Techno, if as politician you deny global warming is man made or happening, there are two significan pitfalls.
It becomes a scientific argument, rather then a political/economic one. She’s a politician
Secondly its very easy to be lablelled as climate change denier.
Thirdly, she shouldn’t dismiss concerns some people have that climate change is occurring, she will lose support as some people have been conned into believing this is occurring on both sides of the fence. She should argue them that there are better alternative strategies (nuclear, world agreements, research in the US, technology advancements), and focus on economic impact of just introducing it (jobs, costs, taxes).
I agree but with the proviso that one day Sarah devotes an entire op-ed to the concept of global warming and cites her own contrary scientists that make the concept at least dubious or at least up for discussion among rational human beings.