Shrill

 Krugman paints the worst case scenario in continued oil disruption. The current price of a barrel of oil - as he explains - is largely speculative. The oil that left the Gulf at the start of the war is only now getting to East Asia. In other words, the actual reduction in the supply of oil really hasn't hit yet. The price increases we are seeing are based the mostly reasonable assumptions about what the price of oil will look like if the war continues. 

There are two looming problems.

The first is that even if Trump could extract himself from this problem of his own making, the supply of oil would remain reduced for months, as damaged Gulf facilities come back online. Additionally, that transportation lag means that the weeks it takes for Gulf oil to get to Asia means that the current void in shipping will last weeks. 

The second is that Trump appears to be doubling down on this insanity by sending just enough troops to make it worse without resolving anything. If he launches an attack on Kharg Island, the disruption in oil supplies will continue well into 2027. 

Once that happens, we could be looking at chained inflation. That was the condition in the 1970s, whereby the price of, well, every output was set in anticipation of where the price of inputs would be. During this latest inflationary period around Covid, everyone assumed that conditions would return to normal, so they didn't want to raise prices too much and drive away customers. If you learn that prices will remain high for months or possibly years, then you raise prices by a lot in June in anticipation of the higher prices in November. 

The problem is that this creates the upwards spiral of inflation that can only be cured by recessionary monetary policy. 

Great job, Donnie. 

Green Shoots

 Krugman notes the unsettling affection that Trump and the creatures around him have for Viktor Orban, Hungary's authoritarian leader. Orban and Putin represent a certain form of autocrat that tends to rely on racial nostalgia to legitimize the destruction of democratic norms. In Orban's case, it was the migrant crisis of a decade ago, where the trauma of the Arab Spring and the civic violence that arose around it spurred a mass exodus of migrants into Europe. In Putin's case, it's nostalgia for the Soviet Union and its ability to dominate the ethnic minorities within its border, minorities that now have their own countries.

In Trump's case, it's nostalgia for an imagined America where white men could dominate everything and "those people" knew their place. There's always fiction in nostalgia, and Trump's version is especially fictitious. Still, the very fact (and it is a fact) that America's president is openly siding with these authoritarian regimes against the democratic regimes of our erstwhile allies is deeply, deeply wrong on a strategic, moral and historical level. 

Trump's rolling disaster of a war in Iran has him silent while Russia provides Iran with targeting data to strike American military assets. He has let Russian tankers supply Cuba, because he simply cannot break with Putin, it seems. Trump routinely insults our allies and neighbors, but have you ever heard him insult Putin? Or even Xi? Is this just a deep seated affinity or does Russia, in fact, have the Epstein Goods on Trump?

Hungary will be a clear test of the long term success of Orbanist politics. He has thoroughly corrupted a young democracy, but if they can vote him out, then the odds of success here in America for a November Blue Wave would seem to be higher. Our institutions are older and more decentralized. Ideally, a Democratic House or hopefully a fully Democratic Congress will be able to investigate Trump's ties to autocrats, whether in Moscow, Budapest or Riyadh. 

Cursed

 Krugman makes a clickbaity argument that the US might be suffering from the resource curse. The resource curse take two forms. The one I'm most familiar with is that poorer, developing countries that have abundant mineral wealth are usually autocratic. The reason is the inverse of the old revolutionary slogan, "No taxation with representation." In a resource state, there is no need for taxation so there is no representation. Additionally, control of the government means control of the resource (usually oil), and that means losing control of the government means losing access to all that wealth. 

Krugman does not seem to be argument that for the US, and I would agree, we aren't in that state. Yesterday's No Kings rallies may have had 8,000,000 attendees. I would say that they one I attended was not necessarily better attended than the one in the fall, but that supportive honking by passersby was higher. Protesting is...weird. It does however stand in for civic engagement. 

The reason why the US is not likely to rely on resources to become a petrostate is twofold. The first is that despite being the world's largest oil producer, oil is still a relative small part of our overall economy. If you want to get rich in America, you go to Wall Street or Silicon Valley, not to Washington, DC to extract rents from the oil industry. 

The second reason is that America already has a well-established democracy. Yes, Trump is waging wholescale war on our democratic institutions and norms, but just like his war against Iran, his tactical wins do not mean strategic victory. Part of the "logic" of authoritarianism and the heart of Project 2025 is that you can simply overwhelm the opposition through "strength" and speed of action. Trump has achieved speed of action - again, in both his assaults on America's democratic institutions and Iran's military infrastructure. However, he cannot understand that the opposition gets its say, too. 

American history is not a triumphal march of progress. It is a long and painful conflict between our ideals and our baser instincts. It is messy. Right now, it seems like everything is unravelling. However, as I said a few months ago, as a political scientist, I would argue that you should be afraid. As a historian, I would argue that you should be patient.

