Author: hamilton1788

There are basically two ways to run against Trump: you can ignore him and try to sell the public on a vision for a better America; or you can focus your energy on prosecuting him for his innumerable sins. The two approaches are mutually exclusive.

You might think initially that the angry approach would be associated exclusively with realos, and the uplift with fundis, but you would be wrong. Beto, for example, is an uplifting realo, while Sanders and Warren are angry fundis.

Which approach will the Democrats choose in 2020? Historically, they have preferred youthful candidates with an uplifting message, but they’ve never run against anyone like Trump before. My best guess is that anger will play well with the blue base this time. We’ll see, probably as early as the first debate.

Bret Stephens predictably thinks that Trump’s decision to break out of the Iran nuclear deal has been successful. Is he right?

Not really. It is true, as he says, that the new American sanctions have made it more difficult for the Iranians to find the money to support their confederates elsewhere in the Middle East, and that the Iranians have chosen to date not to tear up the agreement. It is consequently fair to say that things could definitely be worse. He neglects to point out, however, that Trump’s decision has severely damaged our relationship with our European allies, who are actively taking the Iranian side in the dispute, that the Iranians could change their position on observing the agreement at any time, and that the new sanctions have not, and will not, result in regime change. All the sanctions are doing is making everyone’s lives more difficult, which was hardly the point.

Slavery made it impossible for small white farmers to compete with cotton plantation owners on cost. They were, for the most part, left to engage in subsistence farming. Since the Civil War (notwithstanding what you hear from some diehard Southerners) was about maintaining slavery, it would appear that there was no economic reason for these people to support the war. And yet, they did, and they died by the hundreds of thousands. Why?

There were a variety of reasons, but one of them undoubtedly was status anxiety; slavery might have cost them money, but it boosted their self-esteem, because it meant they would never be the lowest man on the totem pole, no matter how unsuccessful they might be. They were willing to go to extremes to protect that interest.

You should keep that in mind the next time you hear someone ask why white workers vote for Republicans who cut their benefits.

Here are the central tenets of Trump’s foreign policy:

1. The only things that matter are money and military power.
2. Values, international law, and international institutions are for chumps.
3. The quality of America’s relationship with any given foreign country is measured by the size of its trade surplus or deficit.
4. America has no permanent friends. “Allies” who run a large trade surplus with us are using “shared values” as a weapon to rip us off. They’re every bit as bad as our traditional foes. Use tariffs and sanctions to keep them in line.
5. History is made by great men, so the solution to most problems is personal negotiations.
6. Strongmen, particularly of the right-wing variety, are more reliable allies than genuine democrats, because they guarantee stability.
7. Nation-building is a hideously expensive fool’s errand.
8. If your military is going to protect another country, make sure you’re paid handsomely for it.

Like Trump (and unlike Obama), Bernie Sanders doesn’t believe in the Pax Americana. However, the only item on this list with which he would agree is #7. Sanders believes that America should cut its defense budget dramatically and rely exclusively on diplomacy, moral example, and, where absolutely necessary, economic sanctions to solve international problems. He identifies the right-wing illiberal democrats and strongmen so adored by Trump as part of an axis of autocrats that should be opposed by an international movement of social democrats. He would, therefore, increase the number of America’s enemies, without providing any additional means to fight them.

Trump’s anachronistic pseudo-realism has been a disaster for America. Sanders’ extreme idealism would just be a different kind of disaster.

The 45th President Trump

Wants the Fed to keep priming the pump.

He just loves sugar highs.

You don’t have to ask why.

He’s afraid that next year he’ll get dumped.

Pete Buttigieg seems to be the flavor of the month among pundits. I can’t say I know much about him, but the consensus is that he’s a bright, well-educated, sensible guy with limited relevant experience who operates in the same ideological space as Joe Biden. He also happens to be gay.

The question for the day is, why would I prefer him to Biden? If I were an employer and had to choose between the two, why would I pick the inexperienced candidate unless I couldn’t afford the experienced one?

The obvious PC answer is, because he’s gay. And that’s the problem. I wish Mayor Pete well. I’m never going to oppose him just because he’s gay. However, being gay is not a job qualification–at least not for the most important job in the world.

It’s an obvious point, but it’s worth stating: your perceptions of America and its role in the world are largely dictated by your experiences. Consider the following:

Boomers grew up with the threat of annihilation by Soviet nuclear weapons. We rejoiced when the wall came down and the Soviet Union imploded. We celebrated the victory in the Gulf War. Millennials either didn’t experience any of that or were too young to remember it. They just remember 9/11, the Iraq War, and terrorism–a litany of American failures.

