Any hope that somehow Donald Trump
would emerge from his triumph as a unifier and a statesman, even of the de
minimus kind, has been completely shattered in his first 40 days.
So has the idea that he would
capitalize on the opportunity presented by his first 100 days to drive through
a series of legislative and executive initiatives that would thrust his agenda
onto America.
Instead, we are left with the
indelible image of a man alone each evening in the White House, transfixed by
cable news, appalled at his portrayal by CNN while mining FOX News for
intelligence information that somehow eluded his daily security briefing, sleeping
fitfully over this witches’ brew, and reconstituting the resulting bile into morning
tweets, leaving his Administration’s cooler heads, such as they are, spending
the rest of the day cleaning up the mess.
The main theme of the last month is
shrill words (tweets, speeches and executive orders) masquerading as action,
with deflection running interference. Trump
is engaging in full-scale warfare with the media, our own national security
apparatus and our allies, as a means of deflecting attention from the desultory
start of his presidency.
Gliding above the miasma of the
daily chaos, there were three major stories of the month, and each was linked
to a larger theme.
First, the ongoing travel ban saga,
which is linked to the overall failure of the Trump Administration to take
bold, effective (in its own view) action in its outset. The hastily written, ill-conceived and
non-syndicated ban resulted in the mindnumbing optics of innocent students and
family members being held captive in airports, quickly segueing into the mass
protests – another random act of mindlessness that plagued the new
Administration, causing it to hit the ground not running, but stumbling, in
this instance falling face first in the dust.
Because the travel ban saga was just getting started. Soon the judges weighed in and squelched the ban it is entirety, in a non-partisan manner. Trump and company skulked back to the drawing board, refusing to risk humiliation with the Supreme Court, and trying to devise some other more tightly-defined and legal “Muslim ban,” which of course was the original goal and certainly remains the intent.
Because the travel ban saga was just getting started. Soon the judges weighed in and squelched the ban it is entirety, in a non-partisan manner. Trump and company skulked back to the drawing board, refusing to risk humiliation with the Supreme Court, and trying to devise some other more tightly-defined and legal “Muslim ban,” which of course was the original goal and certainly remains the intent.
The bigger picture here is that the
Trump Administration has not done very much as yet. The travel ban was the sole Executive Order
with teeth, unlike the looking-rather-silly orders to “defeat ISIS” or “seek
the prompt repeal of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act”
(Obamacare). Without the travel ban…there
is no big accomplishment. The Obama
Administration passed its mammoth American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
(a.k.a., the stimulus) on February 17, 2009. The Trump Administration is nowhere close to
legislation of that magnitude, nor has it shown any ability at all to organize
an effort that might get one done.
Obamacare (more on that later) remains a major headache for the GOP, the
Wall is not close to getting funding approval, and tax reform, also politically
a minefield, will not even be taken up by Congress until the summer, and will
simmer for many months after that, if not into 2018.
The second major story of the month
was the resignation of National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, a mere 24 days
into his tenure, besmirching the Administration. This fiasco is linked to the larger story of
the Trump’s remarkably friendly posture to Russia and the seemingly bottomless
pit of ties and communications the Trumpsters have with our sworn enemy of the
last 70 years. This is in parallel to
the remarkably shabby treatment Trump has inflicted on allies from the UK (breaking
protocol by suggesting an right-wing nutcase as Ambassador to the U.S.), to
Germany (doesn’t trust Merkel any more or less than Putin), Australia (hung up
on their Prime Minister), Sweden (reference to a FOX-fake-news story on the
impact of immigration on that country), Mexico (need I detail it all?), the
European Union (“flawed”), NATO (“obsolete”) and on and on.
Flynn’s short career trajectory
resembled that of Mili Vanilli, except Flynn’s lips were saying too much.
His infraction, according to Trump, was not the utterly mindless act of speaking to the Russians about the
freshly-minted Obama sanctions nearly a month before assuming office (a seeming
violation of the Logan Act), but rather for lying to Mike Pence about it, who
in turn defended him on the Sunday talk show circuit. The inexplicable warmth to Russia –
inexplicable to everyone – is quite
possibly the most disturbing aspect of the Trump Administration, and that is a
very high bar. What Trump hopes to
accomplish by cozying up to Putin is not fathomable – to anyone – but, predictably, Putin is now testing Trump, sending
warships off the coast of Delaware, buzzing a U.S. Navy destroyer in the Black
Sea, and testing a banned class of cruise missiles in the homeland. What next?
