September 16, 2019--Trump's Four-Step Program

Take the tariffs as an example of a political strategy Trump employs with great aplomb and consequence.

During the 2016 campaign he stressed two things more than anything else--the Wall, how he would build it and Mexico would pay for it--and trade with China--how they were taking advantage of American naiveté and as a result surpassing us in economic growth. They were stealing our intellectual property and the Chinese government was unfairly subsidizing the cost of the expansion of their manufacturing sector. We, on the other hand, were experiencing a chronically stalled economy and ballooning trade deficits.

He said that unlike his predecessors he would confront the Chinese directly and fight back by using every trick and tool at his disposal. Among them, first and foremost, tariffs.

As the initial step he talked tough, boasting how he would take on the Chinese and force them to amend their ways or face crippling tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars of manufactured goods and agricultural products.

The Chinese did not knuckle under. Instead, they announced retaliatory tariffs of their own. In response Trump, as the next step, ramped up the rhetoric, including personal attacks on Xi Jinping, China's president for life.

Still the Chinese did not back down. As a consequence the American stock market plunged, attracting Trump's attention. He had represented the previously soaring market as evidence that his economic policies were working. If the market tanked, not far behind would be Trump's reelection chances.

As a result, as the third step, he began to soften his position. To back off. He ratcheted back his criticism of Xi and began to hint that he would hold off on imposing tariffs until the end of the holiday shopping season. And just last week he announced that perhaps tariffs aren't necessary after all since both the Chinese and he are interested in making a deal. Not so between the lines was the implication that that deal might not require tariffs.

In this final move of the Trumpian four-step, he will soon take credit for getting the Chinese to retreat in the face of a crisis that he himself created and from which he, not they, is doing the backing down. 

The Chinese government's recent announcement that they will resume importing soybeans will be cited as evidence by Trump that they are capitulating, while in truth he is.

So, he begins by initiating a crisis which, when it starts to spin out of control, he "solves" by abandoning his own positions while at the same time taking credit for doing so as if that was the plan all along. 

If I have this right, those who want to depose Trump need to understand how this strategy works and figure out how best in real time to counter it. It's his most powerful tool and we have to expose and resist it, jiu jitsu-style, by turning his own strength against him.

February 15, 2019--National Emergencies

Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell unintentionally just set the agenda for the Democrat who will be elected in 2020 to succeed Trump as president.

He was good enough to set both the programmatic and the strategic agenda. With the latter being about how to govern.

Thank you Mitch.

Mitch did this when attempting to discourage Trump from declaring, in his case, a phony emergency.

Do not declare a national emergency, he urged Trump, to get your way with the border wall because if you do you will set a precedent for future presidents. Like the Democrat who will come after you in less than two years. A progressive who might use your precedent to declare emergencies involving gun "rights" and the climate.

When it comes to Trump, McConnell is whistling in the wind because for Trump there are no precedents. A precedent is something that applies to the future, but with Trump there is no such thing as the future. He is all about the now, caring only about himself, ignoring who or what comes next; and thus he will declare an emergency this morning to allow him to reap political credit from his base (meaning Ann Coulter, who two days ago called him a "weenie,"  and Sean Hannity) for building, or pretending to build the wall.

But for a normal person who might become president, governing by the strategic use of national emergencies in an era where nothing can be enacted by a broken and hyper-partisan Congress may make sense and to declare at least two emergencies--one to deal with the scourge of weapons of mass destruction in the hands of murderous people and the other for another genuine emergency, global warming--sounds like a plan for Kamala Harris or Joe Biden or Amy Klobuchar.

February 14, 2019--Jack: Winning By Losing

"Why don't you pick up the phone and call him."

"Who?"

"You know. Jack."

"I don't want to get in the habit of calling him."

Rona said, "Calling him once every five years doesn't qualify as a habit. I suggested this because he might be a good one to ask about what we've been talking about recently. Why, after all the messes Trump has created, including the fiasco of shutting down the government, that pretty much his entire core of supporters stays loyal to him. There seems to be nothing he can do to alienate them. Even when he does something that's harmful to them. Like the tax cuts people are right now discovering has not been beneficial, as promised, to the middle class."

