Trump isn't playing eight-dimensional chess but he knows exactly what he's doing and got exactly what he wanted, an easy victory that he his cronies can crow about in the news cycle. Before the week is out you will see multiple articles in media outlets such as the Free Press praising Trump for his "bold and aggressive" leadership on tariffs. That he was right all along. That he has once again bent the world to his will, gotten results and that this is why America reelected him and loves him. There will be so much fawning and ass kissing that it will make you sick. But that's exactly why he did this.
Is it better for those of us who oppose his policies to loudly point out that this “victory” is basically a pile of magic beans and that he “got results” the way a toddler yelling at Blues’ Clues on the TV gets results, or should we be quiet and let him think he’s a big tough guy who really did a good job?
I wish I knew the answer to this. I hate to be pessimistic, but as of right now, I don't see a light at the end of the tunnel. Being quiet, playing the long game, and hoping this all somehow blows up in Trump's face could work, but that runs the risk of Trump and his libertarian cronies becoming even further entrenched as the small "victories" pile up. And being loud and brash and calling his supporters names didn't work the first time.
This is right. Everything Trump does becomes easy to understand once you grasp rule number one: the only thing that matters to Trump is making Trump feel good about himself. Trump supporters delusionally believe he cares about the country, and Trump detractors delusionally think he cares about conservative policies or even amassing power. He just wants an ego blowjob, that’s it.
Yes that is why he got shot in the face, and continued to run, because getting shot feels good. Nothing like being the #1 target of the most notorious criminal syndicate in history, the CIA. This is why trump is actually fulfilling his promises, they are already trying to kill him, he has no reason to hold back anymore.
He did this for the prosperity of our nation, because every other country on the planet was taking advantage of us, he is using the tariffs to show he's serious, he's not just saying it in the press. He has to do this because it's completely different from how the Dems operate in power. They would say one thing and do the exact opposite behind closed doors. The Dems are mad and bewildered because trump is doing what he said he would do, something the Dems have never, ever seen.
But I think part of his goal, aside from ass licking, was to get Canada and Mexico to step up and help monitor the borders. Borders. And help stop the fentanyl flow. He accomplished his goal. So I'm fine if people lick his ass. 10,000 troops from both Canada and Mexico will now be helping us monitor borders and secure them.
Well 10,000 troops from Mexico and Canada, if they actually get sent, is something new. And since the Mexican government, at least local levels is involved in the fentanyl trade, can certainly at least stem the flow. So that's new. And if they don't pony up with the troops, Trump will probably threaten tariffs again. I think it was incredibly effective.
I disagree strongly that it was “incredibly effective.” Canada just announced they were doing what they already planned to do in December. And the key phrase in your comment is “if they actually get sent.” Wouldn’t a real negotiator wait to see the condition be met (at least partly) before backing down and declaring “victory”? All the damage Trump did to our economy and reputation in the meantime was worse than whatever paltry concessions he extracted from our two literal closest allies by clownishly bullying them. Trump is an idiot who has learned nothing from history: trade wars are invariably bad for the nations who threaten them.
There are other ways of achieving this without threats. We could have renegotiated a trade deal with Canada, offered to help bolster border security from our end or help Mexico with its fight against cartels. In other words, whatever happened to asking nicely?
I totally agree with diplomacy and asking nicely. First. We've been trying to do this for a long time. Biden, kindly asked Mexico to please help rein in the border. It did not happen. But now? Mexico is building a legit area for deported undocumented immigrants to stay.
True, but Trump has figured out that he doesn't have to be good at diplomacy. Trump isn't playing eight-dimensional chess, he's playing the political equivalent of Money Ball. Diplomacy, tact, and sound policy that doesn't get rejected by courts are for policy wonks and overeducated Democrats. All that matters are "wins". You get "wins" by getting your way. You get your way by getting people to do what you want. And you get people to do what you want by any means necessary.
The problem, of course, is that the things Trump wants are either stupid, ineffective, bad for America’s economy (and our reputation, which is extremely valuable too), or self-servingly corrupt.
A VHS copy of the best of Mr Bean is worth its weight in gold, which still isn’t that much.
Did Mexico actually comply with the Biden agreement? Curious how much of these, including the Trump agreements, are just posturing with no actual follow through.
—Trump is interpreting [the 1977 law] that to mean that he can do whatever he wants as long as he mumbles “something something fentanyl” while he does it.
Sort of like “The Electoral Count Act means I can order Mike Pence to throw the 2020 election” or “I can declassify documents with my mind.”