Boomers saw massive smog problems in LA and a burning river in Cleveland. They applaud their environmental triumphs. Those mean nothing to Millennials, who only see the dangers of climate change and blame Boomers for screwing up their planet.

Boomers drove the Civil Rights Movement and the opposition to the Vietnam War. Gay rights and feminism didn’t exist when they were born. To Millennials, you might as well be talking about the Civil War; they take these social changes for granted. PC is the next frontier.

On the economy, Millennials see stagnant wages, huge amounts of student debt, and rising inequality. Boomers would concede these points, but would also note that it is a great time to be a consumer–a point often missed by the critics of globalization and automation.

Is it any wonder that Millennials see the glass half empty, and Boomers half full? Are you surprised that Millennials call for socialism, and Boomers fear it?

To a large extent, this battle will be fought out during the Democratic primaries, with the Boomers being predominantly realos and the Millennials, fundis. At this point, there is no telling who will win.

The Times (that is, the London version) has the funniest political cartoons I’ve ever seen. You don’t have to pay to look at them. It’s more than worth the effort.

Imagine that Biden’s candidacy dies in a blizzard of PC arrows, leaving him looking like St. Sebastian, or a left-wing Jeb Bush. We all know it could happen; Trump’s political advisers are counting on it. What happens next? Who inherits his voters?

Their first stop would undoubtedly be Beto O’Rourke; remember, the Democrats always want to nominate someone who reminds them of JFK in some way. Beto occupies a lot of the same realo ideological space as Biden, as well. The nomination would be Beto’s for the taking at that point if he can prove to the world that he isn’t an unqualified airhead. If not, where do Biden’s voters go?

Booker is realo enough to fit the bill; so, in all likelihood, is Harris. They will be watching warily, and hoping.

Hillary Clinton ran as the adult in the room–the uncharismatic workhorse who could get things done–in both the 2008 and the 2016 primaries. It worked in 2016, mostly because the majority of primary voters viewed Bernie Sanders as being out of the mainstream of the Democratic Party. It failed in 2008, because there were no significant substantive differences between Clinton and Obama, and the latter was a far more attractive personality.

If Biden runs, he will be assuming the Clinton political persona in 2020. There are, however, three important differences. First, notwithstanding the recent media frenzy, he has far less baggage than Clinton. Second, he knows he’s running against Donald Trump, and can use that to his advantage. Third, and this works against him, times have changed, and left-wing millennials bent on socialism, the GND, and PC nirvana are going to be out for his blood.

Is 2008 or 2016 the more relevant precedent? I honestly don’t know; it depends on whether the average Democratic primary voter is a young activist or someone more like me. We’ll see.

So Trump says he’ll shut down the border.

He vows he’ll maintain law and order.

If you like foreign food

It’s bad news for you, dude.

It might drive you to become a hoarder.

The negative ads on Bernie Sanders practically write themselves, but Hillary Clinton didn’t run any in 2016, probably because she was sure she would win in the end. 2020 will be a different animal, as Bernie will start the race as a favorite. Both Biden and Warren will have plenty of incentive to go negative; Bernie is a direct threat to both of them. Will they do it?

Not immediately. Warren’s campaign will wither and die, leaving Bernie as the king of the class/fundi quadrant. If Bernie and Biden emerge as the last two standing, Biden will probably decide to take the risk of alienating the left and will start running ads starring the Castros and Daniel Ortega.

Elizabeth Warren is much smarter than Bernie Sanders. She has more than one speech. She didn’t lose in 2016. She has far less baggage. Her ideas on policy are much admired by left-leaning pundits. She’s even a few years younger. But for all that, she’s way behind him in the polls. Why?

There are three possible reasons:

1. Bernie has better name recognition by virtue of his 2016 campaign;
2. The voters prefer his gruff authenticity to her wonky schoolteacher persona; or
3. Bernie is a man.

These aren’t mutually exclusive, and the correct answer is probably a combination of all three. We may collectively lament the last two, but in politics, you have to play the hand you’re dealt. Complaining about an imperfect world doesn’t do any good.

Tell the EU it was just an April Fool’s joke.

Joe Biden’s accuser is totally credible. She’s also completely irrelevant, because the conduct in question had no sexual content and would be unobjectionable to a large majority of people in this country. #WhoCares?

Complaining about innocent behavior only invites a backlash, and votes for Donald Trump. The next thing you know, anyone who ever told an ethnic joke will be disqualified from public office. That’s practically everyone in my generation.