If you’re ever tempted to think of the Founding Fathers as plaster saints rather than practical politicians living in the moment, just contemplate the meaning of the 3/5 Compromise. Leaving aside the inhumanity of it for a moment, what possible sense can you make out of calling a slave 3/5 of a person? You can see an argument for 1/2, but 3/5?
It reminds me of the insurance commercial in which the narrator says, “Whaddya supposed to do–drive three quarters of a car?”
So on the one hand, the great man expresses unconventional neo-mercantilist views, offends our allies, and hints at a diplomatic revolution, while on the other, his agents run around the world assuring everyone in sight that he doesn’t really mean any of those things. What are we to make of this state of affairs?
Don’t take much of what you hear either seriously or literally. Trump is deliberately keeping his intentions vague in order to give himself more freedom of action. Of course, in doing this, he will wind up alienating everyone except Putin and Netanyahu, but that’s what he calls “realism.”
Partisan conflict had reached a new high. One party, whose supporters were predominantly medium-sized landowners, espoused decentralized government, tax and spending cuts, traditional values, and reduced commitments abroad. The other party, led by the national elites, believed in a robust central government and a strong international presence.
Is this:
You decide.
The new NSC guy McMaster.
Trump couldn’t have picked him much faster.
His background’s OK.
Don’t have much bad to say.
Just hope he’s not McMaster Blaster.
So Trump’s latest victim’s the Swedes.
An unlikely target, indeed.
His incorrect views
Come, of course, from Fox News.
Not from folks of whom he should take heed.
In the past, Trump has pretended that his family came from Sweden, not Germany. Now he won’t even be welcome in his faux country of origin.
State of the Union 2017
You can say that it’s all over.
You can say it’s just begun.
You can fight to prove you’re right.
You can make yourself comfortably numb.
You can march down to the courthouse.
Watch comedians on TV.
But none of this is really going
To set our nation free.
It’s not about the banners.
It’s not about red and blue.
We need to find the ties that bind
That make one out of two.
There’s a place for Alabama.
There’s a place for NYC.
There’s room for all in this great land
From sea to shining sea.
Welcome to my second annual Founding Fathers week!
Arguably the most significant deal in American history was made in 1790, when Hamilton acquiesced to moving the capital to what became Washington, D.C. in exchange for the assumption of state Revolutionary War debt. Since our fearless leader has taught us that there is a winner and a loser in every agreement, who won this one in the long run?
Hamilton, by a mile. The assumption of state war debt tied the states together and was the first big step in the foundation of our financial system. Moving the capital south, on the other hand, did not really enhance the political power of the southern states, and did not create a southern economic and cultural alternative to New York or Philadelphia.
For me, of course, the first thirty days of Trump have been exactly what I predicted and feared: a toxic stew of blustering, bigotry, incompetence, corruption, and “alternative facts.” I didn’t vote for him, however, so he doesn’t have to care about my opinions. The question for today is, how is he playing to his supporters?
It depends on your reasons for voting for him. If you’re part of the base, you voted for sturm und drang, and you’re getting exactly what you wanted. He promised to shake things up, and he has; if actual meaningful change has been slow, it is only because the corrupt establishment is so entrenched, and so vile. If you voted for him hesitantly out of party loyalty or economic self-interest, on the other hand, you’re worried about what you see, but you’re probably still hopeful that the adults will be called in to tame him and make him a model Republican. After all, even though the optics aren’t good, he hasn’t started a war or caused a market collapse or taken away your health insurance yet.
And so, for a permanent shift in opinion, we will have to wait on events. I think I might have been wrong about one thing, however; he can’t really muzzle the MSM, because he needs them as a foil. His battles with the media connect him with his base in a way that can’t be reproduced in any other fashion.
The problem, of course, is that he isn’t just the leader of his base, but that doesn’t seem to have occurred to him.
Nothing.
The dogs at Westminster are good-looking, intelligent, and loyal. Can you say that about any of the GOP candidates?
Besides, at Westminster, the establishment always wins. Maybe Jeb Bush should find a new line of work.
In the early days of this blog, I speculated as to the meaning of Trump’s hat and, specifically, as to when, in his opinion, America had last been great. Today, I ask a broader and more complex question: what makes America great?
There are multiple answers, and they reveal a great deal about the fissures in American politics today.