(Next up: he uses the Insurrection Act of 1807 to send the 82nd Airborne to Chicago after a city alderman calls him “a bigger idiot than Aaron Rodgers on peyote.”)
For 10 points: is the Canadian government saying they will do something the same as getting them to actually do what they said?
To simplify, is a politician's promise to do something the same as them actually doing what they said they will do? Trump critics are typically able to answer this question, if one of their eyeballs isn't firmly lodged in their own rectum.
The suggestion in the last paragraph to give Congress the authority to levy tariffs, not the president, has one big problem: Congress nowadays is paralyzed by obstructionism. You made a similar point in one of your recent podcasts, explaining why we don't do treaties with foreign countries anymore. It is simply too difficult to get two-thirds of senators to agree on anything, so it is much easier to have the president use executive authority, even though that means the next president can just rip it up and throw it away.
Maybe passively allowing Presidents to become Emperors was a bad idea? You are sounding more like Jack Kemp every day. I, for one, was against the imperial Presidency before it was cool. If you think this tariff shit is stupid and counterproductive but you think DACA was a noble and just act that we should continue to enforce, and Obergfell was correctly decided, you aren't fully grasping the nature of the problem. You have to be against all manifestations of this shit, from Chevron (which has fortunately been disposed of) through to USAID (which was just conjured into existence by Jimmy Carter) if you also want to be against DOGE and Trump playing economic warfare without Congressional mandates. You have to be against the COVID lockdowns and the enforced social distancing (where did that six foot rule come from, and why wasnt the rule four or eight feet?). You have to be willing to publicly roast anyone who tries to enforce the 28th Amendment (I am looking forward to the first time someone sues in court thinking it is a real thing).
No more "Chinese menu" opposition to the unitary executive.
You cant just be against this nonsense when it is being done by Trump.
Congress didnt have to turn any of its creation over to the President is sort of my point. They could have spelled it out, as detailed as they liked. The priorities and guidelines could all be enshrined in black letter law if they felt like it. Its an example of the failure of Congress.
There are Supreme Court decisions that expand the power of the federal government and the presidency in dangerous ways. Obergefell... wasn't about that at all? I'm confused too.
You know I should have left that out. It is an example of branches of government getting into each other's business. In this case it was the courts stepping on law making, which should have been left to Congress.
Obama ran as opposed to gay marriage both times and secretly was hoping courts would eventually do this so he could sidestep the issue, but as part of the imperial presidency, yes, I didn't need to add it.
You should go back and read Obergfell again. The gist of it is that the courts determined "things have changed!" and thus the law must change as well. The courts didnt just strike down a law (which is the extent of what they should be allowed to do) but they went farther and declared something could be done that wasnt being done before. And it makes gay marriage vulnerable. What the courts grant they can just take away and a civil right is something that should be there no matter what.
As the token Canadian, I'm just here to say The Love Guru was made for only one purpose: so Mike Myers- like all of us long-suffering fans- could watch the Toronto Maple Leafs win a Stanley Cup. Personally, I prefer the pro-Leafs Easter Eggs from the Austin Powers movies that probably go over everyone else's heads.
It wasn’t pointless. It created the narrative that Mexico and Canada backed down/captulated to the strong, powerful US, led by the strong, powerful Trump.
It set the ground for many other attempts at the same thing. More sowing of distrust. More bullying, more anger at the US, less willingness to actually cooperate when we actually need it.
But the narrative is more important than the reality, especially when it plays well with the Cult.
You confuse actual, rational, results-oriented policy (in which context this WAS a pointless exercise) with what it was actually about… Trump getting even with people/countries who dissed him in the past. Creating what he (and others) see as humiliation. THAT was the point of the exercise.
Trump isn't playing eight-dimensional chess but he knows exactly what he's doing and got exactly what he wanted, an easy victory that he his cronies can crow about in the news cycle. Before the week is out you will see multiple articles in media outlets such as the Free Press praising Trump for his "bold and aggressive" leadership on tariffs. That he was right all along. That he has once again bent the world to his will, gotten results and that this is why America reelected him and loves him. There will be so much fawning and ass kissing that it will make you sick. But that's exactly why he did this.
Is it better for those of us who oppose his policies to loudly point out that this “victory” is basically a pile of magic beans and that he “got results” the way a toddler yelling at Blues’ Clues on the TV gets results, or should we be quiet and let him think he’s a big tough guy who really did a good job?
I wish I knew the answer to this. I hate to be pessimistic, but as of right now, I don't see a light at the end of the tunnel. Being quiet, playing the long game, and hoping this all somehow blows up in Trump's face could work, but that runs the risk of Trump and his libertarian cronies becoming even further entrenched as the small "victories" pile up. And being loud and brash and calling his supporters names didn't work the first time.
