Author: hamilton1788

It seems silly to say that Trump is remaking his cabinet in his own image; after all, he appointed the original one.  That said, it is obvious that he didn’t really expect to win the election, and had no plan for what would happen next, so his original cast of advisers to some extent reflected the recommendations of others. Now, after a year in office, he thinks he knows how to do the job, and he wants to get rid of his minders.

The new cast of characters will have the following characteristics:  good on TV; fun to be around; and completely loyal.  Intelligence and competence will be unnecessary; after all, we have his infinite wisdom to rely on.

The Senate obviously has a role to play in this.  Will GOP senators insist that Trump appoint qualified people?  Don’t bet on it.

After the Salisbury attack, Sanders expressed the administration’s support for the UK, but pointedly refused to name the Russians as the culprits even after Theresa May had done so in public.  What did that mean?

Sanders, like other members of the administration, has learned that Trump can change positions on a dime.  She also knows that Trump, for reasons best known to him, is always reluctant to blame the Russians for anything.  As a result, she didn’t want to embarrass herself by saying something completely obvious that Trump might contradict ten minutes later.  She left his options open.

That’s probably what we will see from this point forward.  No one is going to say anything unequivocal about anything, because they know if you wait long enough, Trump will change his mind.  And so, the rest of us will have to watch and wonder, which undoubtedly is just the way the man on golf cart wants it, because it makes him the center of attention.

The factions are deeply split on the individualism/communitarianism issue:

CLs:  There is no such thing as society.

PBPs:  I built this!

CDs:  Society is a pact of the dead, the living, and the unborn.

Reactionaries:  The whole point of government is to impose traditional values by force.

This generally results in the communitarians getting their way on social issues, and the CLs and PBPs on economic issues.  With the Democrats, it goes the other way.

Donald Trump claims to love working men, and a lot of them seem to love him back.  His swagger and his protectionism are big selling points with Reactionary white workers.  On the other hand, he and his party have done their best since time immemorial to dismantle unions, and union membership is a big part of the culture in parts of the Rust Belt that propelled him to the presidency.

Trump’s ostentatious embrace of plutocrats, and their union-busting agenda, is a big point of vulnerability in 2020.  It would be political malpractice not to take advantage of it.

Oh, and by the way, it shouldn’t have escaped your attention that the only national figure from whom Conor Lamb requested assistance was Joe Biden.

On the one hand, Gina Haspel is unquestionably tough, smart, and experienced. Her paper credentials to run the CIA are unassailable.  On the other hand, it is undisputed that she personally participated in egregious acts of torture during the Bush years.  That’s a big problem.

When she is asked about this during her confirmation hearings, how will she respond?  I don’t see any good answers:

1.  If she defends the program, she’s automatically disqualified;
2.  If she says she was following orders, why would we believe she wouldn’t do it again, since her boss openly supports torture?
3.  If she gives herself a pass by saying the times were exceptionally difficult, how do we know we won’t see more difficult times during her tenure as CIA head?
4.  If she says she, and the CIA, have learned from the experience and won’t do it again, why should we believe that, and how will Trump react?

Appointing a torturer sends exactly the wrong message to the rest of the world. There has to be someone equally qualified who doesn’t have that stain on his resume.

She should not be confirmed.

Only Trump would hire an economist who has been wrong about everything over the last decade, and who disagrees with him on tariffs, because he’s good on TV.

By virtually any standard, Rex Tillerson was a terrible Secretary of State.  That said, he isn’t stupid or crazy, and he probably exercised some small degree of restraint on a president who needs all the restraint he can get.  Now, that will be gone, and Trump will have yet another hawkish enabler at his side when he makes decisions on war and peace.

I satirically promoted Ivanka for Secretary of State in 2016 on the ground that she could understand and spin her father better than anyone alive.  That wouldn’t look too bad right now, would it?

 

 

You could (and I did) write off Alabama as a result driven by a uniquely bad candidate.  In Pennsylvania, however, the GOP threw everything it had, including steel tariffs, to support a decent (if uninspiring) candidate, and seems to have lost, anyway.

It would appear that, barring a successful military adventure or culture war crisis, we are looking at a wave election, particularly when you consider that the economy could only be worse in November than it is today. Individual GOP candidates will consequently be faced with a choice:  run towards or away from Trump.  Some will choose one, some the other, but I think most will reach the conclusion that Trump’s shadow is inescapable, and double down on him.

For their part, the Democrats seem to have found success by refusing to sweat the ideological details and talking up labor issues.  I will have more to say on that point tomorrow.

