I love fiddling around with AI. I spent some time arguing Grok over the high price of diesel. Grok finally gave the right answer (because I asked the right series of questions).
First, I'm going present the viewpoints of Trump haters and then Trump supporters. Here goes:
From the perspective of a dedicated Trump critic who relies primarily on MSNBC, CNN, and ABC for news:
"This energy crisis—skyrocketing diesel prices, global supply shocks, and the scramble over export bans—erupted after February 2026 because of Donald Trump’s reckless foreign policy and deliberate sabotage of America’s energy stability."
"In this framing, Trump’s return to office immediately revived the most dangerous instincts of his first term. Instead of diplomacy, he pursued maximalist confrontation with Iran, amplified by inflammatory rhetoric, maximum-pressure sanctions, and a military posture that critics on these networks repeatedly described as “reckless brinkmanship.” By late February 2026 the inevitable happened: open conflict with Iran, severe disruption of the Strait of Hormuz (the critical artery for a huge share of global oil and refined-product flows), and cascading shortages. MSNBC, CNN, and ABC coverage framed the war itself as the direct, predictable result of Trump’s rejection of the Obama-era nuclear deal framework and his preference for confrontation over containment.
Once the shooting started, the same outlets argued, Trump’s domestic energy agenda made the damage far worse. He had already rolled back climate and efficiency measures, cheered fossil-fuel expansion without building resilience, and treated refined-product exports as a pure free-market good rather than a strategic vulnerability. When Russian diesel exports later collapsed under wartime pressure, the United States—still shipping large volumes of its own diesel overseas—found itself with tight domestic supplies and record pump prices. Critics on these networks portrayed the administration’s hesitation to impose export limits as proof that Trump prioritized oil-industry profits and “energy dominance” talking points over ordinary Americans paying $6-plus for diesel.
In short, the post-February 2026 crisis is presented as the bill coming due for Trump’s foreign-policy adventurism, his rejection of multilateral energy diplomacy, and an ideology that treats global markets as self-correcting even when war closes the world’s most important oil chokepoint. The networks’ narrative is consistent: this was not an unpredictable act of God or pure market forces—it was the foreseeable outcome of Trump’s choices."
Now for something different.
From the perspective of a strong Trump supporter who primarily follows X, Fox News, and official government monitoring agencies (EIA, DOE briefings, etc.):
"This diesel price surge and related energy squeeze after February 2026 happened because of Iranian aggression and the unfinished business left by the previous administration—not because of anything Trump did wrong."
"On X and Fox, the narrative is straightforward: Iran and its proxies initiated the conflict around late February 2026 by escalating attacks and threatening the Strait of Hormuz, the world’s most critical oil chokepoint. Trump’s team responded with decisive force to defend American interests and global shipping lanes after years of what supporters call Obama-Biden-era weakness, sanctions relief, and failed diplomacy that emboldened Tehran. Government monitoring data (EIA weekly reports, DOE statements) are cited to show that U.S. crude and refined-product production remained robust under Trump’s “energy dominance” policies; the problem was the sudden, external cutoff of Middle Eastern flows plus Russia’s later diesel export restrictions after its own refinery problems.
Fox and X posts emphasize that Democrats and legacy media tried to pin the higher prices on Trump, but official numbers tell a different story: U.S. refineries were already running near capacity, exports of diesel were a market response to global shortages (not greed), and any temporary price spike reflected war-driven tightness rather than domestic policy failure. Supporters point to Trump officials (including Interior Secretary Burgum) publicly rejecting knee-jerk export bans as counterproductive, arguing that restricting American sales would only invite retaliation, reduce refining runs, and ultimately raise prices further—exactly what government analysts and energy data had warned against.
In this view, the post-February 2026 situation is the bill coming due for years of under-investment in American energy security, over-reliance on unstable regions, and prior administrations’ reluctance to confront Iran. Trump is portrayed as the one finally restoring strength, maximizing U.S. output, and refusing to let foreign adversaries or political opponents dictate American fuel policy."
And now for the simple truth:
"For the period after May 2026 (when retail diesel climbed further, reaching weekly averages around $5.97 in early September and over $6.28–$6.50 later in the month), detailed official monthly component percentages were not yet published. Analyses using similar decompositions (e.g., Brent or WTI crude cost per gallon + Gulf Coast/New York Harbor wholesale diesel crack spread/margin + residual for taxes/distribution/retail) indicate:Crude oil’s contribution to the level of the retail price remained in a comparable range (roughly 35–45% depending on the exact benchmark and week).
Refining margins widened sharply (diesel crack spreads hit records above $100/barrel or ~$2+/gallon in periods), so refining accounted for a larger share of the rise since February. One detailed breakdown for the week of September 7, 2026 (retail ~$5.97, up ~$2.25 from the February average of ~$3.72) attributed about $0.68 of the increase to crude and ~$1.71 to the refining margin. "
Soooooo it is the refiners that are shafting us.
