‘Just in case,’ let’s vote Trump out

A farmer harvests soybeans near Luverne, N.D., Oct. 29, 2018. It would have been nice if Trump had talked to any of the hundreds of economists and businessmen who would have told him that tariffs hurt our own economy, “just in case,” columnist Jennifer Rubin says. Dan Koeck/New York Times

The Washington Post reports: “The White House on Tuesday said it would delay imposing tariffs on Chinese imports of cellphones, laptop computers, video game consoles, and certain types of footwear and clothing until Dec. 15, significantly later than the Sept. 1 deadline President Trump had repeatedly threatened.” Stocks moved higher, and economically literate people breathed a sigh of relief.

Now, let’s remember that President Donald Trump, for 2½ years, has said trade wars are easy to win. He’s said that China pays tariffs; and he’s said we are getting rich from tariffs. Now, after days of stock market losses and a steady increase in the risk of a recession, according to economists at top financial firms, Trump has changed his tune. The Post reports:

“‘What we’ve done is we’ve delayed it so they won’t be relevant in the Christmas shopping season,’ Trump said before boarding a flight to western Pennsylvania. “Just in case they might have an impact on people.”

“The economy has shown signs of slowing this year, and some business executives, lawmakers and White House officials had worried that the tariffs were damaging the economy even further. A number of businesses had cut back on investing, in part because they were unsure how Trump planned to proceed with the trade war. Democrats had begun attacking Trump for lacking a coherent plan in his approach to dealing with the Chinese, and the rapid reversals had caused dramatic swings in the stock market.”

Well, it would have been nice if “just in case” tariffs would hurt farmers — driving up the number of bankruptcies to record highs and risking the loss of essential overseas markets — that before launching his trade war and taxing American families (that’s what a tariff is), Trump had talked to any of the hundreds of economists and businessmen out there who would have told him that tariffs hurt our own economy.

It also would have been nice if Trump — “just in case” he was wrong and every qualified economist was right — hadn’t announced these additional tariffs, then blinked and thereby gave China all the reassurance its negotiators would need that the president could either be pressured to dropping the tariffs or just waited out. China can see that Trump cares about the risk of a recession far more than getting a deal, let alone a good deal. China’s hand has improved.

In the “just in case” department, perhaps Trump could be convinced to adopt a scientifically sound approach to climate change because, after all, according to analysis by The Washington Post, “Over the past two decades, the 2 degrees Celsius number has emerged as a critical threshold for global warming. ... (and) more than 1 in 10 Americans — 34 million people — are living in rapidly heating regions, including New York City and Los Angeles. Seventy-one counties have already hit the 2-degree Celsius mark.”

“Just in case” China might take Trump’s nonchalant attitude (“I hope it works out for everybody — including China, by the way”) about China’s troops moving toward a conflict with Hong Kong’s democracy protesters as a green light to brutally suppress the activists, Trump might try issuing an unmistakable warning against violence or even supporting the protesters, as many lawmakers have.

“Just in case” there is a chance that violent white nationalists derive encouragement and confidence from Trump’s language parroting white-nationalist tropes (“an invasion”), he might stop the racist rhetoric.

“Just in case” there is a chance a hard Brexit may trigger a serious recession (which will impact the United States), he might tell national security adviser John Bolton to stop egging on British Prime Minister Boris Johnson.

“Just in case” there is something important in the daily intelligence briefing, he might insist upon reading it every day at an in-person meeting. You never know — he might learn that North Korean leader Kim Jong Un doesn’t really smile only for Trump and doesn’t even like him, but is flattering Trump only as a means of continuing Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons program without fear of U.S. military action or increased sanctions.

You get the point. Trump is a man without curiosity, knowledge or judgment. He’s skated through a life of failures (bankrupting casinos, shuttering everything from an airlines to steaks with his name on it), blaming others or simply hiding evidence of his mismanagement. Now, his record in office is plain for all to see and voters are coming to the conclusion it might be a good idea to get a new president, “just in case” his assault on democratic institutions, his erratic foreign policy, his ignorant trade policy and his reaffirmation of white-nationalist themes would, with another four years in office, pose a dire threat to the planet and to our national security, prosperity and constitutional system. You can never be too careful.

Jennifer Rubin writes reported opinion for the Washington Post.

WPBloom

Tags

Recommended for you

(27) comments

Airball55

So who shall we vote for? It seems each candidate backs up everyday. And Now Mr. Sanders has proposed the most extreme of energy plans yet. No chance. But at least he is putting forward some ideas. The Bill Mahar theory of basically hoping for an economic collapse, stock market crash, job and business loss just won't work and sadly it's a characteristic of hate and racism never seen. Sadly jerks like this get to spread this on TV. Some candidates were moving center and even going after Obama administration policies i.e. ACA Obamacare but that quickly was a tactic that was withdrawn upon the party leadership basically telling folks to not "go there." Solutions for immigration, infrastructure projects, national defense, job creation, price controls, etc..that's what most want to here. Which candidate will go this way? It seems they are all too busy telling people how racist and hateful we are for things we have never done, ever did or would ever do lol. We need serious people who have the taxpayer at heart. Who will it be?

Scoot24

Unfortunately the Democratic party is so fixated on Trump they won't even let there candidates agree with anything he's done or disagree with what Obama did. They are self destructing paving the way for the wild man we have in office now.

hermit thrush

this is such a biased perspective. you could have written the same thing in 2016 with the roles of republicans and democrats reversed, and look how it came out.

rockloper

I wonder if Scoot24 is the bigot formally known as scooter whetmore? Ya this discussion format has a lot to be desired. I'm guessing with changes like this the wet is gonna go belly up. Republicans don't desire to be in this country.

Scoot24

Nope, don't know Mr. Whetmore. I've been watching you and your 2 liberal cronies on here for years, with the new format decided to start commenting. BTW, I'm as far from a bigot as you'll get. You just like the liberal rhetoric to satisfy your pain from the 2016 election.

Holmes -- the real one

Puh -- leeze.

That is so lame.

Scoot24

I love how you, loper and hermit go around and defend each other in this forum. It's anti-Trump at all cost no matter what. How close together are your heads buried in the sand?

rockloper

Whether you are a racist or not isn't relevant. You support an idiotic racist - every bit as bad. You better believe the 2016 election was painful. It showed even in this day and age stupid people can bring a charlatan and hitleresk person into power with the help of a foreign enemy. BTW all you bigots say you're not bigots.


Scoot24

I don't support people I support the ideas I think are the best. Trump has made some terrible decisions that I don't support but I actually have the cognitive ability to sort it out instead of only seeing one color. The liberal generalization of prejudice is creating more of a bigoted society than the actual bigots. You think that because people want to provide more security at the border they're bigots. Have you ever spent time on the southern border? My nephew works construction on the border in Texas and a minimum of once a week they have to call Border Patrol because their is an illegal alien on their job site with a gun. Some weeks more than once. The people funneling through the border is continuing to increase but the liberals want to nit pick at what is happening. Because I want to prevent people from coming into our country illegal does not make me a bigot. I don't care what nationality or color they are, they need to do it legally.

Holmes -- the real one

rockloper --

From the reply of that one, i guess we are supposed to believe that choosing the screen name "Scoot24" is just a coincidence. love the part about being the least racist.. or what was that? Something about not a racist bone in the body?

Scoot24

Hey rockloper…..….Hahaha.



I remember seeing whetmore on here and one of my few previous comments was to s/he about their prejudice actually giving conservative a bad name. Keep fishing.

hermit thrush

Scoot24 Aug 19, 2019 2:55pm



That was sarcasm. It did not have all of the facts. What was there was factual but not all of them. You thought the article was good because it justified your liberal view and didn't give any opposing facts. Great journalism there...(sic)

hard to know where to start with this, but first off, this is an opinion piece. it's in the opinion section of the paper. it's not intended to be a comprehensive overview of the subject. i personally think it makes a very compelling case, and evidently you do too, insofar as you have now posted multiple comments on this thread without pointing out a single point of substance (either omitted facts or questionable logic) contrary to the piece. to be very explicit, what are some missing facts here?

Scoot24

I do realize it's an opinion piece and it has become even more obvious that the WDT prints mainly liberal opinion pieces. It's not my job nor do I have the time to do your research for you. It's even more obvious that you will only comprehend the liberal Kool Aid as is evident with years of watching your comments.

hermit thrush

"the WDT prints mainly liberal opinion pieces"

all this goes to show is how profoundly warped your own perspective is. ask regularly-featured columnists christine flowers, george will, jay ambrose, bret stephens, and ramesh ponnuru about it. (while we're at it, i'm not sure if i would call cynthia allen a conservative, but she's definitely not a liberal.)

for that matter, jennifer rubin is the exception which almost perfectly proves the rule: she's a conservative who was almost fanatical in her support of mitt romney in 2012, but because she actually hews to her conservative principles she has come to oppose trump. there's nothing actually liberal about her. (if you're are confusing "liberal" with "opposed to trump" then i don't know what to tell you.)

"It's not my job nor do I have the time to do your research for you."

yep, there it is, the one true tell of everyone who's blowing goods. if you have aces in your hand, you put them on the table. if you don't, then you just tell people to take your word for it.

hermit thrush

*blowing smoke

Holmes -- the real one

hermit thrush

I was going to hazard a reply but your comment says it all.

Holmes

"Just in case" I couldn't imagine a Hillary or a Biden presidency, talk about the end of the US. The level of delusion on the left is such that they're just throwing anything against the wall and seeing if it will stick. See the crowds at Trump's rallies, that is an indicator of who is going to win the 2020 election. Sorry but Biden drawing 35 people isn't going to do it.

Holmes -- the real one

This is a run-of-the-mill example of partisan tripe.

In any disinformation campaign the goal is to foment division by disseminating falsehood. Usually this is done with some modicum of expertise.

Holmes -- the real one

This new system for commenting doesn't even indicate whether a comment is to the column itself or as a reply to another commenter.

My comment -- mentioning "partisan tripe" etc. was directed at the commenter who calls him/herself "Holmes" not at the column itself.

The writer of the column makes a good point.

Scoot24

Yes, because this article had all of the facts not just the liberal view.

hermit thrush

what is delusional is thinking that cherry-picked crowd sizes mean anything in comparison to large-scale polling. and oh by the way, we got through eight years of obama just fine without the end of the u.s., and hillary or biden would be no different.

Scoot24

As we will get through 8 years with Trump. Do you really trust polling? If so your memory is short. 2016 proved that polls are not reliable. Hillary supporters were so fooled by them they still haven't got over it.

hermit thrush

i value empiricism, so of course i "trust" polling. the polls said that dems would retake the house in 2018 and pick up around 30-40 seats, and that turned out to be right on. on the eve of the 2016 election, the polls said trump had about a 30% chance of winning, which means it's not some weird black swan event that he won. 30% chance events don't happen all the time (or else they would be 100% chance events), but they're hardly uncommon.

i also have to say, i really get a chuckle out of all this mind reading people do about clinton supporters. every time people write things like "they still haven't got over it," they're really just telling on themselves. trump is a terrible president. he is a stain on our country. that's why people are upset. i am also still upset about scott norwood missing that field goal in the super bowl against the giants, but let me assure you, with trump it's not just about my team winning or losing.

hermit thrush

good column.

Scoot24

Another good helping of the same Kool Aid.

hermit thrush

you have said "this article had all of the facts not just the liberal view," yet you're also now saying "Another good helping of the same Kool Aid"? suffice it to say this is completely without sense.

Scoot24

That was sarcasm. It did not have all of the facts. What was there was factual but not all of them. You thought the article was good because it justified your liberal view and didn't give any opposing facts. Great journalism there...(sic)

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.