It's Funny How Trump Doesn't Bother Articulating Goals Anymore

Literally no-one knows what we're doing

Photo by Nathan Howard via Getty.

Noah Smith and Max Boot had columns yesterday that were accidental companion pieces, sort of Barbenheimer for middle-aged nerds. Smith pointed out that no one knows what Trump’s goals are with tariffs, and Boot noted that the same thing is true of whatever we’re doing in Iran. Both articles struck me as correct, but I figured I should check in with Fox News — maybe there’s lively discussion on these topics in right-leaning circles and I missed it because I get my news from low-T Substack keyboard jockeys and lifestyle apps that dabble in news (e.g. The New York Times). But here was the headline on FoxNews.com:

Crack reporting, Fox News! This article contains that bombshell that Meghan Markle and Rosie O’Donnell are mentioned in the Epstein files!!! In what context? Well, they were “mentioned in press articles sent in seemingly regular news updates.” So, if I understand this right: A staffer in 2009 sent Epstein daily news updates, one of those updates said “Hangover Star Ed Helms Cracks Wise On The Rosie Show”, and 17 years later, Fox News is using that to imply that Rosie O’Donnell is a sex criminal. Absolutely first rate, Fox — a gleaming, immaculate pearl of hack reporting.

The big MAGA social media accounts today are about the Epstein files, trans stuff, and dunking on Canada (as if taking the gold in a sport that’s the cornerstone of Canadian identity but less popular in the US than YouTube dog grooming videos isn’t humiliation enough). The only real discussion of Iran I found was from anti-Trump conservative Bret Stephens, whose first sentence notes that Trump is “barely bothering to spell out his reasons.” Stephens describes some goals he might pursue if he were president, though — as of press time — he is not. I’d summarize Stephens’ argument as “It might work out”, and he’s right — whatever “it” is might! Or, ya know…the opposite. In a sane society, we’d be debating what “it” could be and trying to assess the likely consequences of various its, but instead we’re engaged in the largest military buildup in the region since the Iraq War and not even talking about why.

If there was ever any logic behind Trump’s tariffs, it’s disappeared. Anyone defending Trump’s policies is begging for humiliation, because he’s likely to do a 180 at the exact moment that you’re on TV calling the tariffs “absolutely essential for national security”. You can only go back and forth between “this policy is crucial” and “it’s just a negotiating ploy” so many times before you say “how ‘bout we talk about hockey instead?” And results aren’t backing the theory that tariffs will bring back manufacturing:

Source: Joey Politano.

Tonight’s State of the Union address is unlikely to add any clarity. Trump’s Iran message will surely be “Iran bad, me strong”, and his tariff message will be “Neil Gorsuch is a dickless scumbag”. Trump never gets more specific than he has to, and he never has to get specific at all because his base will back him no matter what. The only semi-coherent noises Trump is making on Iran are that it has something to do with their nuclear program, but he assured us in July that he had “obliterated” that program. And right-wing media would rather imply that Meghan Markle might be a pederast than point out the incongruence.

The absence of a discussion illustrates how aware everyone is that we’re subject to the whims of one weird old man. Trump’s base no longer proactively tries to justify his policies — they just wait for him to do stuff and will rationalize whatever he does after the fact. Trump’s critics know that we can’t stop him and strategize about winning the next election instead of debating a non-existent policy. Everyone knows that Trump will just do whatever his Raisinette of a brain tells him to do, and we just have to deal with it. Your opinion and my opinion don’t get talked about much because there’s only one opinion that matters.

And Trump clearly doesn’t have a theory of what he’s doing with tariffs or Iran. He’s driven by a mix of avarice, personal grudges, and half-remembered bits of a Nightline segment he saw in 1983. He won’t describe what his goals are and why because he doesn’t know — he’s just doin’ stuff. The fact that that stuff in no way resembles the product of a serious national debate goes to show how idiosyncratic our policies have become. There’s only one character in this drama — everyone else is the audience. And all we can do in the short run is follow Bret Stephens’ lead and cross our fingers and hope that things will somehow work out.

---