No Kings

 I am off to - I think - the third protest I've ever been to. The second one was No Kings this fall. I am not a protest guy, I am not a crowds guy, but this shit is so fucked up and bullshit that it's prompting me to overcome my previous scruples.

Meanwhile, CPAC was sparsely attended and riven by factions. Factionalism is rare on the right, but common within revolutionary movements, which sums up the basic friction between Trumpism and institutional conservatism.

The House Republicans have rejected the bill to reopen DHS except for ICE. Senate Republicans caved because the TSA situation was getting out of hand and perhaps some of them secretly wanted to rein ICE in a bit, too. The House catering to Trump's diktats over not funding TSA means that it could not be any clearer who is behind the chaos in America's airports.

We will see how many people take to the streets to protest Trump's corruption, war mongering, incompetence and authoritarianism. I'm guessing that the numbers will be large (providing people can afford gas to get there). If it's as big as the fall protests - or even larger - then I think it's pretty clear where the energy rests going into the midterms. I think the key to a Blue Tsunami is a combination of extremely motivated anti-Trump voters and dispirited Trump voters who stay home. 

So if you can go today, go.

Could Trump Accidentally Do Some Good?

 Trump's war is a slow rolling disaster at this point. However, there might be some positives.

The first, obviously, is that if this trajectory continues, Democrats win the House and the Senate.

The second is that rising energy costs will nudge more and more people to renewables. It will be interesting to see if the GOP Congress decides to make things easier on consumers by rolling back the regulatory and fiscal attacks on renewable energy. I know I certainly would like a return to solar tax credits.

The third is that maybe this war explodes the AI bubble. Now this is "good" in a narrow set of ways. Bubbles have to burst, it is in their nature. Best to get that over with. Second, anything that slows down AI and gives us time to adapt to it is good. Third, crashing AI companies means fewer data centers and, again, lower energy costs. Data centers are being built out beyond requirements, and stopping that would be helpful before it gets out of hand.

Of course, we could very well be looking at a 2008 scenario. The AI boom is pretty much the only thing keeping America out of a recession, and once that bubble bursts, we should expect things to get very panful. It could lead to a full blown financial crisis, as many financial firms are knee deep in AI debt.

Luckily, we have a crack team of crisis managers in charge of the federal government, so I'm sure we will sail right through. 

Democrats Win One

 Republicans have caved on the TSA standalone funding. I saw someone online predictably say that this was less a Democratic win than a Republican loss, because Democrats can never win. Bullshit. Democrats laid out a clear line, they held to it and Trump, then Senate Republicans caved. That's a clear "W."

This doesn't really stop the depredation of ICE, but it does begin the process of isolating ICE's budget within the debate over DHS.

Iran Isn't Going To Back Down

 Krugman has a cryptic post about a security briefing that left him depressed. My guess is that Trump's latest movements bringing Marines and the 82 Airborne "online" has people more or less assuming that we will commit ground troops at some point. We know that Trump's war and his deployment of ICE to airports is not popular, but with the latter, how much of that is simply disgust with Trump personally? What could Trump do that would make 55% of the country approve of his actions (besides resigning and fleeing the country).?

Trump seems to realize that he's shitting the bed in Iran or at least that the oil markets are giving him feedback that he knows will be painful for him politically. What's also clear is that Iran understands this, too. Trump can ask for a ceasefire or a peace plan, but Iran has no incentive right now to give him anything. In fact, Iran has denied any talks with the US and has only engaged - it seems - with other regional powers. We have reports that Saudi Arabia wants to keep the war going and is basically on the same page with Israel in that regards, but other Gulf states may want an off ramp and might be willing to negotiate separate deals with Iran.

Right now, Iran's chokehold is on the Straits of Hormuz. That is going to be painful for months maybe years even after it opens. It's not a faucet that you simply turn on and off. At some point, I would expect some sort of terrorist attack on a military or political target in the US. Iran basically has nothing left to lose. Even if they are wiped out tactically, strategically they have some very powerful cards and are playing them. 

The US military under Trump has been a series of tactical triumphs without any coherent strategic goals, beyond "make things go boom" and "exploit the chaos to make money." Iran's strategic goals would include any pain that they can inflict on the US plus keeping their regime basically intact. If they do so, their prestige would rise in the Middle East. Saddam Hussein got his ass kicked in 1991, but because he survived, he actually improved his reputation. That's where Iran is right now and there is no amount of shitposting that Trump can do to alter that fact.  

The Polls That Matter

Special elections are just that: special. Still, the Democrats have been crushing special elections since Trump took office, and last night they flipped two seats in Florida's legislature. One of the districts includes Mar A Lago. Trump, of course, voted by mail, which he's trying to kill with the SAVE Act. 

There are examples of interviews and posts of people decrying their vote for Trump. Anecdotes, though, are not data. The elections we have seen with Democrats overperforming by around 10-15 points, suggest that those anecdotes represent something real. Reuters has his polling collapsing even further and there's clearly some flop sweat in the GOP today.

