I think the apt way to think about Donald Trump is as a bully. He is not going to pick on someone that can truly fight back. That’s why he hasn’t stood up to Russia in Ukraine (there is also probably some personal leverage that Putin has over him as well). Israel exposed Iran as weak with their coordinated strikes and that’s why he felt comfortable launching a military strike against them.
Overall, I see Trump’s marginal (in the economic textbook sense of the word) impact to be very small on this conflict. The gimme putt metaphor is accurate and funny since Trump is known to give himself ridiculous gimme putts.
I think his stance on the war in Ukraine is a better barometer of what he will do going forward.
Trump has indeed been consistently underestimated. I've underestimated him since 2015. The dark side of this is obvious; no one expected him to attempt an honest-to-God coup instead of accepting defeat in 2020. I am grateful when the bull in the china shop breaks my enemy's vases, but I still don't want him to destroy my vases, and I still think bull-in-a-china-shopism is a terrible way to run a railroad (much less a constitutional republic).
I suspect that, like his first term, Trump's second term will be marked by a handful of successes heavily outweighed by the damage he's done to things patriotic-minded Americans should hold dear (beginning with the Constitution and the rule of law). This will be the result of his boldness, filtered through his character and his beliefs (or lack thereof). We don't have any other president until 2028 (putting aside his bold "jokes" about a third term), so all we can do is hope for the best - and appreciate it fully when it comes - while expecting the worst.
1. A family member is in Iran and he and his friends lived in fear of getting flattened by Trump or the Israelis. And they have done for years. Of course, you don’t understand this.
2. You realize that it wasn’t only Jews who lost their lives in the Hamas attacks, don’t you?
3. Israel is in the UN. Palestine is not. Netanyahu has proved to be exceptional at wiping a group of people out, and then getting angry and calling it ‘antisemitism’ when they point out what a turd he’s being.
4. Trump should be in jail for sedition. If the loyalists go by The Constitution, then let’s talk about the act of 1798.
5. Both floated ideas of dictatorship. Trump has said that he wants to run for a third term. Netanyahu said that he wanted to change the electoral laws so one person could govern indefinitely. This caused everyone to strike or threaten to strike.
The truth is is that they might have done well this time, but they are truly horrific people who’s legacy will only looked upon kindly by Satan himself.
"Netanyahu said that he wanted to change the electoral laws so one person could govern indefinitely."
Israel does not have term limits on being prime minister. I cannot think of any parliamentary democracies that do. So I asked Google AI:
"No, parliamentary democracies generally do not have fixed term limits for prime ministers. The prime minister's tenure is typically tied to their ability to maintain the confidence of the parliament. If they lose that support, they can be removed from office through a vote of no confidence, regardless of how long they have served. This contrasts with presidential systems where term limits are common."
So, can you be more specific about what changes to the electoral system Netanyahu proposed?
Well stated. I bet Trump, when it comes to Israel, has some behind the scenes perspective (the Jared Kushner and NYC real estate contacts). I mean that positively, not a**hole anti-Semitically.
I mean, Jared pushed The Abraham Accords in Trump term 1, which was effin' smart.
And yes, Trump is often nuts and we don't know what future "vases" may get broken. As a Canada fan in NY State, Trump's stupid 51st state smack probably saved the corrupt Canadian liberals from a crushing defeat. Woe Canada...
Kushner and an Abraham Accords is a great example. I'd add to that Avi Berkowitz, who was Kushner's basketball buddy, but from what I've read did an excellent job when the opportunity for the Accords came around. They were both there because of nepotism, rather than merit, yet they succeeded when the moment came. For that I'll be forever grateful. And of course it doesn't change my opinions about the benefits of nepotism vs. merit.
Really like the bull-in-a-china shop comparison. He's breaking some things that kind of need breaking, adjusting as needed, and we'll spend years putting things back together, but it will likely be better than the alternative.
Got Europe to pinkie-promise to increase defense spending. He's complaining about Putin. It depends on what Putin and China decide as to what happens, and on that count, I don't think anyone knows, nor does Trump.
A coup *attempt*. Had he succeeded in retaining power despite having lost the election, it would have been a coup, in particular a self-coup, or autogolpe. (I invite you to look up the definition.) Fortunately he failed, hence attempted coup.