I said, "It is puzzling why that rock bottom 30, 35 percent stays loyal. Jack might have some insights to share."

So I called. He picked up on the second ring as if waiting for me.

"It's me," I said, "I know I never call but here I am. I have a question for you. It will only take a few minutes. If you're too busy, just hang up."

"No, no. I'm OK," Jack said. "To what do I owe the honor of this call? Every time I phone you you're rushing to get off the line."

I didn't want to get into why that might be, and said, "Rona thinks you can help with something."

"Shoot. Anything for her. You know I love Rona."

"I promise not to tell her that," I laughed, "I don't want to spoil her day. But here's the question--Why do you and your Trumper friends stay so committed to him even though he's constantly screwing things up?"

"Can you give me an example?"

"There are so many. But OK, in the news recently, take the Wall. He's clearly obsessed with it and claims during the past two years it's being built out at a fast pace even though it's well known that nothing, nothing has been constructed. Not one mile since he's been president. He's now saying it's time to 'finish' the wall. Lie built on lie. And yet you and his people don't seem to be upset about that. They and I presume you are upset with Nancy Pelosi and Democrats in general for not voting for the money he says is needed. What happened to all the winning? Isn't his appeal all about winning? On this one he's a loser."

"Once again you don't understand, you don't get it. But you called the right person to get the answer."

"I'm waiting."

"You've got it backwards. It, he's not about winning but, actually, losing." Jack paused to wait for my reaction to this radical thought--that Trump is into losing.

"I'm listening."

"I'll include myself."

"I assumed you would."

"We are angry about what's been going on in America from endless nation-building wars around the world, to all the illegal immigrants, to political correctness. We're furious about affirmative action and identity politics and the unfairness of the mainstream media. Also, we're made crazy by the drug smuggling and the murderous Mexican gangs. I could go on but this should give you a glimpse of what's on the minds of Trump's people."

I interrupted, "You're making my point for me. I mean, yes, this is the familiar list of grievances, but he's delivered nothing in more than two years to help alleviate what you and his other supporters are frustrated about. He's accomplished very little except passing tax cuts for the rich and withdrawing troop from Syria, which every serious foreign policy expert considers foolhardy."

"Again, you're showing your ignorance. For us it's not about accomplishing things of a traditional sort. Passing legislation to do this or that. We don't believe in that sort of approach because as we view things it's these kinds of government programs that have caused the problems we have."

I said, "This is familiar territory. Nothing new in what you're saying."

"So let me repeat this in words even you can understand. We're about wanting to continue to be frustrated and angry. That's the lens through which we view the world. We are pessimistic that government can make things better. In fact, it's the opposite. And so we don't want to be cooled out by getting a bone or two thrown at us. We want to remain in a rage. It's what we're about, what motivates us."

"So what about the winning/losing business?"

"If we win, so to speak, which at best will be minimal, what do we do with our anger? Being angry makes us feel alive and powerful; and now, with Trump, paid attention to. It gives us a purpose in life. So he too has to lose to remain angry. What we like about him is not getting a few more dollars for the wall or some new program, what we like, what we crave, is his expressing anger and fighting for us. Not mincing words (how he fights is therefore very important), telling it like is, showing contempt for traditions and moderate ways of talking about and doing things. For this reason we even like his public cursing."

Jack was on a roll, "His appeal to us is the result of the ways he represents our anger, our sense of being looked down to, our being thought of by your type as being deplorable. We haven't forgotten that one. To use one of your fancy words, to being marginalized. In other words, we're all about expressing grievances and frustrations. To do this you have to keep losing. We wouldn't know what to do with winning. We have so little experience with it. So Trump, who is the first president to represent us also has to lose."

I was stunned and couldn't quickly come up with what to say. He had never been so honest.

So Jack said, "Had enough for today? Remember you called me." He roared with laughter and hung up without a goodbye.