 😂

Samuel C Cogar
Reply to  JonZig
November 9, 2019 4:23 am

Thank you, …. JonZig, …. I truly enjoyed reading your commentary.

For what is worth, ….. it is comforting to know that there are others out there that knows and understands the “root problem(s)” that is destroying this great nation. I decided some time ago that the “social pendulum” has swung too far to the “left” past center to ever swing back on its own, thus this Nation will have to devolve into “anarchy” before it can mimic the Phoenix, …… and hopefully arise anew from the ashes.

Reply to  Samuel C Cogar
November 11, 2019 1:17 am

I disagree. Common sense can’t even come into play when the subject has been so corrupted and politicized. Most of the time people discussing the issue aren’t even using a common vocabulary. Except for extremist loonies at either end of the spectrum, most people would probably agree with each other a lot more than expected, if a reasonable, well-defined discussion could be had.

Instead, we follow human nature. We don’t have time to personally research every single subject of modern life. So we take shortcuts. We go to our trusted, familiar sources of information (friends, radio, news, etc.) and if what they say generally sounds about right and checks our boxes, we accept it as “true.”

Then we lose our minds, ascribe bad intention to everyone who doesn’t agree with us, and yell past each other. Take, for example, the last sentence of your reply…

Ed Zuiderwijk
November 7, 2019 3:44 pm

Within a few month there would be an extinction rebellion, one against a real extinction, and the rebels will be armed to the teeth.

November 7, 2019 4:45 pm

The US Government has been weaponized against America. There is no real justice for anyone targeted by the Left. (Besides the Sham Impeachment and Climate Fraud…Check out Roger Stone’s “Mono-Culture”Jury for the latest. He’s being tried for wanting Wikileaks documents released.)

If this doesn’t change, there will be revolution. This is not tolerable.

November 7, 2019 4:46 pm

In some sense I won’t mind if Warren were President and kept her promises. Sometimes people have to learn the hard way. Best to put all these disastrous economic policies in place immediately so people learn their lesson.

Nicholas Harding
November 7, 2019 5:03 pm

End US oil production means more money for Putin!

November 7, 2019 5:36 pm

She says she will ban fracking everywhere? On what authority? And they call Trump a tyrant.

November 7, 2019 5:45 pm

As a non American I cannot understand the idea of a President NOT putting “America first”. Why would anyone vote for a politician who openly says that they place the welfare of foreign citizens in distant lands above the welfare of their own citizens?

I noticed it in the last election, Democrats deriding Trump for his “America First” stance. did they want a President who places America and Americans second?

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  JohnB
November 7, 2019 7:18 pm

Did you see that shrieking woman falling to her knees screaming to the Heavens like a rabid Banshee after Trump won in 2016?

That’s the entire Democratic Party now. Totally insane.

And because US Democrats are now totally insane, any in that Party who try not to be publicly insane (like Tulsi Gabbard) get labeled a Russian Agent and kicked to the curb by the PC-enforcement arm of that Mad Hatter’s Tea Party.

And Trump has driven them further down the derangement rabbit hole where they wallow in that miserable hope of a Hell they want to create for everyone from Socialism.

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
November 7, 2019 7:48 pm

Not only insane, they are ugly. Good video.

Samuel C Cogar
Reply to  JohnB
November 8, 2019 5:01 am

JohnB – November 7, 2019 at 5:45 pm

As a non American I cannot understand the idea of a President NOT putting “America first”.

JohnB, your logical reasoning doesn’t surprise me any, …… I am an American and it amazes me that so many American citizens have been so easily “brainwashed” to actually hate the country of their current residency, the US.

What is more amazing is the tens-of-millions of emigrants that have escaped the deplorable conditions in/of their home country, …….. want to restructure America like the country they escaped from.

November 7, 2019 5:51 pm

Sorry – the entire silly premise of this post is false. Warren is NOT the “likely Democratic nominee”. She trails in the polls to both Joe Biden and Sanders, and of course nobody will know who leads in delegates until after Super Tuesday in March. Few democrats agree with Warren’s radical views.

Asians, with the exception of PRC and North Korea, will fare far better with President Joe Biden than the nutcase Trump. Much more importantly, Americans will do far better with President Joe Biden than the nutbag, traitor, Putin-serving Trump. Putin, however, will be disappointed that his American asset will no longer be operational.

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  Duane
November 7, 2019 6:43 pm


Pocahontas (Warren) currently leads 4 of the 5 polls over Biden in Iowa.
Warren RCP avg: 21.8%
Biden RCP avg: 15.5%
She leads the pack there in Iowa.