Ideally what we see in November is that Democrats are prepared to crawl over broken glass and swim through lemon juice to vote whereas many MAGA and non-MAGA Republicans just stay home, dispirited by the shitshow their orange god has unleashed on America and the world.

I really think there will be competitive Senate races in Ohio, Iowa, Alaska and even Kansas. There is going to be a Senate seat that flips Blue that will have people surprised. Not because MAGA is abandoning Trump personally, but because they have soured on politics althogether. 

Not Brilliant

 The Times runs down how RFK has gutted public health.

Brilliant

 Read this on Iran. 

It's all just insane.

Corruption: Once More With Feeling

 It has been my position that the single most consistent line of attack against Trump should be his corruption. Everything that he does can likely be tied back to some interest - usually including himself - that profits from his actions. Recently, he decided to pay a French company $1,000,000,000 to cede their lease to a wind farm off the East Coast. Why? Why would the US government deprive a private company the opportunity to build a wind farm? There is the usual Republican friendliness to petrochemical companies, but this seems so obviously self-defeating. When it all comes out, I would bet dollars to doughnuts that there is money changing hands under the table.

In Iran, we now have pretty compelling circumstantial evidence that Trump and the people around him are conducting insider trading around futures markets. Krugman is being little - it has to be said - shrill in calling this treason, but it sure as hell seems like a crime. I don't think he engaged in this very unpopular war simply to make a buck, but once begun and especially since it started going poorly, he has done what he always does, which is to find a way to personally benefit from the destruction that he and his policies caused.

Perhaps the reason why the oil shock from Trump's War has been somewhat muted is because markets aren't necessarily following the TACO rule so much as not wanting to invest in an obviously rigged market. Trump has now said we are negotiating with Iran. Iran says this is bullshit. There is some evidence that Trump's new timeline of five days is just to get Marines in theater, but not attack until markets close on Friday. 

I remain guardedly optimistic that Trump's corruption and incompetence will undo him. Fraud doesn't work in the long run, and the man is the walking personification of fraud. When his hold on power is wrested away from him, the creatures that have gorged themselves at this trough of corruption and self-dealing might be surprised that he did not pardon them on the way out. 

The challenge for whomever restores American democracy will be to hold those who have violated the public trust accountable, despite the inevitable caterwauling about "lawfare" from Fox and Fiends. Trump was prosecuted because he's broken the law. This has given Republicans cover for when Trump demands spurious investigations into his opponents, based on political malice. There needs to be a Truth and Reconciliation committee, only without the reconciliation. 

Someone said that the 48th president of the United States (unless it's Vance because of the actuarial table) will spend an entire term cleaning up Trump's mess. That process has to start by driving the money changers from the temple. 

The Fictive Nexus

 Trump's war with Iran is only his second most important war. The war with the truth is one that he has been waging for his entire life. As a malignant narcissist, Trump cannot be wrong. He is always right, always winning. The realities of the Iran War are intruding upon that cocoon of lies. Today, Trump said that he was close to a negotiated deal with Iran; Iran said, "Bullshit." 

The question some have asked is whether Trump's lies about the war are 
A) Part of an effort to manipulate markets.
B) A fundamental disconnect with reality.
C) Just who he is: a liar.

Reality really does get the last say. Trump, however, has created a public career where his lying has not been nearly the disqualifying character flaw that we would have hoped it would be. Trump's congenital contempt for the truth has somehow not become the defining trait when the new media reports on his utterances. When Trump says anything at this point, it should be treated as false until otherwise verified. The continuing, persistent treatment of Trump as if he were a normal human being - much less a normal president - is the height of the sanewashing that routinely occurs.

This is why Trump could only have risen to prominence in the Republican Party. The reason is because of Fox News. Fox has primed a generation or two of "conservatives" to respond in a Pavlovian way to the red meat and lies of Republican politicians. We have certified morons like Senator Tommy Tuberville decrying Sharia law in the US...which isn't a thing. But if you've marinated in Fox for decades, it might be. 

One of the theories behind John Fetterman's complete abandonment of Democratic partisanship is that after his stroke, he's become closer to his Fox News addicted brother. That would absolutely track. 

Trump is a uniquely awful human being - among the worst public figures this or any other country has produced. 

He could not have become president without Fox News.

MAGA Is A Cult

 Morris looks at the viral poll from CNN that says that 100% of MAGA supports Trump's war in Iran. Of course, MAGA supports the war, because Trump could literally give their kid measles, the kid could die and they would eat that tragedy up with a spoon. It is absolutely a cult, and trying to care about MAGA is pointless, unless you're Trump.

The critical numbers to look at are who is self-identifying as MAGA and self-identifying as Republican. MAGA has slipped from 36% to 30%. That's significant. We need to keep an eye on people moving from Republican to independent, as well. Typically, people don't identify as Republican and vote from Democrats. They stop identifying as Republicans first.

