I'm not saying I agree with him necessarily, but I do feel like he has some points. I think technical analysis is horsecrap, but this makes sense:
Price will need to double to keep miners' profit level. They're already pumping the price, so how much higher can they pump? Basically miners are going to take a hit. Also I agree that a global slowdown is imminent after the US election. This won't necessarily be good for bitcoin, unless there is high inflation. Given that the central banks have inflated for 8 years straight, inflation may not continue.
Your logic, like the article, seems to attempt to over generalize the behavior of miners, here, and also seems to get wrong their behaviors based on long and short term incentives. I think that we have to zoom out a bit, and try not to be so macro-predictive in our analysis.
There is no real actual evidence that miners are responsible for pumping the bitcoin price up, even though they are likely self-interested, and bitcoin naysayers like to spread around some of these kinds of simplified logic scenarios, such as miners are selling to themselves to pump up the price. Makes little sense in terms of explaining overall price performance and various networking effects of bitcoin that continue to expand.
Miners are acutely aware of the halving and likely are taking steps to deal with it. They are calculating whether or not they can take a 50% pay cut in 2 months. I don't believe there are any mitigating factors to that, other than the USD price pushing significantly higher. I can't imagine a miner who would want the price of bitcoin to go down? So 99.99% of miners want the price to stay high, and there is no regulation of the exchanges (not saying there should be). Therefore someone can buy their own coins (or a buddy's) OVER AND OVER at a progressively higher price. Why wouldn't at least SOMEONE be doing this?