Libertarian? Tariffs are not an established libertarian policy position, last I checked. They're big on free markets.
The libertarian cronies are probably the reason Trump was willing to back off of the tariffs so quickly.
I can tell you that cutting usAID will free up funds for the nation where it's actually needed. This is amazing
If and when Trump decides to restore USAid I have no doubt that you’ll find some way to justify that too. TDS seems to infect all sides.
This is right. Everything Trump does becomes easy to understand once you grasp rule number one: the only thing that matters to Trump is making Trump feel good about himself. Trump supporters delusionally believe he cares about the country, and Trump detractors delusionally think he cares about conservative policies or even amassing power. He just wants an ego blowjob, that’s it.
Yes that is why he got shot in the face, and continued to run, because getting shot feels good. Nothing like being the #1 target of the most notorious criminal syndicate in history, the CIA. This is why trump is actually fulfilling his promises, they are already trying to kill him, he has no reason to hold back anymore.
He did this for the prosperity of our nation, because every other country on the planet was taking advantage of us, he is using the tariffs to show he's serious, he's not just saying it in the press. He has to do this because it's completely different from how the Dems operate in power. They would say one thing and do the exact opposite behind closed doors. The Dems are mad and bewildered because trump is doing what he said he would do, something the Dems have never, ever seen.
But I think part of his goal, aside from ass licking, was to get Canada and Mexico to step up and help monitor the borders. Borders. And help stop the fentanyl flow. He accomplished his goal. So I'm fine if people lick his ass. 10,000 troops from both Canada and Mexico will now be helping us monitor borders and secure them.
The point of the article is that he didn’t really “get” anything new, and did enormous damage in the process!
Also… the War on Drugs should have taught us all that you really can’t get around targeting demand, not just supply.
Well 10,000 troops from Mexico and Canada, if they actually get sent, is something new. And since the Mexican government, at least local levels is involved in the fentanyl trade, can certainly at least stem the flow. So that's new. And if they don't pony up with the troops, Trump will probably threaten tariffs again. I think it was incredibly effective.
I disagree strongly that it was “incredibly effective.” Canada just announced they were doing what they already planned to do in December. And the key phrase in your comment is “if they actually get sent.” Wouldn’t a real negotiator wait to see the condition be met (at least partly) before backing down and declaring “victory”? All the damage Trump did to our economy and reputation in the meantime was worse than whatever paltry concessions he extracted from our two literal closest allies by clownishly bullying them. Trump is an idiot who has learned nothing from history: trade wars are invariably bad for the nations who threaten them.
There are other ways of achieving this without threats. We could have renegotiated a trade deal with Canada, offered to help bolster border security from our end or help Mexico with its fight against cartels. In other words, whatever happened to asking nicely?
I totally agree with diplomacy and asking nicely. First. We've been trying to do this for a long time. Biden, kindly asked Mexico to please help rein in the border. It did not happen. But now? Mexico is building a legit area for deported undocumented immigrants to stay.
Of all the things that Trump is bad at, he might be the worst at diplomacy.
True, but Trump has figured out that he doesn't have to be good at diplomacy. Trump isn't playing eight-dimensional chess, he's playing the political equivalent of Money Ball. Diplomacy, tact, and sound policy that doesn't get rejected by courts are for policy wonks and overeducated Democrats. All that matters are "wins". You get "wins" by getting your way. You get your way by getting people to do what you want. And you get people to do what you want by any means necessary.
The problem, of course, is that the things Trump wants are either stupid, ineffective, bad for America’s economy (and our reputation, which is extremely valuable too), or self-servingly corrupt.
A VHS copy of the best of Mr Bean is worth its weight in gold, which still isn’t that much.
Did Mexico actually comply with the Biden agreement? Curious how much of these, including the Trump agreements, are just posturing with no actual follow through.
Hmm… Is the VHS rewinded?
—Trump is interpreting [the 1977 law] that to mean that he can do whatever he wants as long as he mumbles “something something fentanyl” while he does it.
Sort of like “The Electoral Count Act means I can order Mike Pence to throw the 2020 election” or “I can declassify documents with my mind.”
(Next up: he uses the Insurrection Act of 1807 to send the 82nd Airborne to Chicago after a city alderman calls him “a bigger idiot than Aaron Rodgers on peyote.”)
Not the important part, but I now know there is a non-zero chance I have set Jeff Mauerer on fire.
For 10 points: is the Canadian government saying they will do something the same as getting them to actually do what they said?