Trump is such a uniquely awful human being that he continually repels people. Many Republicans keep returning to him like an abused dog hoping this time will be different. Some, though, start to fall away. As they fall away, it really doesn't matter in November if they vote for Democrats or just stay home. Either one works.

Oil Vey

 Oil markets are experiencing real pain right now. Krugman tries to contextualize them, but when he makes a video on Thursday, the situation changes by Saturday.

Gas prices - as distinct from oil prices - have already exploded. Before the war, local gas was about $2.85, not it's $3.99. I've already felt that there is a fair amount of skullduggery in oil markets, but this all seems to make sense. Markets are beginning to realize that Trump can't simply TACO his way out of this mess, as critical facilities are simply gone and will take years to replace. Farmers may not be able to fertilize their fields.

The appalling decision by Trump to open the spigots to Russian and Iranian oil is because he's legitimately and properly concerned by the spike in oil prices, but with so many other critical commodities passing through the Straits of Hormuz, all he's really doing is putting money in Iran and Russian coffers.

Fucking lunacy.

Strategic Incoherence

 If you are thinking either tactically or especially strategically about something, you have to consider multiple outcomes of every action you take. If you do X, what are the potential outcomes? Which of those outcomes is particularly catastrophic, and are there factors that can remove those catastrophic outcomes? 

You absolutely cannot "wing it" or go with your gut.

Unless you're Donald Trump and the gaggle of sycophants and fools that constitute his inner (and outer) circle.

The goal - such as it is - was apparently regime change. The best opportunity for that was when the people of Iran were being gunned down in the streets in early January. Even then, it was primarily wishful thinking, even magical thinking. The ease of Venezuela clearly influenced Trump, as did the need to reassert dominance domestically and internationally.

The result, so far, has been pretty catastrophic. Apparently, no one really expected Iran to do the thing that we all knew Iran would do: throttle oil supplies. For someone so locked into the world view of the 1970s, Trump's ignorance on this is striking. 

To be clear, this is not about national security. Iran did not pose an immediate threat to the US. We've been mostly containing them for half a century. By threatening regime change, we've removed any constraints on Iranian behavior, as this is an existential conflict for them. Yet, apparently, we went into a war with our goals - regime change on the cheap - completely inadequate to the ability to influence events in Iran.

The final expression of just how unbelievably fucked up the "thinking" is on Iran is this: We are letting Iran export oil and reducing sanctions. We are bombing their country, but we absolutely cannot allow them to stop selling oil to China or China might fuck with us and our plate is kinda full right now. Allowing Iran to sell their oil - hell, allowing Russia to sell their oil - is not in America's national security interest. When you are in a conflict - directly or indirectly in Russia's case - you throttle their economy. You have a PLAN to throttle their economy. 

In World War II, America flew a dangerous and costly mission to bomb the oil facilities in Ploesti, Romania. It was the primary oil facility in Nazi occupied Europe, and it was critical that we use oil as a weapon to deprive their military of a critical resource. Today, we are letting Iranian and Russian oil on the market because Trump knows that rising oil prices are politically perilous for him. The war started out unpopular and it will only get more unpopular as the cost of the war and the price of oil soars ever upwards. 

Turns out having imbeciles running your government is a bad idea.

It's Not The Crime, It's The Cover Up

 The refrain of "it's not the crime, it's the cover up" from the Watergate Era, refers to Nixon's role in covering up the White House involvement in the Watergate Break In. In order to protect the White House in general, Nixon authorized criminal actions to thwart the investigation.

Today, we have something that in many ways is far worse than Watergate, with the Epstein saga. Here, again, we have a clear cover up that creates a visible effect without actually being visible. We don't know what was in the investigation that Senator Wyden uncovered (that Richardson references at the link). What we do know is that there are only two possible explanations for the DOJ's contempt of Congress.

The first and most obvious one is that Trump and/or other members of his administration are all over the files. Wyden's discoveries relate to drug trafficking and money laundering (in addition to the human trafficking that we have been discussing). We know how Trump was always kind of short of money. We know that Trump laundered bribes through his properties - renting or selling above market prices to Russians and others. 

The second, but still plausible explanation is simply that Trump and Bondi and others obstruct for the sake of obstructing. Deny, attack, deny, attack. That's pretty much the single playbook that they use. Never admit weakness, never admit you were wrong. Know that Fox and similar organizations will smooth out the rough edges of your lies. If you cave into Wyden on the money laundering and drug trafficking issue, then you might have to cave on other redacted files.

The problem is that by constantly covering up whatever is in the files, you're allowed for the worst possible information to become plausible. The cover up becomes confirmation of the crimes.

It's The Corruption - An Ongoing Series

 It is a daunting task to try and create a singular line of attack on Donald Trump and MAGA. There is just so much that they do that is transgressive, incompetent, cruel and self-defeating that finding a single tack to take - a central narrative - can be really hard. You can focus on ICE's murderous behavior...but here comes Epstein. Focusing on Epstein? Here comes some racism!