I think it’s accurate, and that we should call things what they are. I don’t think histrionic is the right word. The phrase is rather extreme, to be sure, as we’re not used to coup attempts in the US (yet?). Is there a phrasing you’d prefer?
The phrase “honest to god” suggests the situation was the epitome of a coup attempt when it’s well known that the event is controversial. It has drawn a variety of reactions due to the weak link between Trump and the participants. I would accept “…to refuse to accept the 2020 election results giving rise to mob violence with coup-like characteristics.”
By "honest to God" I meant that it was genuinely an attempted coup. I did not mean to imply it was the platonic form of the attempted autogolpe.
To be clear, when I discuss his coup attempt I'm only tangentially referring to the attack on the Capitol (although a "weak link" to Trump? seriously?). I am mostly referring to everything he did to try to stay in office after the legal challenges finished in mid-December. The coup aspect of January 6 was that he was even trying to find a way to hold onto power at that extremely late - and entirely ceremonial - date by pressuring members of Congress, the Vice President, and even state officials like Brad Raffensperger, to exercise their power to help him circumvent his election loss. (Note also that the January 6 Committee and the federal investigation both focused as much on the events leading up to January 6 as on the day itself.)
I'll end this on a personal note. Our tradition of the peaceful transfer of power, dating back to 1800, was for me one of the things that truly made America great. Until I first learned about it in school I had taken the cycle of elections and transitions completely for granted, as an obvious part of our national fabric. The idea that an election loser might simply refuse to transfer power struck me as fantastical, relegated to the distant past. Even in 2000 there was no question of Gore, say, taking advantage of his role on January 6, 2001 to count "alternative" electors from Florida. The post-election battle was fierce but at the end of the day both candidates submitted to the rule of law. I don't know what remains of that tradition today. And it saddens me.
Thank you for this, Russ. Like many Israelis, I've been scratching my head in confusion since yesterday. This well written explanation really puts things in perspective.
I enjoyed this one, Russ. What I am tentative about is the assuredness you cast over the Trump and Bibi relationship, and the coordinated and advanced planning the two put into the events of the last two weeks. Good reporting from the major papers presents a different narrative of the opportunism, spontaneity (and, to be fair, you do cite it), and bromance between the two players. America is in Israel's corner because Israel delivered. What I am unsure about is how resolute Trump would be in taking action and speaking boldly against Iran, not just because of the skill Israel demonstrated, but also because of the good fortune and perception that would redound to Trump. Even after all that has transpired, I still don't know Trump's global, rather than Americentric, policy goals. You need both if you are going to run the table in that powder keg piece of the world.
Seems like Bibi (or Israel) has been the main protagonist. The gimme putt metaphor is apt, and it’s sad but true that nowadays it counts as bold for a US president to have taken that no-brainer one-footer. Trump does deserve credit for doing something Blinken/Biden/Rhodes/Obama would not have, but it feels a little inflated to laud him as a master strategist behind the last two weeks?
Hi Russ, Always get something out of your blogs, but this one was especially good because it brought together a few themes relevant to the U.S. and Israel. Congratulations.
Whatever short term gains have been made, they have been made through killing, bombing, and destruction. Not sure they can kill enough people to prevent the seeds they have planted from germination.
Me too. He continually surprises me. If I’m Putin in thinking negotiate a deal. If I’m Xi I’m thinking of holding off on Taiwan. I do hope we continue to focus on our country
You know what I've always seen in Trump because I feel it in myself? Imperfection. King David was Imperfect. I love that God says He will have mercy on whom He will have mercy. I love that imperfect people can be used in the most perfect ways.
I don't see that the Iranian nuclear program has been definitively ended forever. I do see that they've been given good reason to feel that they *must* have a nuclear deterrent for their future security, and that no diplomatic overtures to the contrary should be trusted.
I think the apt way to think about Donald Trump is as a bully. He is not going to pick on someone that can truly fight back. That’s why he hasn’t stood up to Russia in Ukraine (there is also probably some personal leverage that Putin has over him as well). Israel exposed Iran as weak with their coordinated strikes and that’s why he felt comfortable launching a military strike against them.
Overall, I see Trump’s marginal (in the economic textbook sense of the word) impact to be very small on this conflict. The gimme putt metaphor is accurate and funny since Trump is known to give himself ridiculous gimme putts.