To simplify, is a politician's promise to do something the same as them actually doing what they said they will do? Trump critics are typically able to answer this question, if one of their eyeballs isn't firmly lodged in their own rectum.
The suggestion in the last paragraph to give Congress the authority to levy tariffs, not the president, has one big problem: Congress nowadays is paralyzed by obstructionism. You made a similar point in one of your recent podcasts, explaining why we don't do treaties with foreign countries anymore. It is simply too difficult to get two-thirds of senators to agree on anything, so it is much easier to have the president use executive authority, even though that means the next president can just rip it up and throw it away.
Maybe passively allowing Presidents to become Emperors was a bad idea? You are sounding more like Jack Kemp every day. I, for one, was against the imperial Presidency before it was cool. If you think this tariff shit is stupid and counterproductive but you think DACA was a noble and just act that we should continue to enforce, and Obergfell was correctly decided, you aren't fully grasping the nature of the problem. You have to be against all manifestations of this shit, from Chevron (which has fortunately been disposed of) through to USAID (which was just conjured into existence by Jimmy Carter) if you also want to be against DOGE and Trump playing economic warfare without Congressional mandates. You have to be against the COVID lockdowns and the enforced social distancing (where did that six foot rule come from, and why wasnt the rule four or eight feet?). You have to be willing to publicly roast anyone who tries to enforce the 28th Amendment (I am looking forward to the first time someone sues in court thinking it is a real thing).
No more "Chinese menu" opposition to the unitary executive.
You cant just be against this nonsense when it is being done by Trump.
The mandate for USAID's actions was given by congress. USAID was just created to manage it.
Congress didnt have to turn any of its creation over to the President is sort of my point. They could have spelled it out, as detailed as they liked. The priorities and guidelines could all be enshrined in black letter law if they felt like it. Its an example of the failure of Congress.
....they did do all of that? USAID was created as an independent agency.
The president can't just unilaterally cancel USAID, which he seems to be aware of even if Musk isn't.
The mandate for a relief agency was legislated. The mandate for an agency that spends most of their budget on regime change was not legislated.
Congress said an agency had to be created. They did not specify that USAID had to be created.
And Carter had nothing to do with it, as well.
Obergefell was a Supreme Court decision. What does it have to do with the imperial presidency?
There are Supreme Court decisions that expand the power of the federal government and the presidency in dangerous ways. Obergefell... wasn't about that at all? I'm confused too.
You know I should have left that out. It is an example of branches of government getting into each other's business. In this case it was the courts stepping on law making, which should have been left to Congress.
Obama ran as opposed to gay marriage both times and secretly was hoping courts would eventually do this so he could sidestep the issue, but as part of the imperial presidency, yes, I didn't need to add it.
It is not "getting into each other's business" - interpreting the Constitution is what SCOTUS is supposed to do.
You should go back and read Obergfell again. The gist of it is that the courts determined "things have changed!" and thus the law must change as well. The courts didnt just strike down a law (which is the extent of what they should be allowed to do) but they went farther and declared something could be done that wasnt being done before. And it makes gay marriage vulnerable. What the courts grant they can just take away and a civil right is something that should be there no matter what.
Of course all of his disastrous plans fall under “official presidential duties” so it’s all good, nothing criminal to see here folks…
That orange POS is not necessary either. Get rid of him!
As the token Canadian, I'm just here to say The Love Guru was made for only one purpose: so Mike Myers- like all of us long-suffering fans- could watch the Toronto Maple Leafs win a Stanley Cup. Personally, I prefer the pro-Leafs Easter Eggs from the Austin Powers movies that probably go over everyone else's heads.
Well, it did get folks to look the other way for a minute as he continued to dismantle American institutions…
It kept our attention while Musk gutted Privacy, the economy and the Treasury.
Say what you will, but Turtle Wax is a damn fine product, and ten cents is ten cents!
No, no! Don’t pull the bishop out! It will cause major trauma to your nose. You have to push it all the way through. It’s the only way.
It wasn’t pointless. It created the narrative that Mexico and Canada backed down/captulated to the strong, powerful US, led by the strong, powerful Trump.
It set the ground for many other attempts at the same thing. More sowing of distrust. More bullying, more anger at the US, less willingness to actually cooperate when we actually need it.
But the narrative is more important than the reality, especially when it plays well with the Cult.
You confuse actual, rational, results-oriented policy (in which context this WAS a pointless exercise) with what it was actually about… Trump getting even with people/countries who dissed him in the past. Creating what he (and others) see as humiliation. THAT was the point of the exercise.