I've argued that corruption needs to be a powerful unifying thread in attacks on Trump. First, because he's easily - and I mean by far - the most corrupt president in the history of the Republic. Harding, Grant, Nixon...they didn't really personally enrich themselves. Trump is making money for himself and his crime family. 

As Krugman points out, there are very, very extensive ties between Trump and the petrostates of the Persian Gulf. There has been a lot written about whether Israel forced us into war, with a lot of that discussion veering quickly into antisemitism. However, the role that Saudi Arabia played has been less focused upon. 

"We went to war for Israel and Saudi Arabia, and the result is that oil companies and oil producing states are going to reap a massive windfall" is a decent line of attack. The "forever wars" rhetoric could founder on the fact that at some point Trump will simply declare victory and go home. I don't think Iran is a "forever war"; it's the expenditure of tens of billions of US taxpayer dollars to make oil producers rich - just like his ban on renewable energy is to make oil producers rich.

Anger at rising gas prices will translate into anger at Exxon and Shell and Gulf. Link that to Trump via the corrupt self-dealing that is exemplified in everything that orange fucker does.

Does Trump Meet The Qualifications For Psychosis?

 It's not exactly a specious question. He seems so incredibly detached from reality.

However, Trump's manifest and repeated lying is a personality trait. He simply cannot tell a truth that might reflect poorly on himself. The Iran war is pretty much already won, but Europe needs to send help immediately to reopen the Straits of Hormuz, which are open anyway. Tell me how that is the utterings of a sane person. Then again, he has always simply lied about everything. Prices are down! He won in a landslide! The world respects us!

At what point does his repeated inability to tell the truth reach the level of psychosis? Particularly since he has absolutely no one around him who will tell him the truth.

There has been reams written about the sanewashing that the media does for Trump. They treat his utterances as somehow true or they frame them in a way that might make sense. Trump can say something that sure seems false, but it is accorded the weight that we normally give presidential statements. Then, inevitably, the truth is different than what Trump said, but the media has already moved on. Then he says something else that, again, is treated as true.

Trump's ramblings - if not filtered through this media screen - would seem to be so detached from actual reality that it would call into question whether Trump understands what is actually real. You know. Psychosis.

We've typically understood Trump as being a liar, a profoundly ignorant even stupid man and a man clearly slipping into cognitive decline, perhaps full on dementia. I have to wonder if all those dementia tests that he passed - but that his doctors feel the need to repeatedly administer - are perhaps something that needs to be a screen for actual psychosis.

We have reached the point where we don't know if the President of the United States is capable of interacting with reality.

Back Home

 Anyone volunteer to help Donny Small Fingers out of his jam in the Straits of Hormuz?

The Board of Peace?

His friend Putin?

Anyone?

Bueller?

Maybe shitting on all our allies and then launching a war of choice was a bad idea, actually.

Healthy Lifestyle

 There are a lot of heath benefits to living in Europe/Spain. Certainly, we have walked A LOT. We eat smaller meals. The food is less processed.

But I've also been consuming less news, and that's been a blessing.

Of course, come tomorrow or Tuesday, I'll be back at it. I do wonder about the Ariana Grande Voter - that lump of barely sentient clay who tunes into elections every four years and votes their feelings. These are people who are going to be surprised when food prices rise because the Strait of Hormuz are closed and that will have a massive impact of fertilizer prices which will be passed on to consumers by the fall.

Everything is a genuine surprise to these people, but even in my relative cocoon the war is on the background.

Greeting From Spain

 Once again, it is striking how much more beautiful Europe's urban public spaces are than ours are in the United States. I'm not 100% sure if this is a legacy of imperial grandeur and therefore inherently anti-democratic or a values system that prioritizes public goods that is inherently very democratic.

Anyway, Spain is beautiful even in March.

The Adults In The Room

 In 2016, many Republicans - when faced with the grotesquerie that is Donald Trump - assured themselves that the "adults in the room" would restrain his worst, most venal impulses. Every time Trump did something egregious, this concept of "adults in the room" was widely mocked.

When he ran again in 2024, many warned that Trump 2.0 would not have even those few voices of reason that had apparently constrained him during his first term. 

What we are seeing in Iran is a vivid example of what happens when you put people like Pete Hegseth in charge of a massive bureaucracy like the Pentagon and then have him running around doing workouts with the troops rather than soberly (ahem) considering the impact of military policy. Trump Unleashed was catnip to his cultists, but it's already resulted in the murders of three Americans by state security forces, crashing the post-Covid recovery with tariffs and macroeconomic uncertainty, measles outbreaks, widespread, staggering amounts of corruption and the wrecking of a global system of alliances that has largely prevented Great Power conflict.

This was, of course, predictable and predicted. 

I'm going to be moving around a bit, not sure how much content I'll be providing for the next week. 