In Trump’s case, being great is clearly tied to being a winner. He sees the world in zero-sum terms, like a never-ending athletic event. And so, for him, what makes America great is: (a) being rich; (b) having the most powerful military on the planet; and (c) having really great athletes. Wait until you hear from him around the Olympics. He will act as if those American gold medals belong to him.
In the case of a typical red person, being great is tied to American culture. In many cases, there will be a strong religious element to this. Red person greatness is also typically connected with ideas of limited government and personal self-sufficiency.
For a typical blue person, greatness is tied to our open, dynamic, cosmopolitan society. We put up as few barriers as possible to excellence in every field. The trade-off, relative to European countries, is more inequality.
For a red person, American greatness, therefore, is a profoundly conservative concept vulnerable to attack from outsiders, while for a blue person, it is “liberal” within the nineteenth century meaning of the word. Red people value solidarity; blue people prefer progress. How can the two ideas be reconciled? Primarily by creating a welfare state that shares the benefits of progress with everyone and thus promotes national solidarity. A little more overt respect for red culture wouldn’t hurt, either.
CROOKED MEDIA DON’T GIVE ME CREDIT FOR MY SUCCESSES! UNEMPLOYMENT RATE BELOW 5% DUE TO ME! AND WITH MY NEW LABOR SECRETARY, EVERYONE WILL BE ABLE TO FIND A MINIMUM WAGE JOB!
There can only be one possible replacement for Spicer: John Barron.
In Christie’s fantasy world, the amateurs around Trump will quickly display their incompetence and be replaced by adults like him. Sanity will then prevail, and the GOP will live happily ever after.
Not so fast, Bridgegate-breath. I know you’re desperate to get away from New Jersey and your pathetic approval rating, but things in Washington are not going to be that simple.
Trump has no idea how to run a government, but he craves popularity, and he constantly needs to show that he is in charge. As a result, it is extremely likely that he will deal with his Cabinet and closest advisers the way George Steinbrenner handled his managers and general managers: by taking credit for their successes, and quickly firing them for any perceived failures. Instability is going to be the hallmark of this administration. And so, while Christie may well get his chance, there isn’t going to be a happy ending to this story.
Several months before the election, I posted a satirical faux future news story about a deal in which Trump and Putin agreed to carve Europe into spheres of influence. Now that the election is over, something at least vaguely similar to my post is likely to become reality, so it is time to analyze its pros and cons.
For Putin, the benefits of a deal are obvious: the US drops its sanctions; recognizes the annexation of Crimea; and gives him a free hand in Ukraine. His ultimate objective, turning Ukraine into a Russian vassal state, becomes feasible again. The question for the day is, what does he have to offer in exchange for these clear and tangible benefits?
Here are the possibilities:
1. Assistance against terrorists: There are several problems with this. First of all, the war against IS is already being won; the caliphate is likely to expire in the next year or so without Russian help. Second, Putin can’t help with domestic terrorists even if he wanted to do so. Third, the US and Russian armies were designed to fight each other, not to cooperate, so getting them to share intelligence and otherwise work together would be very difficult. Finally, the Russian style of fighting terror–essentially, collective punishment on a massive scale–won’t go over well with the American public, even if Trump turns out to be an enthusiast, which seems likely.
2. Assistance with Iran: The Russians didn’t want an Islamic neighbor with a bomb on their border, so getting them to cooperate in the negotiations that culminated in the Iran nuclear deal was not that difficult. On the other hand, Russia (reasonably) sees Iran, not as a terrorist state run by crazy ayatollahs, but as a responsible business partner, so the likelihood of persuading them to apply pressure is pretty low. The most important question here is, with or without a deal, would Putin extend the Russian nuclear umbrella over Iran to deter an American attack? I doubt it.
3. Assistance with China: If we aren’t going to use a rules-based system to try to keep the Chinese in line, the only real alternative is brute force. Russia could help by attracting Chinese military attention away from the South China Sea. But would the Russians really agree to do that? The risks would probably outweigh the rewards.
In short, in the real world, the Russians don’t have much to offer us, and they probably won’t deliver on anything they do promise.
The Trump nominee known as Andy.
For the pro-business crowd, he’d be handy.
He’s withdrawn his name.
He and Trump share the blame.
For me, his departure’s just dandy.