I said this on Facebook last night, so some of our readers might have already seen it. But given the continued, persistent loyalty the Democrats have to the global warming issue and the end-all, be-all of overbearing economic policy it represents to them, it’s worth sharing onto the internet at large.
Namely, this: I really hope the GOP nominee, whoever it is, makes global warming an issue in the campaign next year. And I hope that nominee is willing to show some stones on the issue. And furthermore, I hope the GOP nominee actively, aggressively picks a fight on the issue.
Poll after poll shows the American people don’t give a fig about global warming, and yet it’s like religious dogma to Democrats.
Draw them out and let them start in with their demonization, and call you a “denier” and so on. And then say something like this:
“You people want to turn our economy upside down and deny millions of Americans freedom and money in pursuit of this global warming business. In order to be able to do that, you should be able to show four things, and frankly you’ve had 25 years to do it and you’ve failed.
“First, you need to show that the planet is actually warming. The most reliable data on global temperature is the satellite data, and it shows the planet isn’t any warmer over the last 17 years. None of your computer models predicted that.
“Second, you need to show that global warming is anthropogenic. You can’t show that, because there is no particular connection between carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere and temperature. CO2 is actually a trace gas in the atmosphere, and it’s exceedingly difficult to show that variations in the levels of a trace gas govern global temperature and not the amount of solar activity.
“Third, you need to show that global warming is a bad thing. You haven’t done that because you can’t show higher concentrations of severe weather, and you also can’t explain why, when the planet was warmer centuries ago and they were growing grapes for wine in England and Greenland was green, us getting to the temperatures they had then would be a disaster when it wasn’t then.
“And fourth, you need to show that our turning our economy upside down would make a difference in global temperature, which you can’t do because regardless of what we do with emissions China and India aren’t changing their energy policy.”
You come out with that and you win the debate. Why none of the GOP candidates will forthrightly put that out there and demand the Democrats answer it point by point is beyond me.
The GOP nominee ought to flatly call the Democrats’ position on global warming nuts, and say that its consequences are horrible. The nominee needs to say that global warming is a microcosm of virtually all Democrat policy – creation of a false crisis through harmonized dishonest messaging and then present failed socialist policy as the only possible solution to the false crisis. And when nothing improves, the prescription is always more failed socialist policy.
The reaction to such a position will be vituperation and bile, but vituperation and bile don’t sell in political campaigns. And when you respond to vituperation and bile with calm, dry ridicule, the voters will find you far more interesting.
This is how you win. You certainly don’t win by allowing yourself to be pressured into accepting the other side’s narrative.
Advertisement
Advertisement