Surprised By The Unsurprising

 Anyone with the sense Dog gave a Labrador retriever would have known that Iran would strangle the Straits of Hormuz. Anyone with the sense that Dog gave a guinea pig would have known that there are thousands of Americans and other nationals in the Gulf and they might want to be evacuated.

When people say that we "rushed" to war with Iran, we do know mean that this was a last minute decision. it certainly seems like this was weeks in the planning. It is precisely the incoherence and incompetence of this "plan" that has sober people concerned. Iran has likely been planning for this since last June, but really for decades. It is not clear that Trump and his crew of podcasters and Fox News personalities have done anything but dust off some old Pentagon contingency plans.

This has led to Trump apparently brow beating oil executives to bring down prices of a global commodity that he has just imperiled. "I've cocked things up, but I'm relying on you guys to fix it." Apparently, he didn't even bother to refill the strategic oil reserve before launching this war.

If anything, our latest foray into the chaos of the Middle East should remind us that renewable energy is not just environmentally sound, but it makes sense in terms of economics and national security.

Spiraling

 I've mentioned Josh Marshall's theory that all politics are unitary. If you suffer a setback on the economy, that effects the way people view your ability in other areas. Roughly speaking this is about governing legitimacy. Jimmy Carter was elected because he was bracingly honest after Vietnam and Watergate. He was undone by some of his own actions, but largely because of events in the...wait for it...Middle East, especially Iran. 

If we look at Trump's polling on Iran, we can see it's really unpopular for being in the first days of a military conflict. Perhaps - as many have argued - that this is because Trump never made the case for striking Iran. Another argument is that he's simply lost the support of the majority of the American people and no matter what he does, it will be unpopular because he's unpopular. 

Now, we have rising gas prices, and that tends to impact all sorts of prices. We also have a bad jobs report, both the number we lost in February and the revision downwards for December and January. Trump's firing of the head of BLS might get your a favorable tilt on initial reports, but the revisions will typically be downwards, when the data is more concrete. People have been worried about the economy in ways that the data suggested didn't make sense, but perhaps that soft job market that crept in after the chaos of Liberation Day tariff-palooza really was on people's minds.

The "affordability" crisis is certainly not going to be helped by Trump's war in Iran. Trump's numbers on the economy were already bad, and then he goes off in all of his speeches about how things are actually great, and have you seen these drapes? People were getting pissed about the economy before Trump launched a war that very predictably has spiked oil prices. 

Meanwhile, yesterday, Trump finally fired a Cabinet official when the overwhelming corruption of Kristi Noem became too much even for Republicans on the Hill to stomach. Of course, being Trump he nominated Markwayne Mullion, arguably the stupidest member of Congress, but a scalp is a scalp. Noem no doubt thought she could get away with cheating on her husband on the taxpayer's dime, funneling money to cronies and killing American citizens in the street, because Trump would protect her.

Surprise!

If you're Pam Bondi or Pete Hegseth, just know that once you become a liability in his eyes, he will cast you over the side before you can blink. 

Republicans are fleeing from Congress and dropping out of their re-election bids, because they can see the coming catastrophe. Trump - stupid, senile and arrogant - will refuse to accept his many setbacks. 

He's spiraling, and he will continue to spiral.

Dire Straits

 Josh Marshall has been tracking the impact of Iran's threats to shipping through the Straits of Hormuz. Basically, there was no planning and insurance carriers can't insure all these ships.

This basic level of fuck up is exactly what we should expect from an administration of Fox News rejects, podcasters and mediocre white supremacists. Any idiot could have predicted that Iran would close the Straits, just like any idiot could have predicted that American citizens (and others) might not want to be stranded in a war zone. In Afghanistan, the collapse was so fast and unpredictable that there probably wasn't anything that could be done. This was a war of choice being planned for weeks, if not months. 

And apparently no one considered the fact that Iran might strike back at the Straits or at commercial air traffic?

Fucking morons.

Talarico

 James Talarico won the Democratic primary to challenge for the Senate seat in November. Democrats have been waiting years to win statewide in Texas, but there are signs that maybe...maybe...this could be the year. 

There are a few important reasons.

- Republicans are in disarray. Cornyn and the scandal magnet Ken Paxton will go to a bruising runoff. If Paxton knocks off Cornyn, the seat can be considered a true toss-up. Paxton is super MAGA-ish, so it's entirely possible he succeeds in the runoff.

- Hispanics are fleeing the GOP. Democrats always assumed that what seemed to them to be pretty racist statements and policies from Trump and the GOP would drive Hispanic voters to Democrats. It hadn't happened. That was before Trump 2.0, with Stephen Miller's pogroms unleashed everywhere.

- Talarico seems a better fit with Texas. Crockett is a cable news star and brilliant at invective and the sort of insurgent politics that people say they want from Democrats. Her theory of the election - that there were a ton of un-mobilized Democratic votes - is almost always wrong. Talarico talks like the Sunday School teacher that he is. He's a calming presence. He believes in persuading people fed up with Trump's chaos and corruption to switch sides. This seems key in mobilizing those Hispanic voters.