On the ex-diplomat they call Rex.

He’s glad to be gone, one suspects.

Trump fired him today

In the usual way.

Now a CIA guy is up next.

So you’re negotiating with the star of “The Art of the Deal!”  Lucky you!  Here’s what to expect:

1.  He’ll be woefully unprepared.  Your superior knowledge of the details will help.  Try to keep him away from his staff.

2.  He’s a drama king.  There will be lots of banging the table and threats to walk out.  Take them in stride.

3.  He just wants “wins.”  He’s perfectly capable of accepting your position if he can spin it as a “win.”

4.  He doesn’t keep his promises.  You can’t take anything he says seriously until he signs on the bottom line, and even then, he may well renege.  Just ask his contractors.

5.  He loves to take hostages.  Don’t give in to blackmail.

6.  He’s so vain.  Sucking up to him works wonders.  Make it clear that you think he’s the man; he’ll give you anything you want in return.

In short, there are lots of opportunities to play him as long as you know what you’re doing.

You’re the head of the RNC, and the prospects for the 2018 election aren’t looking too good.  The public isn’t giving you much credit for the roaring economy, and some of your swing voters (women in particular) are appalled by Trump’s antics.  What do you do?

You don’t need to convert anyone to win the midterms; you just need to fire up your base.  The best way to do that is to attack the Democrats, not to bang on about the GOP’s meager accomplishments.  Here’s how to do it:

1.  Double down on the culture wars.  The president helps you with that with his tweets on a daily basis.

2.  The Democrats are coming for your tax cut.  The voters may not be very impressed with their tax cut, but that doesn’t mean they want to give it back.

3.  The Democrats are coming for your guns.  No elaboration necessary.

4.  Control of the Supreme Court is at stake.  If Kennedy retires and the Senate turns blue, what will you do?

 

The factions don’t even agree on what makes America exceptional!

CLs:   American exceptionalism is about freedom from overreaching government.  God bless liberty and limited federal power!

Reactionaries:  God, guns, and guts made America great.  It’s all about our culture.

CDs:  God blessed America with lots of resources, an ideal geographical position, and a great legal/political system.  We are obligated to share the last with the world.

PBPs:  Economic man knows no country.

And so, the PBPs are the “globalists” in this group.  They have issues with the others–particularly the Reactionaries.

Here’s where the factions stand on military actions abroad:

CLs:  No nation-building, period.  We fight only when we’re attacked, and the military should be cut along with everything else.

PBPs:  War is bad for business.

CDs:  America is obligated to use force for humanitarian purposes.  That includes the spreading of democracy around the world.

Reactionaries:  We generally support the exercise of American power, and we love the military.  However, we’re not too sure about the nation-building thing; we would rather use the money at home to make American great again.

The Reactionaries are the wild card here.  They supported the Iraq War initially, but then turned against it.  They can go either way–just like Trump, who threw more troops into Afghanistan over his previous objections about wasting money and nation-building.

 

An unnamed Wall Street figure was quoted in an article in Politico a few days ago as saying something similar to “Trump may be a bit of a moron, but he’s our moron.” That pretty well sums up the relationship between the two.

Trump filled his cabinet with Wall Street types because he thinks rich people are winners and because he loves the idea of plutocrats sucking up to him.  The bottom line, however, is that Trump made a lot of his money just being a celebrity, and he never played by the same rules that Wall Street people do.  Wall Street is really a fairly gray, conservative, rules-bound place;  Trump never ran his business that way, and nothing has changed in his new job.

The most prominent Wall Streeter in his administration is now on his way out. Wall Street hates tariffs and the chaos that is Trump’s hallmark.  Where is this relationship going?  Barring a disaster, the two will probably continue to tolerate each other with a mixture of public adulation and private contempt.

As I’ve noted before, Trump isn’t Hitler; for one thing, he’s way too lazy.  But how does the Man on Golf Cart stack up against the Great Dictator?  Here’s my analysis:

                                    Trump           vs.            Hitler

Famous Book       “The Art of the Deal”     “Mein Kamp”

Military Service     Bone Spurs                     Gassed

Loved Dogs             No                                     Yes

Enemies                   Mexicans; Muslims       Jews

Russian Foil             Putin                               Stalin

Took Power             Legally                            Legally

National Revival     None Needed                Lost War

And the winner is . . . Trump.  Hitler gets points for loving dogs and being a veteran, but he lost the war, killed millions of people, and committed suicide. Trump hasn’t done any of those things yet.