In New Hampshire the faux Cherokee leads Biden 25% to 21% in the RCP avg of ALL 3 polls there.

Next time… do a little research before you post easily rebutted nonsense.

And even if she doesn’t win, one of those other Dems will get the nomination to face Trump. And most if not all have similar energy destructive policies as Pocahontas. Comrade Sanders anyone???


Samuel C Cogar
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
November 8, 2019 5:17 am

Duane – November 7, 2019 at 5:51 pm

Asians, with the exception of PRC and North Korea, will fare far better with President Joe Biden than the nutcase Trump. Much more importantly, Americans will do far better with President Joe Biden than the nutbag, traitor, Putin-serving Trump.

Me thinks the above comments by Duane ……. is literal proof that he is one of those that Trump has ……. “driven further down the derangement rabbit hole” …… and is frantically searching for “excuses” to explain his predicament.

Reply to  Duane
November 7, 2019 7:03 pm

Gerbil Warming is not outside the sphere of politics because the response – whatever the climate does – will be political.

Reply to  Duane
November 7, 2019 7:07 pm


I’d like to hear your explanation as to how driving the price of oil down – thereby costing Russia $billions in revenue and power at the negotiating table – is supposed to be “serving Putin”.

J Mac
Reply to  Duane
November 7, 2019 8:37 pm

The only ‘nut case’ here is Duane. Nuttier than squirrel crap and of significantly lower value.

John Tillman
Reply to  Duane
November 8, 2019 5:56 am

Some 40% of Democrats support Warren or Sanders. Biden is stuck under 30% in the national polls. Betting still favors Warren. We’ll see.

Trump will be able correctly to portray Biden as a more stupid version of the corrupt Clintons. Warren, aka Lieawatha, would fare even worse.

Joe Campbell
Reply to  Duane
November 8, 2019 10:25 am

Duane: In the words of Joel: “Really?” You cannot be serious: “the nutbag, traitor, Putin-serving Trump”. Talk about ad hominum; Whew…

John Endicott
Reply to  Duane
November 11, 2019 10:11 am

Speak of Trump Derangement Syndrome and a poster boy, such as Duane, arrives to show every one what it looks like. Nothing like a living breathing example to drive home a point.

Joel O'Bryan
November 7, 2019 6:12 pm

As the US 2020 election continues to get closer more and more policy “experts” and even common folks are going to realze the total insanity of US Democrats and their energy policies they have been forced into the corner on by their GreenSlime Masters.

Even where Tilak Doshi writes, “Academic models suggest that oil prices are up to $40 – $50 per barrel lower than they would have been were it not for the US fracking revolution,” that is almost certainly a deep underestimate of what would have happened if the tight-oil/gas fracking revolution in the US had no started in 2008. $150/bbl would have been cheap oil had that not ahppened in 2008 at this point in 2019 with the continued fall in conventional oil plays outputs. Another place the Dmeocrat’s will hit if they can is ANWR and the Alaskan pipeline. Alaska’s already permitted NorthSlope may still have much oil left there but remember the Left is intent on also shutting down ANWR to lead to the Alaskan Pipeline closure, stranding all the remaining oil there.

Likely we would have seen oil at $200/bbl hit by now if Fracking and a Republican President in 2016 had not happened. Which in 2000 to 2005 was supposed to be the massive windfall ROI the Renewable Energy Investors (the GreenSlime) were expecting to drive up the value of their wind and solar schemes.

Although it is impossible to say how everything would have shaken out. A President Hillary might have gone down the Warren path to try to ban fracking, but probably not. She would have continued on with CPP since she would have had 2 Liberal Supreme Court Justices to help rubber stamp it instead of Gorsuch and Kavanaugh there now. But Iran would also not be under US sanctions either with President Hillary so Iranian oil would have likely been on the world market. The dynamics and what-ifs are so non-linear it is impossible to say what would’ve happened. A world-wide recession from a Democratic US President could/can easily suppress oil prices even if scarcity (no fracking/fracking ban) is present.

Since today’s Democrat want to totally F Israel, we could expect that President Warren would unsanction Iranian oil in 2021, so that oil would be on the market. Simultaneously her ban on federal land and off-shore permitting in the US driving oil production down domestically. That’s just another way a Democratic President would F#&k the American economy and US work-force by sending more dollars to the MidEast to buy their oil we need.