- Turnout will, in fact, matter, but not in the way Crockett hypothesized. Talarico's job is to get suburban college educated voters and Hispanics to switch from the GOP to him. Democrats - and we have ample evidence for this - will crawl over broken glass to vote this November. Republicans? Especially some of those irregular Trump voters? The various factions of the Trump coalition who feel betrayed - by Epstein, by Iran, by MAHA, by the economic promises - they don't have to vote for Talarico. They just have to stay home.

This is why I think Talarico is such a good pick, because there would have been Republican voters who would have gone to the polls to vote AGAINST Jasmine Crockett, but with MAGA collapsing along with Trump's mental faculties, they can just stay the hell home. 

I think that's the key in all sorts of races, like Ohio, Iowa, Alaska, North Carolina and maybe even some surprising states like South Carolina or Kansas. If Republicans are just dispirited and don't vote, that counts, too.

The Contingency Of History

 Martin Longman runs through a connection I had not known about. A critical moment in the history of Iran was the death of Ayatollah Khomeini, as it is often difficult to retain a revolutionary ideology after the charismatic leader of that revolution dies. It's what Max Weber referred to as the "routinization of charisma" and it's hard to pull off.

The logical successor to Khomeini was Ayatollah Hossein Montazeri. He was the most senior and respected cleric in Iran, and Khomeini's ideology required that the most senior cleric by in charge of the rule by religious authority. There was an friend of Montazeri named Mehdi Hashemi who was a complete asshole and got sideways of Khomeini, and that blew up in Montazeri's face.

I knew that this had happened, but I didn't know about Hashemi's role in this.

The reason this is important is that Montazeri was not completely wedded to the idea of the velayat-e faqih or rule by religious authority. He certainly wasn't a fan of trying to export the Iranian Revolution.

Ali Khamenei was.

In the span before his death, Khomeini worked with Ali Rafsanjanah - a nakedly cynical man - to elevate Khamenei over Montazeri. Khamenei was a revolutionary ideologue and Iran continued down the path that now has it as a pariah state at war with all of its neighbors.

I believe that history is largely about big forces, but individuals matter. What would have happened, for instance, if James Comey doesn't announce his investigation in Hillary Clinton's emails and/or the Stormy Daniels story gets out in October of 2016. What happens if Clinton wins is pretty obvious. Donald Trump never sniffs public office and America and the world is in a better place.

Incoherent America

 Lots of work is being done around the realization that Americans don't hold truly ideological or even informed opinions about politics. Because the world is complicated, people's opinion of things can shift depending on how you ask them. That's how you get a slim majority rejecting "amnesty" and a sizable majority supporting a "path to citizenship." 

Perhaps one of Trump's political strengths is how well he mirrors this inchoate, unexamined, almost thoughtless approach to politics and policies. Trump's shifting explanations for war against Iran are not going to win him any real converts to his war of choice, but they DO reflect the way many Americans respond to political dilemmas, often taking a position and then retroactively finding a justification. A person could be xenophobic. Why? Jobs! No, access to public goods! No, crime! No, disease! No, actually it's jobs again!

Good policy is not guaranteed by good process. You can have a perfectly reasoned and coherent case for war and it is still likely to be a bad policy. (That doesn't mean having a terrible case will work either.)

What it does suggest is that the most ideological people have a flawed view of other people's politics. If you believe people are as ideologically focused as you are, you will presume that ideological appeals will win their votes. You just need the pitch perfect 12 point plan and suddenly everyone will vote for your program. Take Project 2025 (please). The more these reactionary ideologues wrote down what they were going to do, the less popular it was. The fact that Trump is governing from the blueprint that he expressly disavowed is one reason why he's so far underwater.

Lots of the terminally online Millennials hate Bill Clinton, but there is a reason why he was so popular. Same with Obama. They were capable and pragmatic. Yes, as partisan politicians they had Things They Wanted To Do, but they weren't eager to couch them in ideological terms.

One of the most deleterious developments in American politics has been the severe ideological sorting of the parties since the 1990s. This means that they people at the head of our politics are often captured by ideological thinking in ways that obstruct winning elections. Given that one party has dived headlong into authoritarian patrimonialism if not fascism, I'd say winning elections is important.

The Politics Of Trump's War

 It is inevitable that any discussion of the conflict in Iran turn to the impact on Trump and his political fortunes. Especially given the fact that a Democratic Wave in the November elections might be the difference between America surviving as a democracy or not.

Trump's inherent incoherence is going to work against him here. As he tosses out contradictory war aims and negotiating positions, it becomes clear he doesn't have a framework for "winning the war." What's more, Trump made no effort to "sell" the war to the American public. He did not use the State of the Union address to make the case; he only tossed out a few videos on his social media site. He did not engage Congress or the American people in this conflict. It seems that he assumed he would get a quick and clean Venezuelan outcome - neglecting the fact that Venezuela is still a mess.

