donald-trump

Hopes Dashed in ’25

Dave Davis Commentary, Policy, Uncategorized , , , ,

A year ago, I was still befuddled by the Democrats having secured the Republican Presidential nomination for the weakest candidate, Donald Trump, by burying him in bogus lawsuits. That made him a sympathetic figure to many and sucking all the media attention away from his competition. Democrats nominated the only person who could manage to lose big. While pondering this turn of events, I had to come to terms with the fact that Trump was back.

As I pointed out at the time, the outlook could be very positive. After all, Trump’s first term employed supply-side economics to cut taxes on capital and work to reduce onerous regulations. These actions have led to solid pre-COVID growth. Increasing supply is the best way to tackle the high inflation engendered by the Biden administration’s heavy spending. A government-directed economy was shoveling vast sums into the fight against “climate change.” Covid relief swallowed more billions.

Daming the river of wild spending to reduce demand growth, while pumping up supply, worked for Reagan in subduing double-digit inflation and promised to work for Trump. Sure, Trump had added some things to his campaign, such as no tax on tips, overtime, and Social Security, which are not supply-side, but on balance, things looked to be improving on the economic front.

After Trump’s peaceful first term, the war in Ukraine and in the Middle East raged under Biden after his disastrous Afghan withdrawal. In the campaign, Trump promised to bring peace quickly to both areas.

Millions of illegal aliens streamed across our southern border, with the Biden administration just throwing up its hands. Americans know they need immigrants, but not in this way. Trump promised to get control of the border.

The Trump Administration has taken action in all three areas, but it’s unpopular:

The question is why? While other essential problem areas, such as education and healthcare, exist, these three are most directly under the president’s control. The states dominate education, and neither party has a handle on reasonably priced healthcare.

While Trump, in his first term, imposed tariffs on a few products, such as steel and aluminum, and forced a revision of the NAFTA trade treaty with Canada and Mexico, the administration granted many tariff exemptions, and the new treaty had only minor changes. This time around, Trump has wielded tariffs like a club, hitting everyone in the room.

One thing we know about tariffs is that they don’t lower prices—quite the opposite. Claiming crisis conditions and national security, Trump last spring imposed the highest tariffs on imports since the infamous Smoot-Hawley tariffs—coffee from Brazil and chocolates from Switzerland were deemed existential threats.

Continue reading →

A Tale Of Two Assessments

Dave Davis Commentary, Policy, Uncategorized , , , ,

On foreign policy and national security, we were recently treated to two assessments that provide guidance on the underlying foundations of the administration’s policy and American attitudes in these areas. The National Security Strategy(NSS) was issued in November 2025 by the Trump administration. At the recent gathering of many of the country’s best minds on foreign policy at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, the Reagan National Defense Survey was widely discussed.

Karl Rove, in the Wall Street Journal, points out that many of the government’s positions are in stark opposition to the attitudes of the American Public.  For instance, our policy towards Europe. In Ukraine, the Reagans Survey found, “A strong majority (62%) want Ukraine to prevail in its war with Russia, and 64% support sending U.S. weapons, up  9 points from last year, with bipartisan gains (59% of Republicans, 75% of Democrats).”  “Favorability toward NATO has reached its highest level ever at 68%, with strong bipartisan support for Article V commitments.”

The NSS says, “as a result of Russia’s war in Ukraine, European relations with Russia are now deeply attenuated, and many Europeans regard Russia as an existential threat.” The American public agrees that Russia is a threat. We want Ukraine to prevail.

Reading both, you get a sense that Americans still want to stand by our friends, especially those who share our values. On the other hand, the administration’s NSS takes a harder line with our longtime friends and allies than with Russia and China. One can’t help but wonder if down the road we might find ourselves without any friends.

We’ve seen Japan and South Korea hammered and forced to make U.S. investment commitments while facing higher tariffs. Our friendly neighbor, Canada, has incurred Trump’s ire, even though he updated the NAFTA trade treaty with Mexico and Canada in his first term.

Continue reading →

A Discussion Starter

Dave Davis Commentary, Policy, Uncategorized , , , ,

Gathering in Atlanta for Thanksgiving, no one ventured anything along political lines until our son’s 86-year-old mother-in-law asked everyone what they thought of Majorie Taylor Green (MTG), the controversial Georgia Republican representative. Everyone chimed in. She is everyone’s hero for standing up to President Trump, including the family Democrats. She’s even on the left-wing “The Week” magazine, contesting Trump:

This reaction shows far-out positions race across media at the speed of light, while we shun actual policy discussions. Name the first twenty politicians you think of. Sure, you’ll include Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and the Clintons and Obamas.

Still, beyond them, you’re likely to name the likes of Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders, A.O.C., Zohran Mamdani, Jasmine Crockett, Pete Hegseth, Sean Duffy, and J.D. Vance. What do they all have in common? They’re all media savvy. It may not be too strong to say that the media brought them to their present prominence.

While we are well aware of these people, none of us associates them with any deep, well-reasoned policy positions. To be sure, they have policies, free buses, little or no immigration, high tariffs, and price controls, but none of them provides a well-reasoned defense of their positions, leaving the tasks to others. Think tanks and media outlets are left to make their positions seem coherent.

Contrast that with Reagan’s radio talks, spelling out and selling his policies. Clinton and Carter were policy wonks.

Continue reading →

Turkeys before Thanksgiving

Dave Davis Commentary, Policy, Uncategorized , , , ,

As we approach the Holidays and the New Year, our leaders are in a full retreat from reality. This situation doesn’t bode well for our future. As I pointed out in my last post, Democrats only offer bromides featuring price controls and socialism that have proven to make matters even worse. However, they’re not in control of anything at the national level, and can only throw temper tantrums like the lengthy Government we just experienced. For all the problems it caused, it changed nothing.

Our Republican President is another story. With control of the executive branch, both houses of Congress, and a conservative Supreme Court majority, he sets the agenda. If the recent elections weren’t enough of a wakeup call, Trump’s continued decline in approval indicates that the public isn’t buying what he’s selling:

The 2024 Democratic election debacle, in part, was traced to taking too many 80-20 positions, such as biological boys playing women’s sports, with them holding the short end. Now, Trump takes minority positions, but doesn’t seem to realize it. Trump’s inability to see the big picture may not only leave him an impotent lame duck but also threaten the future of the Republican Party by alienating core supporters and moderates alike.

Failing to speak against some of his most ardent “New right” supporters, who claim there is nothing wrong with the likes of Tucker Carlson normalizing the anti-Semite Nick Fuentes on his podcast. I’ve denounced left-wing anti-semitism, and right-wing bigotry is no less odious. There is nothing inclusive about “white supremacy” and “Christian Nationalism.”

Trump’s inexplicable deference to Putin’s Russia took an even darker turn this week, with an ultimatum to Ukraine that they must accept his 28-point peace plan by Thanksgiving. A plan that asks nothing of Russia, but demands Ukraine give up strategic land and cap its military strength, while forgoing NATO membership forever. In other words, a rolling surrender.  

Continue reading →

Hans Christian Andrson Told It Right

Dave Davis Commentary, Policy, Uncategorized , , , ,

In my August 1, blog post, I wondered if Donald Trump’s second term was “Topping Out”? The President looked like the King of the Hill. The Stock Market hitting new highs and tariff-induced deals seemed to promise a manufacturing boom that would take us to untold prosperity, or at least that’s what Trump endlessly told us.

The passage of the Great Big Beautiful Bill, which allows businesses to write off capital investments immediately, is expected to contribute to the upcoming boom. Trump trumpeted his imminent settling of the world’s wars. What’s not to like? I warned of shoals ahead. One problem is that Trump has never had Reagan’s widespread appeal:

The cornerstone of Trump’s economic policy is his ability to use tariffs as a bludgeon to extract concessions from the rest of the world and force American businesses to plead their cases on bended knee, some even giving the Government an ownership stake. The world awaited Trump’s next action.

Yet, the majority of the tariffs had already been deemed illegal by two courts. The appeals court has upheld those verdicts, and we’re awaiting the Supreme Court’s final decision after just hearing oral arguments. If the High Court had only wanted to nullify the tariffs imposed under the single subject law, it could have refused to take the case. That action would’ve avoided prolonging the pain while ending most tariffs.

It’s too horrifying to think that the court wants to take the power to tax away from Congress and award it to the President, so it may wish to clarify how narrow the executive power is in this area, defining what actually constitutes an emergency, setting limits as to the time before you have to go to Congress. The bludgeon may become a twig, and Trump’s economic policy, domestic and foreign, evaporates.

While the President has had some success in fostering peace in some places, the two most significant areas of conflict, Israel and Ukraine, have received vastly different responses from Trump.

Both featured an unprovoked attack seeking to destroy these states ultimately. Israel and Ukraine seek to embrace Western values, while Russia and Hamas profess the opposite. Both Ukraine and Israel have waged truly brave and intelligent innovative wars, much to the shock of their enemies. America should know what the right side is to support, given our values.

While Israel has received the utmost Trump administration support, including direct defensive support and the bombing of a common enemy, Iran, the U.S. only provides arms bought and paid for by others and intermittent intelligence to Ukraine. Trump fetes Israel’s Netenyhu, but treats Ukraine’s Zelensky like a pariah.

Given the similarities of the two wars, what accounts for Trump’s differing positions? The administration, and even the special envoys, are mostly the same. The scientific method seeks to isolate and identify a single, distinct factor that explains a phenomenon.

Vice President Vance’s distaste for Ukraine is hardly a secret, given his part in humiliating Zelensky in the Oval Office. His and his supporters’ views dominate the administration of Ukraine policy. The same people are present in discussions of Middle East policy, but with two notable additions: Trump’s daughter, Ivanka, and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, both Orthodox Jews, have also taken part in this area. During the previous Trump administration, they played a significant role in facilitating the Abraham Accords, arguably one of Trump’s most notable foreign policy achievements.

Continue reading →