The only thing we do know for sure is a Democrat President in 2021 would (will?) likely result in deep recession in 2021 and then as the recovery began world oil prices would skyrocket. Prices could hit north of $180/bbl leading to $6-$8/gal gas for US drivers and still heading upwards as OPEC and Russia capitalized on the fact that US Democrats put them back in the oil prices driver’s seat.

Oh and your electricity and nat gas heating bills — expect double or triple in 2-3 years under a Democratic President by 2022 to pay back their GreenSlime Masters.

John Endicott
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
November 11, 2019 10:18 am

As the US 2020 election continues to get closer more and more policy “experts” and even common folks are going to realze the total insanity of US Democrats and their energy policies they have been forced into the corner on by their GreenSlime Masters.

I certainly hope so, but with a compliant fake news media machine back them, it’s not so easy for the everyday folks who aren’t following the minutia of the campaigns and aren’t well versed in economics and science to see through the lies and distortions.

November 7, 2019 6:20 pm

Here’s a solution to the problem of Warren and her Big Mouth: turn off her utilities: gas, electric, water – all of it. Why? So that clanker can find out what it’s like to live without them. What’s good for the goose (us po’ folks) is certainly good for the gander (Warren and her ilk).

Look into her personal finances, somebody. See what her investment portfolio consists of. If it’s gas and oil stuff, and utilities, point the finger and make fun of her. She’s a moron, like all the rest of the political animals on that side of the fence. The rhetoric – which is what it is – is meant to draw votes from the numbskulls who think the World is Going To End.

Well, it ain’t gonna end, and I don’t think her campaign promises will buy votes for her. People aren’t as stupid as she takes them to be. Besides, she won’t get the nod, Biden will, and she’ll go hang with Bernie on his independent commie platform, pulling votes away from Biden.

November 7, 2019 6:48 pm

Michael Bloomberg Actively Prepares to Enter 2020 Presidential Race. There would be good traction from Climate sensationalists too !

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  Ashok Patel
November 7, 2019 7:27 pm

Bloomberg isn’t stupid. He knows he won’t win anything. He isn’t entering the Alabama Primary race to win the Presidential nomination.
Bloomberg has decided to play Steyer’s campaign finance game. That s to make an unlimited campaign transfer from his self-funded campaign committee to the Democrat’s State committee there once he withdraws.

He is entering the Alabama Primary so that when he withdraws he can (without looking like too big a douchebag) transfer whatever millions of dollars in his campaign to the Alabama Democratic Party to support the Dem’s nominee there for Senate. Bloomberg is focusing on taking the US Senate for Democrats and electing a Democrat to the Senate there would go a long ways toward that goal.

Chris Hanley
November 7, 2019 7:34 pm

“Fanciful policy promises by politicians in the election trial are nothing new …”.

Indeed, who can forget Obama’s ambitious pledge on winning the Democratic primaries to a tumultuous ovation that it was the moment ‘when the rise of the oceans began to recede’.

Michael Jankowski
November 7, 2019 8:04 pm

She could try to ban new leases on federal lands. And fracking on federal lands. She can’t ban fracking “everywhere”…period. How does she not know what an executive order is?

Global Cooling
November 7, 2019 9:44 pm

Climate change is a camouflage of global trade war. We try to ban products that our competitors sell. We try to find substitutes to products that we need to import. Virtue signalling makes the story look better for the sheeple.

Peter Fraser
November 8, 2019 12:47 am

Have not had time to follow all the thoughts on this topic but the democrat impeachment fiasco seems to miss the point. Why was Biden and his son involved in businesses in Ukraine, a rather shady administration to say the least. Trump could have asked the CIA to have a look but he took the direct approach and asked Ukraine’s president. What’s wrong with that even with a little bit of leverage. Once again the wrong question being asked

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Peter Fraser
November 8, 2019 6:48 am

And the Democrats act like there has never been quid pro quo in politics before. Diplomacy is nothing BUT quid pro quo.

Reply to  Jeff Alberts
November 11, 2019 2:14 am

What the eff are you talking about?!? Diplomacy is quid pro quo IN SUPPORT OF AMERICA’S INTERESTS. It is absolutely NOT bribery in pursuit of the PERSONAL POLITICAL agenda of an incompetent anti-patriot.

One of the articles of impeachment against Nixon was for abusing the power of his office in an attempt to destroy his enemies. Trying to make the IRS audit all of his democratic opponents seems tame compared to the current debasement of the Executive Branch.

At least Nixon had the dignity to resign when he was caught.