Americans don't seem pleased with this. YouGov threw out a snap poll (take with a grain of salt) and only 34% of Americans supported the war. In March 2003, 71% of Americans supported the invasion of Iraq, largely because the Bush Administration made a relentless (and flawed and mendacious) case to the American public. Republicans naturally support Trump far more than Democrats, but while 10% of Democrats express any support for the war, only 20% of independents do. Democrats oppose the strikes at 70%, but independents oppose it at 52%. 

Trump never made the case for war, and now he's throwing off bangers like "there will likely be more (casualties) before it ends. That's the way it is." He routinely references Venezuela, "What we did in Venezuela, I think, is the perfect, the perfect scenario." He thinks he can waltz in and out of a Middle Eastern war, the way he did in the Caribbean, which betrays an unsurprising but woeful level of ignorance.

Meanwhile, Iran's closing the Straits of Hormuz is unlikely to make people think that Trump is laser focused on affordability. It might not crater the economy the way the 1979 Iranian Revolution did, but supply chain disruptions have a way of making themselves felt. One driver of the "Biden" Inflation was the supply chain disruption to world oil and gas markets by the Russian invasion of Ukraine. There is no reason to believe that we won't see another oil shock, even if it doesn't tip us into stagflation.

Trump is an idiot. Most of the people around him are idiots. They believe in performing on social media over doing the hard work of crafting policy and long term strategy. "The Venezuelan raid went great, let's do that again. It will make great TV." Except the American people are really not at all ready for this, and they made no effort to prepare them for it.

Trump has no reservoir of good will or public trust to draw on, beyond his diminishing base. He is absolutely incapable of filling the role of selfless war time president. I would be shocked if he met the caskets of fallen soldiers at Dover. What's more, it is precisely his rural voter base that is sick and tired of these wars, because they disproportionately fight them. 

Iran is playing the long game, because it must. It can launch swarms of cheap drones until America's supply of anti-missile weapons is gone. If it resorts to tactics that have served it in the past, one would have to expect terrorist attacks at some point. They merely have to hunker down and endure. 

Trump is talking about a four week war. Venezuela might be instructive here, in that we really haven't changed much about the government of Venezuela, except who sits atop it. But we declared victory and moved on. Maybe we see a bunch more dead people - American, Iranian, Israeli, Qatari, Kuwaiti - we degrade the Iranian military...and then the war just ends. It's pretty clear that Trump has no real plan to make "regime change" happen. 

I would be shocked if Trump benefits from a "rally 'round the flag" effect. 

Why?

 Why attack Iran now? 

That question is really paramount in my mind as I try and discern why we have engaged in yet another war of choice in the Middle East. Richardson runs through some of the possibilities.

The proper time to launch strikes was during the massive civil unrest that led to the Revolutionary Guard gunning down thousands of its own citizens. However, most of our military assets were tied down off the coast of Venezuela. So there was a lag between the optimal time to launch strikes and the ability to do so. (Apparently the strikes were planned for earlier, but they learned that Khamenei was going to be in a meeting, so they moved the strikes to target that meeting.)

The popular theory online is, of course, that this should be named Operation Epstein Fury. It's all just another distraction from the Epstein Files. Perhaps. More likely this could be seen as a way to "project strength" or "dominate the news" in the face of sagging poll numbers and widespread dissatisfaction with Trump's presidency. The operation in Venezuela went so well, why not try it again? Of course the operation in Venezuela did not arrest Trump's declining poll numbers, but whatever.

Timothy Snyder suggests that this could be part of the overall corruption of the Trump Administration, in particular their cozy relations with the Gulf States. This feels less like a corrupt quid pro quo ("Attack Iran and we will give you billions in crypto.") and more the corruption of shared values. Trump and his minions love the rich emirs of the Gulf, and they could imbibe their perspectives just by constant contact.

It is the opinion of this humble blog that Donald Trump is a profoundly stupid person. He has the vocabulary of a third grader, fer chrissake. Intelligence can take many forms, and Trump's feral ability to attack and lie is kind of intelligence. What he is clearly incapable of doing is looking ten steps ahead. There is a reason no American president has taken this step, despite almost 50 years of hostile relations between the US and Iran. We have no idea what will come next. Trump doesn't care. Venezuela is currently struggling through a humanitarian crisis. Same with Cuba. Trump doesn't care. Iran might collapse into a failed state, like Libya. Trump doesn't care.

Maybe everything works out. Maybe the Iranian army and elements of the Revolutionary Guard switch sides and drive the hardliners from power. Maybe we kill enough hardliners to facilitate that happening. Maybe Iran doesn't degenerate into civil war and chaos, but becomes a vibrant democracy. It's not totally impossible. What IS clear is that we have no plans or ability to shape that particular outcome.