Republicans have a very slim majority in Congress. They are trying to maintain said majority by, among other things, gerrymandering. That effort may be successful in the short run by allowing them to pick up a few more Republican leaning districts. Hence the Democratic squawking.
But the time honored practice of gerrymandering isn’t really all that important. What is important though, is that nationally, the Republican party has effectively adopted socialism as its raison d’être. How else to explain comrade Trump’s decision to take a 10% equity stake in the Intel corporation?
Or, for that matter, how to explain his taking a 15% cut of Nvidia’s sales to China of certain computer chips. Not to mention the same deal with Advanced Micro Devices. Or Kevin Hassett (former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors and one of the front runners to be Fed chief) proclaiming that the White House is likely to continue seeking similar deals with other companies. How else do we understand why Trump, referencing the Intel deal, today said on his social media feed that “I will make deals like that for our Country all day long.”
All actions taken (of course) without Congressional authorization. And not to put too fine a point on it, the Trump administration allowed Nippon Steel to buy US Steel only after Nippon acceded to certain political demands.
While Republicans are tripping over themselves preparing to run a national campaign against the self-declared Democratic Socialist running for mayor of New York, they ought to glance at a mirror.
The Republicans claim to be different. For example they point to Candidate Zohran Kwame Mamdani’s promised rent freezes, fare-free buses (why not subways too?), public grocery stores, universal child care, and a $30 minimum wage, financed (at least in part) by taxing the “wealthy”. The term wealthy is, of course, routinely left undefined.
Before the Republicans get too carried away with themselves while busily scorching Mamdani they ought to ask themselves this question: How are they any different? They like to either deny or push off costs too.
Remember that border wall that Mexico was going to pay for. How did that work out? Or take Trump’s trial balloon about controlling drug prices. How is that different from rent freezes? Or the trial balloon about variable rates for patent fees. Leaving aside the fact that Section 8 of the US Constitution clearly requires Congressional authorization for this, notwithstanding Trumpian bombast, it would effectively be a flat out tax on innovation and next to impossible to administer.
Then there are the ever changing tariffs that fluctuate with Presidential whims. Interestingly enough, Trump argues simultaneously that (1) tariffs won’t slow global trade, even though it is perfectly obvious to any freshman Econ student that the opposite is true; (2) the revenue derived from the tariffs will substantially reduce the budget deficit (it won’t) and (3) the tariffs will generate foreign investment and therefore reduce the trade deficit.
That last argument is particularly amusing in that trade deficits and foreign source investments are two sides of the same coin. Consequently, any increase in foreign investment necessarily increases the trade deficit. Trump, who insists on referring to country specific trade deficits despite modern supply chains, clearly doesn’t understand this.
Speaking of the devil, Trump has also decided to impose tariff duties on countries where America has a trade surplus. The US, for instance, has a trade surplus with Brazil, but at last count His Majesty threatened to impose a whopping 50% tariff on all Brazilian goods. His rationale was that ex Brazilian President Bolsonaro was being treated unjustly, which even if true, has absolutely nothing at all to do with Brazil’s trading position.
Anyway with respect to his threat to impose a 50% tariff on all Brazilian goods, here is what Trump wrote on his badly misnamed Truth Social: “[Bolsonaro’s arrest] is nothing more, or less, than an attack on a Political Opponent — Something I know much about! It happened to me, times 10…”.
So, as it turns out, Trump now claims to be offended by the way the Brazilian establishment has behaved with respect to a political opponent. Let’s see. That’s the same Donald J Trump who cancelled secret service protection for John Bolton (former Trump National Security Advisor), Mike Pompeo (former CIA Director and Secretary of State), Brian Hook (former top aid) Dr. Anthony Fauci (former NIAD Director), Retired General Mark Milley (former Chair of the Joint Chiefs), and former DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.
He also revoked the security clearances of lawyers critical of him, including New York Attorney General Letitia James, Manhattan prosecutor Alvin Bragg and private lawyer Andrew Weissmann. Arguably Letitia James and Alvin Bragg used their official positions to unjustifiably attack Trump. But that doesn’t justify Trump doing the same thing.
And we know he didn’t sleep with Stormy Daniels. After all, he said he didn’t. And we all know he wouldn’t lie. Nor would he weaponize the justice system the way it was weaponized against him. Otherwise he would pardon all the January 6 rioters without examining their cases. Oops—he did just that.
So the question of the day is: how exactly, are we to distinguish today’s Republicans from today’s progressives? At least Mamdani is right upfront about the stupid things he apparently believes. (And they are without question, undeniably stupid.)
The Republicans, however, are unwilling to say what they believe. Probably because they don’t believe in anything other than getting re-elected.
In a pinch, the Republicans act just like the progressives. They have demonstrated they will do whatever it takes to stay in power. Their only substantive difference with progressives is that they have different constituencies to promise all the “free” goodies to. But there is no real philosophical difference between the two.
America can pull itself out of this mess. It is a choice. America’s political leadership has to start acting like it. It could start by experimenting with telling the truth. Which is that (1) America’s love affair with deficit spending has to stop and (2) America is critical for preserving a Liberal world order; the alternative is pretty grim, and our allies are critical for the effort.
The choice is ours to make.
JFB