John Endicott
Reply to  takebackthegreen
November 11, 2019 10:24 am

Trying to make the IRS audit all of his democratic opponents

You misspelled republican/conservative. and it was Obama’s IRS that was targeting republican/conservative groups. where were the Dems calling for impeachment over that abuse of power?

Reply to  John Endicott
November 12, 2019 4:09 am

When I was a child and did something bad, if I tried to use the “Well Billy did the same thing, and HE didn’t get punished” excuse, the reply was always “We aren’t talking about Billy. We are talking about YOU.”

So as an adult, I don’t use child-like, irrelevant excuses for bad behavior.

Now, to (probably) waste some time on the “substance” of your comment…

What you describe is an illogical and silly conspiracy theory. Anyone with unclouded judgement should be able to parse out why it couldn’t possibly be true.

The President doesn’t own the IRS. He appoints its commissioner with the Senate’s consent. So there was no “Obama’s IRS.” That’s the point.

Doesn’t matter anyway, because the IRS under Obama did no such thing. If it had, and it had done so at the direction, request or suggestion of Obama, it would have been an instant, gigantic, unstoppable news story. It would have been wrong, and absolutely deserved removal from office as well as criminal prosecution for everyone involved who wasn’t President.

Also: PLENTY of Democrats who would have rushed to condemn him.

Also, also: If you honestly believe that there was even a SHRED of evidence of what you are claiming, yet, for some unimaginable reason, Republicans decided to skip a legitimate chance to (correctly) impeach Obama… well… I hope your alternate reality at least serves free beer and lap dances. Enjoy!

John Endicott
Reply to  John Endicott
November 12, 2019 5:05 am

The President doesn’t own the IRS. He appoints its commissioner with the Senate’s consent. So there was no “Obama’s IRS.” That’s the point.

Um, you realize you just demolished your own argument about “Nixon Trying to make the IRS audit all of his democratic opponents”. If there was no “Obama’s IRS” than there equally was no “Nixon’s IRS”. way to make an own goal there takebackthegreen.

Doesn’t matter anyway, because the IRS under Obama did no such thing

except that it did. Deny reality all you want, won’t change what actually happened.

John Endicott
Reply to  John Endicott
November 12, 2019 5:09 am

If you honestly believe that there was even a SHRED of evidence of what you are claiming, yet, for some unimaginable reason, Republicans decided to skip a legitimate chance to (correctly) impeach Obama

Unlike Democrats, Republicans don’t seek to impeach their political rivals at the drop of a hat. Also, when the scandal broke, Democrats controlled the Senate, any such attempt at impeachment would be doomed to fail and would be a repeat of the Clinton impeachment (which didn’t turn out too well for Republicans)

Reply to  takebackthegreen
November 12, 2019 7:12 pm

John Endicott:

Even though you picked out the least important part of my comment, and didn’t understand what it says, your effort obviously made you proud. So I’ll try one last time, even simpler:

I was correcting your use of the phrase “Obama’s IRS,” which gives the false impression that any President directly controls any Federal Agency. Of course there was no “Nixon’s IRS” either. That’s just axiomatic context for the real issue.

The distinction between Nixon and Obama is clear and simple.

It wasn’t “Obama’s IRS.”
Obama didn’t try to MAKE it “his” IRS.
And the IRS didn’t perpetrate a massive crime. (See below for proof.)

It wasn’t “Nixon’s IRS.”
**** Nixon DID try to make it “his” IRS. He even taped himself discussing it. ****
And, again, the IRS didn’t perpetrate a massive crime. (Nixon had mistakenly appointed a commissioner who respected the rule of law, and ignored Nixon’s orders. He didn’t even unseal the enemies list Nixon gave him.)

Time for a quick logic test. The IRS did not commit the crimes you describe while Obama was President. Proof? IRS audits aren’t secret missions. If a taxpayer thinks they are being targeted unfairly, they complain. In public. At high volume. Continuously. And attention is paid. Because they are alleging a CRIME. Unless I was in a multi-year coma I forgot about, and the recording of history ground to a halt, none of that happened.

There is also this: Even IF the IRS waged a coordinated campaign of criminal abuse on American citizens–which it DID NOT–and conducted it in secret, and not a single one of its thousands of employees blabbed, even by accident, Obama STILL didn’t do anything wrong. UNLESS he ACTUALLY coerced, ordered, requested or even secretly just KNEW ABOUT and allowed such illegal activity. Or if he attempted any of the above. And if he did, it still doesn’t excuse Trump.

That is the difference between your imaginary Obama scenario, the real events of Watergate, and the tiny portion of Trump’s vast ocean of corruption that is currently under discussion.