An offshoot of the Flynn/Russia
storyline is the ridiculously bad relationship that Trump has developed with
his own national security apparatus, accusing the FBI of rampant leaks and the
CIA of incompetent intelligence and ignoring the entire State Department,
including Rex Tillerson. If anyone has
the goods on Trump, it is the FBI and CIA, and it will be interesting to see if
James Comey – of all people – begins to intentionally fatten his Trump file,
channeling his inner J. Edgar Hoover.
(Oh, right, Comey is a man of unimpeachable integrity, I forgot.) And the Watergate era mantra has returned…what
did the President know and when did he know it?
Speaking of the FBI, another twist
came when Reince Priebus apparently thought it was a terrific idea to ask them
to “knock down” (that is, proclaim false) a New York Times story on the links
of the Trump campaign with the Russian Government, yet another tributary to be
traversed in the river of congressional investigations afoot on the whole
Russian matter.
All of this sturm und drang necessitated
the “Damage Control Tour,” when Mike Pence, James Mattis, John Kelly and Mike
Pompeo flew from place to place across the globe, behaving like adults, saying
soothing words to miffed allies, completely contradicting the twitter-rants of
their boss, and generally leaving all these allies perhaps slightly mollified
but definitely wondering aloud who in the U.S. Government was the ventriloquist
and who was the dummy.
The third major story in February is
the war on the media. There can be
little doubting the intentions here. Ever
since George H.W. Bush uncharacteristically attacked Dan Rather on the air, the
right has known that “leftist”-media-bashing is a winning strategy for the
base. You don’t need to be Steve Bannon
to figure that out, though perhaps you do
need to be the bedraggled Bannon to implement it so brazenly – who but him
would ever think to actually ban The New York Times and CNN from a routine
off-camera briefing? Apart from this,
discrediting the media in turn discredits the stories they report – every
unflattering story can be dismissed as “fake news,” duh.
But the bigger picture link here is
the deflection of attention. A daily dressing
down of the mainstream media is essentially an invitation to chew up a news
cycle reporting that attack, and the media seems unable to avoid taking the
bait. That is the real genius. What would Trump rather see as a headline or
breaking news: “Trump Revised Travel Ban
Delayed Yet Again” or “Trump Bans New York Times.” A no-brainer, and, while the media has
certainly woken up to its responsibility to hold Trump accountable for his
lies, they now need to focus on his policies, programs and progress and stop
giving his relentless media attacks oxygen.
Those are the big items of February,
2017. Plenty else happened – Trump’s
cabinet is still getting confirmed, one (Puzder of Labor) had to withdraw for
basically being despicable, another (DeVos of Education) made it in only by the
vote of Vice President Pence – and proceeded to get a rude awakening to the
limits of her authority when Trump revoked Obama’s protections of transgender
bathroom preferences over her objections.
Trump went weeks failing to acknowledge the growing number of
anti-Semitic attacks around the country.
He finally gave in (perhaps due to Ivanka’s pleading) and read a
statement that contained the right words but was delivered with little
heart. Speaking of Ivanka, Kellyanne
Conway apparently thought that shamelessly hawking the Ivanka brand could not
possibly be an ethics violation, and this ate up a news cycle.
Coming soon? Trump’s budget proposal is probably DOA even
to his fellow Republicans. His
late-breaking call for immigration reform was a head-scratcher given his own
rather strident positions on the subject.
And Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch for the Supreme Court, a judge who
comes in gentle packaging but legal scholars rate as being to the right of
Alito, if that is even possible.
That nomination sets up a potential battle
of the ages over Gorsuch’s nomination.
The Dems – remember them? – almost thoroughly emasculated their ability
to fight back several years ago by nearly scuttling the 60-vote Senate
filibuster power, forgetting that they too might be in the minority
someday. Now they only have that weapon
for Supreme Court nominees, and let’s see if they stay unified and use that
power to deny Trump his first pick. Or
the GOP could display its own stupendous lack of foresight and decide to get
rid of the 60-vote rule for the Court picks as well to push him through.
The month ended last night with
Trump’s address to Congress, which he delivered soberly and on script. Suffice to say, big promises were made in
areas in which even Republicans are far from agreement.
Trump’s presidency thus far has been defined by chaos, words masquerading as
action; now he has to actually deliver on those promises.
Approval Rating
Trump’s approval rating has held
more or less steady since Inauguration, holding at 45%. His “disapproval rating” has increased,
though, by 5 points on average. This
means that a portion of the “wait and see” group does not like what is sees so
far. It also means that Trump is “underwater”
with a net negative approval of -5.
But the GOP is hanging with Trump
even through this incredible bad start.
And you will not see GOP members jumping ship unless and until these
numbers go further south. We are not as
far away from 2018 as you might think, when all of the House and one-third of
the Senate is up for re-election. Right
now the GOP members who will be in contested races are very worried, because
you cannot be embracing Trump with his low approval ratings, and you will be
tied to him by your opponent unless you make a clean break. The lower the approval ratings, the more GOP
members of Congress will be confronted with the “embrace or defect” choice.
TRUMP APPROVAL RATING
|
||
Jan
|
Feb
|
|
Approve
|
45
|
45
|
Disapprove
|
45
|
50
|
Margin
|
0
|
-5
|
Trump’s approval rating remains at
historic lows, not just when compared to his immediate predecessors but also
including all presidents measured by
Gallup back to Truman. None of the last
dozen presidents have ever had an approval rating below 50 (or a net negative
approval) within their first 40 days in office.
Obama had started moving down at this point, but his was the highest at
Inauguration among his contemporaries.
Bush had gone up, while Clinton had remained about the same.
GALLUP APPROVAL RATING
|
|||
First-term President
|
Inaug. Day
|
Feb 28
|
Change
|
Trump
|
45%
|
42%
|
-3%
|
Obama
|
68%
|
64%
|
-4%
|
Bush
|
57%
|
62%
|
5%
|
Clinton
|
58%
|
59%
|
1%
|
Trumpometer
An explanation of the Trumpometer
can be found at the end of this article, but basically it is a simple way to
compare how the economy is performing under Trump in comparison to the day he
inherited its stewardship – January 20, 2017 (and to his immediate
predecessors). We developed it to
provide a simple gauge to assess the question, “are we better off now than when
this President took office?”
The Trumpometer has barely moved
since Inauguration Day, of course, and Trump cannot be held accountable for its
movements as yet (although he certainly has taken credit for the stock market
surge and perhaps rightfully so, given the promise of “pro-business” reforms in
the tax and regulatory environment.) In
time, of course, he will be held accountable for how these measures perform.
The Trumpometer thus stands at “1” (versus
the re-set to “0” on his first day in office) with the modest upward movement
driven by a 1,000-point rise in the stock market. Not too much more to be said about this for
now.
Clinton
ends; Bush begins 1/20/2001
|
Bush
ends; Obama begins 1/20/2009
|
Obama
ends; Trump begins 1/20/2017
|
Trump in progress Feb 28, 2017
|
|
Clintonometer
|
Bushometer
|
Obameter
|
Trumpometer
|
|
25
|
-53
|
0
|
1
|
|
Unemployment Rate
|
4.2
|
7.8
|
4.7
|
4.8
|
Consumer Confidence
|
129
|
38
|
114
|
115
|
Price of Gas
|
1.27
|
1.84
|
2.44
|
2.43
|
Dow Jones
|
10,588
|
8,281
|
19,732
|
20,812
|
GDP
|
4.5
|
-6.2
|
1.9
|
1.9
|
Obamacare/ACA Approval
One of Trump’s biggest campaign
promises, of course, was to get rid of Obamacare and replace it with “something
terrific”. The GOP, of course, is confounded
by the ownership of the problem, longing for the days when they could pass
repeal bill after repeal bill without any accountability for the outcome (since
these repeals had no chance of becoming law).
They cannot agree on a replacement plan, much less a replacement plan
that doesn’t result in takeaways, as Trump has promised, from anyone currently
covered by Obamacare. Now even John
Boehner is publicly mocking the very idea of “repeal and replace.”
Some GOP voters are starting to
clue-in to the potential loss of their own health care coverage – some did not
even realize that their own health care plan is enabled by Obamacare, and others
had no idea that the “Affordable Care Act” (the ACA) is the exact same thing as “Obamacare.”
But one thing is indisputable –
positive attitudes toward Obamacare are starting to rise. Obamacare has been a net negative in
popularity since it was enacted in 2010, by double-digit or high single digit
margins. But once Trump was elected, and
Americans started becoming educated on the real impact of repeal, there has
been a marked upturn in how it is viewed, and it is now it is a net positive
(+3). And among those who oppose
Obamacare, only about half want it repealed.
This, of course, makes the GOP’s
case even weaker, and I will not be at all surprised if the GOP ultimately ends
up focusing on fixing Obamacare, doing what it should have been doing for six
years now – making it better.
OBAMACARE POPULARITY
|
||||||||
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
2014
|
2015
|
2016 Jan-Oct
|
Nov '16 to 2017
|
|
For/favor
|
40
|
39
|
41
|
40
|
40
|
42
|
41
|
48
|
Against/oppose
|
53
|
52
|
51
|
52
|
53
|
50
|
49
|
45
|
Margin
|
-13
|
-13
|
-10
|
-12
|
-13
|
-8
|
-8
|
+3
|
******************************************************
Explanation of Trumpometer
We picked (long ago) five measures
that we thought were easily understood and long accepted as indicative of
economic strength:
1)
The Unemployment Rate (U3), issued
monthly by the Bureau of Labor and Statistics.
2)
Consumer Confidence, measured
monthly by the Conference Board
3)
Price of gasoline, reported weekly
by the U.S. Energy Information Administration
4)
The Dow Jones Industrial Average
5)
The GDP, measured quarterly
Using these five measures, we then
create a simple index. We pick a
point-in-time “baseline” – which we will now make January 20, 2017, Trump’s
Inauguration Day – and calculate the percentage change on each measure going
forward versus that baseline, and then take an average of those percentage
changes.
You can see how it works with the
chart below. The economy was in good
shape on January 20, 2001, the day Bill Clinton turned the White House over to
George W. Bush. Unemployment was low
(4.2%), Consumer Confidence was high (well over 100, at 129), the price of gas
was low (1.27 per gallon), the Dow was strong at 10,588 and the GDP was roaring
at 4.5% in Q4 2000. When Bush left
office – the middle column – the picture was starkly different. Unemployment was soaring (7.8%), Consumer
Confidence was in the pits (38), the Dow was well below where it was 8 years
before, and the GDP was an abysmal -6.2.
You will recall a nation in the midst of its worst recession since the
Depression. Under Obama, the recovery is
nearly complete, with the numbers resembling those in Clinton’s time, with the
exception of GDP growth which has been decent but not “roaring.”
The Trumpometer Index captures this
nicely. Clinton’s end number of 25 means
that the economy then was, on average (using these measures), about 25%
stronger on each measure than it is now, driven mostly by that GDP number. Bush’s end number was 53% worse than that of
today. So it is fair to say that, under
Obama, the economy made it almost all the way back to the Clinton Era. And now we re-set the Index, re-name it the
Trumpometer, and see – objectively – where he takes it.
Clinton
ends; Bush begins 1/20/2001
|
Bush
ends; Obama begins 1/20/2009
|
Obama
ends; Trump begins 1/20/2017
|
Trump in progress
Feb 28, 2017
|
|
Clintonometer
|
Bushometer
|
Obameter
|
Trumpometer
|
|
25
|
-53
|
0
|
1
|
|
Unemployment Rate
|
4.2
|
7.8
|
4.7
|
4.8
|
Consumer Confidence
|
129
|
38
|
114
|
115
|
Price of Gas
|
1.27
|
1.84
|
2.44
|
2.43
|
Dow Jones
|
10,588
|
8,281
|
19,732
|
20,812
|
GDP
|
4.5
|
-6.2
|
1.9
|
1.9
|
No comments:
Post a Comment
Leave a comment