I think his stance on the war in Ukraine is a better barometer of what he will do going forward.
Trump has indeed been consistently underestimated. I've underestimated him since 2015. The dark side of this is obvious; no one expected him to attempt an honest-to-God coup instead of accepting defeat in 2020. I am grateful when the bull in the china shop breaks my enemy's vases, but I still don't want him to destroy my vases, and I still think bull-in-a-china-shopism is a terrible way to run a railroad (much less a constitutional republic).
I suspect that, like his first term, Trump's second term will be marked by a handful of successes heavily outweighed by the damage he's done to things patriotic-minded Americans should hold dear (beginning with the Constitution and the rule of law). This will be the result of his boldness, filtered through his character and his beliefs (or lack thereof). We don't have any other president until 2028 (putting aside his bold "jokes" about a third term), so all we can do is hope for the best - and appreciate it fully when it comes - while expecting the worst.
1. A family member is in Iran and he and his friends lived in fear of getting flattened by Trump or the Israelis. And they have done for years. Of course, you don’t understand this.
2. You realize that it wasn’t only Jews who lost their lives in the Hamas attacks, don’t you?
3. Israel is in the UN. Palestine is not. Netanyahu has proved to be exceptional at wiping a group of people out, and then getting angry and calling it ‘antisemitism’ when they point out what a turd he’s being.
4. Trump should be in jail for sedition. If the loyalists go by The Constitution, then let’s talk about the act of 1798.
5. Both floated ideas of dictatorship. Trump has said that he wants to run for a third term. Netanyahu said that he wanted to change the electoral laws so one person could govern indefinitely. This caused everyone to strike or threaten to strike.
The truth is is that they might have done well this time, but they are truly horrific people who’s legacy will only looked upon kindly by Satan himself.
"Netanyahu said that he wanted to change the electoral laws so one person could govern indefinitely."
Israel does not have term limits on being prime minister. I cannot think of any parliamentary democracies that do. So I asked Google AI:
"No, parliamentary democracies generally do not have fixed term limits for prime ministers. The prime minister's tenure is typically tied to their ability to maintain the confidence of the parliament. If they lose that support, they can be removed from office through a vote of no confidence, regardless of how long they have served. This contrasts with presidential systems where term limits are common."
So, can you be more specific about what changes to the electoral system Netanyahu proposed?
Well stated. I bet Trump, when it comes to Israel, has some behind the scenes perspective (the Jared Kushner and NYC real estate contacts). I mean that positively, not a**hole anti-Semitically.
I mean, Jared pushed The Abraham Accords in Trump term 1, which was effin' smart.
And yes, Trump is often nuts and we don't know what future "vases" may get broken. As a Canada fan in NY State, Trump's stupid 51st state smack probably saved the corrupt Canadian liberals from a crushing defeat. Woe Canada...
Kushner and an Abraham Accords is a great example. I'd add to that Avi Berkowitz, who was Kushner's basketball buddy, but from what I've read did an excellent job when the opportunity for the Accords came around. They were both there because of nepotism, rather than merit, yet they succeeded when the moment came. For that I'll be forever grateful. And of course it doesn't change my opinions about the benefits of nepotism vs. merit.
Really like the bull-in-a-china shop comparison. He's breaking some things that kind of need breaking, adjusting as needed, and we'll spend years putting things back together, but it will likely be better than the alternative.
Got Europe to pinkie-promise to increase defense spending. He's complaining about Putin. It depends on what Putin and China decide as to what happens, and on that count, I don't think anyone knows, nor does Trump.
The Genie’s out of the bottle. America’s screwed for decades to come. Enjoy the dictatorships, USA!
“honest-to-God coup” 😂
A coup *attempt*. Had he succeeded in retaining power despite having lost the election, it would have been a coup, in particular a self-coup, or autogolpe. (I invite you to look up the definition.) Fortunately he failed, hence attempted coup.
You won’t grant that the phrasing is a bit histrionic?
I think it’s accurate, and that we should call things what they are. I don’t think histrionic is the right word. The phrase is rather extreme, to be sure, as we’re not used to coup attempts in the US (yet?). Is there a phrasing you’d prefer?
The phrase “honest to god” suggests the situation was the epitome of a coup attempt when it’s well known that the event is controversial. It has drawn a variety of reactions due to the weak link between Trump and the participants. I would accept “…to refuse to accept the 2020 election results giving rise to mob violence with coup-like characteristics.”
By "honest to God" I meant that it was genuinely an attempted coup. I did not mean to imply it was the platonic form of the attempted autogolpe.
To be clear, when I discuss his coup attempt I'm only tangentially referring to the attack on the Capitol (although a "weak link" to Trump? seriously?). I am mostly referring to everything he did to try to stay in office after the legal challenges finished in mid-December. The coup aspect of January 6 was that he was even trying to find a way to hold onto power at that extremely late - and entirely ceremonial - date by pressuring members of Congress, the Vice President, and even state officials like Brad Raffensperger, to exercise their power to help him circumvent his election loss. (Note also that the January 6 Committee and the federal investigation both focused as much on the events leading up to January 6 as on the day itself.)
I'll end this on a personal note. Our tradition of the peaceful transfer of power, dating back to 1800, was for me one of the things that truly made America great. Until I first learned about it in school I had taken the cycle of elections and transitions completely for granted, as an obvious part of our national fabric. The idea that an election loser might simply refuse to transfer power struck me as fantastical, relegated to the distant past. Even in 2000 there was no question of Gore, say, taking advantage of his role on January 6, 2001 to count "alternative" electors from Florida. The post-election battle was fierce but at the end of the day both candidates submitted to the rule of law. I don't know what remains of that tradition today. And it saddens me.
Thank you for this, Russ. Like many Israelis, I've been scratching my head in confusion since yesterday. This well written explanation really puts things in perspective.
I enjoyed this one, Russ. What I am tentative about is the assuredness you cast over the Trump and Bibi relationship, and the coordinated and advanced planning the two put into the events of the last two weeks. Good reporting from the major papers presents a different narrative of the opportunism, spontaneity (and, to be fair, you do cite it), and bromance between the two players. America is in Israel's corner because Israel delivered. What I am unsure about is how resolute Trump would be in taking action and speaking boldly against Iran, not just because of the skill Israel demonstrated, but also because of the good fortune and perception that would redound to Trump. Even after all that has transpired, I still don't know Trump's global, rather than Americentric, policy goals. You need both if you are going to run the table in that powder keg piece of the world.
Easily the greatest analysis of the last 9 - 10 years!
Seems like Bibi (or Israel) has been the main protagonist. The gimme putt metaphor is apt, and it’s sad but true that nowadays it counts as bold for a US president to have taken that no-brainer one-footer. Trump does deserve credit for doing something Blinken/Biden/Rhodes/Obama would not have, but it feels a little inflated to laud him as a master strategist behind the last two weeks?
Hi Russ, Always get something out of your blogs, but this one was especially good because it brought together a few themes relevant to the U.S. and Israel. Congratulations.
Whatever short term gains have been made, they have been made through killing, bombing, and destruction. Not sure they can kill enough people to prevent the seeds they have planted from germination.
Oh you are just so sad to see Iran’s nuclear ambitions thwarted.
No, I'm worried that Iran will have less qualms about using the bomb when they do get one.
Me too. He continually surprises me. If I’m Putin in thinking negotiate a deal. If I’m Xi I’m thinking of holding off on Taiwan. I do hope we continue to focus on our country
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design." F.A. Hayek
You know what I've always seen in Trump because I feel it in myself? Imperfection. King David was Imperfect. I love that God says He will have mercy on whom He will have mercy. I love that imperfect people can be used in the most perfect ways.
I don't see that the Iranian nuclear program has been definitively ended forever. I do see that they've been given good reason to feel that they *must* have a nuclear deterrent for their future security, and that no diplomatic overtures to the contrary should be trusted.
The prettiest words often come from the foulest of hearts.
You overestimated the electorate.
Most politicians have other interests outside of the job and think politically, first, on actions.
Trump does what other politicians say they will do to win an election and during the term of office to satiate political affairs.
Trump does and then will talk it up, later. Worry about political consequences later.
“He’s not normal”
For academia and DC, you are correct.
As it relates to much of the rest of the country, blue collar workers, not concerned about their reputations, he is normal.
I think you’ve got this wrong, Russ. What Israel did here was astounding. Trump came along for a victory lap after Israel won the race.