Summary: You, John, have personally repeated a nonsensical lie that has been debunked, including right now, in a manner that relies on simple logic. The fact that you even WANT to believe something so provably false and completely irrelevant to current events is baffling. I can think of dozens of real things to criticize Obama about. Why is a stupid lie so important?

I know this won’t change anyone’s mind, or even be read, but it felt good to say it.

Barry Sheridan
November 8, 2019 1:00 am

Should Elizabeth Warren gain the Presidency and enact on these promises it will do more than cripple the US economy, it will disrupt the entire world and lead to a global depression. How ignorant individuals like her can aspire to political power is inexplicable. She has no idea what she is saying, or its consequences.

Ed Zuiderwijk
Reply to  Barry Sheridan
November 8, 2019 4:19 am

Her aspiration is part of the pathology.

Samuel C Cogar
Reply to  Barry Sheridan
November 8, 2019 5:41 am

She has no idea what she is saying, or its consequences.

Their “inherited survival instinct” …. pretty much forces the female of the species to make “emotional decisions” rather than ”logical decisions”, therefore a female POTUS can not be trusted to make “logical decisions” in the best interest of the total population.

The “girly-men” Judges on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals does America and the COTUS no favors whatsoever.

Reply to  Barry Sheridan
November 12, 2019 7:10 am

She would also give every American syphilis and force then to convert to Buddhism. And her IQ is in the single digits. And she smells like dirty socks.



Here’s my unsolicited suggestion for Mr. Watts, since there is (understandably) no obvious way to directly offer my two cents. After all, this website is successful and I’m just a random visitor. But… nothing ventured, nothing gained…

To Whom it May Concern:

The SCIENCE presented on WUWT is vitally important. It is impressive in both scope and detail. But the site’s potential is largely untapped. It is severely undermined by the political garbage that is allowed to fester here. Like it or not, Truth doesn’t just magically win. It has to be effectively communicated.

Alarmists (correctly) warn anyone who will listen that anyone who isn’t 100% sure about climate change is relentlessly attacked here in the comment threads as purely evil, communist, sexually deviant, socialist, freedom-hating, authoritarian idiots (often by people who insist on proudly rejecting fundamental facts of science such as evolution).

The Posts themselves occasionally undercut WUWT’s effectiveness: irrelevant political diatribes aren’t edited out of otherwise scientifically valid posts. Unpersuasive screeds by disreputable fringe-dwellers are sometimes linked to, despite the damage they inflict on credibility. So the average person stays far away. A chance to educate is lost. And that’s sad.

I know the workload of running this site is enormous. The added work of editing out politics and bad behavior in favor of a strict focus on science would be impossible. Hell, that may not even be the GOAL of WUWT.

But I wish it WERE the goal. To quote the great philosopher Benjamin Parker, “With great power comes great responsibility.” Think how amazing it would feel to know you played a significant role in speeding up the correction of a dangerous, mistaken, global fallacy?

George Lawson
November 8, 2019 4:09 am

I wonder whether Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez will tell us what the World will be like following “global extinction in 12 years time” which she has forecast?

V for Vendetta
November 8, 2019 6:10 am

Are there really people who would actually vote for Pocahontas? On the other hand, you probably have to be a proven lier and cheater to become head of state in a modern country.
She never paid back the stipend she received from Harvard under false pretenses, did she?

November 8, 2019 9:26 am

There is an old saying, you don’t miss the water until the well runs dry. Those who oppose oil have never lived without modern utilities like water and sewage and electricity and modern transportation. As one who has lived without such things as a child, I don’t recommend it.

What is the point of a short life to save a world that does not need saving. And what is the point of losing freedom in life to a few fabricating a crisis. From the time the US was founded after great sacrifice and struggle there have been those who have been attempting to undo it. That is the real danger.

Samuel C Cogar
Reply to  Olen
November 9, 2019 4:49 am

Those who oppose oil have never lived without modern utilities like water and sewage and electricity and modern transportation.

Olen, …….. Exactly right.

Those who oppose “modern necessities” have never lived without them ….. and the two (2) groups who are the worst offenders of said “opposition” are the public school/educational employees and most politicians.

The public school/educational employees don’t seem to realize they are destroying “the hands that feed them” ……. by not sufficiently educating the students to provide the “taxes” required to fund their employment and life style.

November 10, 2019 3:58 pm

“It has probably brought about the biggest transfer of wealth in history.”

Maybe the author should try to understand specific terms and what they mean. Maybe the author meant to say, “..the biggest creation of wealth in history..”

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights