Why MCA?

Okay, so, on Monday, Trump started a tariff war with...Canada.

Canada is our #2 trading partner. Canada is also our top trading partner for the purchases of automobiles.

We had a trading agreement with Canada and Mexico, which Trump tore up -- the U.S.-MCA. That supposedly unfair, terrible deal was negotiated by Trump, during his first term.

The 50% tariffs are taxes paid by U.S. consumers. This will raise prices for products like cars, trucks, automotive parts, steel, furniture, clothing, agricultural products and more. And increase inflation.

Canada is retaliating with tariffs on U.S. exports, including steel, farm equipment, dairy products, and appliances. This will raises prices, likely cut American sales and hurt business.

Canada is our oldest and closet ally. We share the longest international border in the world with Canada, of 5,525 miles. A remarkably friendly border, all the more remarkable at that length.

We had a trade agreement with Canada -- The U.S.-MCA. It was negotiated by Trump. (Yes, I know I said this, but it can't be said enough.)

And...and...and this is an election year. Early voting starts in some states in only four weeks. As many as 13 states -- a quarter of the country -- start early voting in just six weeks.

And then later in the day, Trump announced imposing a threat of tariffs and an "economic D-Day" on Iran and every country that does business with Iran. That would include Russia and China.

And this is an election year. Yes, I know I said that, too. Same reason. See above.

And all of this comes when Trump's poll numbers have been plummeting and, just 19 months into his term, have already hit a horrific 32% approval.

So, what is the reason for all this?

Okay, I've got nothing. That's it. I can't explain it.

When discussing incomprehensible actions by Trump with people twisting themselves to come up with an explanation, I always say, "You're using logic. Don't try to figure out why Trump is doing something because he often doesn't know himself. You're just dragging yourself into a dark hole."

So, sorry, I've got nothing.

To be clear, it's not that there's no rational political reason to explain all this from Trump, it's that there's no irrational reason either.

All I can come up with is what I've written since his first term -- that psychologists say Trump has dementia, and it's degenerative. And that they also say he is a "malignant narcissist," a medical term where (among other things) if he doesn't get his way he will burn his own home down.

This isn't hyperbole. It doesn't mean I'm right, but I can't see much else to go on. Consider, for a moment: what issues does Trump talk about these days?  We won the war, the economy is great, affordability is a hoax, his ballroom, his heliport, his Reflecting Pool, vandals, his arch, granite, Scott’s Miracle-Gro, the road race, if Darline Graham wins in South Carolina he’ll play golf against the state’s best golfer, and he’s going to Ireland next month to attend the Irish Open played on his course.

Again, that isn't hyperbole. Maybe I'm leaving some things out -- but not much. And a lot of what I'm leaving out is worse. Like how AI data centers are great, and people should love them.

Imagine being a MAGOP candidate and having to run during the Mid-Term in support of this agenda of Trump's. And if you campaign against it, you'll lose the party's base. But the bigger reason you can't campaign against it because you've been enabling it all since Trump took office.

So, it's not that I've got nothing to explain it (other than dementia and malignant narcissism) -- they have nothing. At least I can fill up an article describing this. They've got to campaign on it.

And you know it's going to get worse. Because dementia is degenerative. And because we've seen it. It used to be -- "You know Trump is going to do something awful every week." Then it was every day. But now, you have to check the news every hour!

And no, that's not hyperbole. Consider Monday: tariffs on Canada, economic D-Day tariffs on Iran, jailing for deportation the father of a sailor coming home on the U.S.S. Lincoln, and SCOTUS letting Trump’s block of mail-in-voting move forward.  All Monday!  And that doesn't count new stories about Natalie Harp, Trump begging at a rally in deep Red South Carolina that "What I really want you to do is pretend, please, that I’m on the ballot,” ordering the Navy being not to name a new ship after a black hero at Pearl Harbor but instead name it after...Trump! And more. On Monday!

Don't even ask about Tuesday. I don't want to get into when said he's thinking about renaming Lake Ontario. And threatening to tear down the Kennedy Center. And sending a nuclear deal with Saudi Arabia to Congress. And Canada imposing tariffs in retaliation. All on Tuesday.

So...why did Trump declare 50% tariffs on our second-biggest trading partner and closest ally, ripping up the U.S.-MCA trade deal he himself negotiated (you can't say that too much...), and do all this just weeks before early voting starts for the Mid-Terms? When his approval is only 32%?

I'm not even going to try to explain why. Just describing it is bewildering enough.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zph7YXfjMhg

European Reacts

For this “European Reacts” video, the Portuguese couple André and Sara – after a couple years of them posting these videos showing their intense love of America – finally made it to the U.S., loved it all and brought back a mass of snacks to try for the first time.  Obviously, they could have eaten them on their trip, but clearly they wanted to give their first impression for the camera and their videocast.  And it’s fun to see their reactions to basically junk food that’s not available in Portugal, but which Americans take for granted.  Products like Peter Pan peanut butter (André is a peanut butter aficionado, and they have Skippy and JIF in Portugal, but not Peter Pan), Jalapeno Cheetos, Reese’s peanut butter cups,  Goldfish and Twinkies (neither of which can be found in Europe, but as André says, “Americans really love them because you guys don’t share with anyone”), and finally…Easy Cheese in a spray can (which they’ve heard of and been bewildered by in their videos for a very long time, and are anxious but wary to try it at last), as well as much more.  It’s fun, too, to see which items surprise them the most – and even which they combine together.

I'll have videos the next time that they recorded on of their trip at long last making it to the United States.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SeANyX_SYk

Mail Chauvinists

I had another article I was in the middle of writing for today, but then the Supreme Court reared its ugly head and pushed things aside. That's when they made an emergency ruling that the Trump administration could continue going forward with his executive order to have the U.S. Postal Service block mailing out ballots to people in states that have met Trump's guideline of providing voter rolls to the federal government.

They had an interesting discussion about it on MSNOW with three eminent lawyers, and there was a mixed sense about the ruling.  There’s was also one other factor no one discussed – which I think even if this goes through (still a big "if"), it could backfire on Trump and the MAGOPs.

In general, here is a sense of what was said, along with some of my own thoughts mixed in.

Yes, it’s a terrible ruling. As the Supreme Court knows, mail-in voting is not only legal, it's been legal in the United States for 160 years ever since the Civil War. Moreover, the Supreme Court also knows that the U.S. Constitution says that states alone control their own elections. Congress only has a say when federal elections are held, and the president has absolutely zero role to play in elections. And contrary to what Trump keeps repeating -- that the U.S. is supposedly the only country in the entire world that allows vote-by-mail -- it should not come as a shock that this isn't even remotely true. In fact, over 30 countries allow some form of what they call "postal voting."

As terrible as the ruling is, the decision made clear that it’s only preliminary in order to let the Postal Service go forward with its planning.  (Although, not to quibble over facts, the Postal Service actually did announce its plan this past Friday...) Whether the plan they announced is actually legal is a separate matter. And that will be argued in court and ruled on at a later date.

Furthermore, there’s another similar case in which a federal judge put a block on Trump's executive order, and the Supreme Court did not rule on that. The case yesterday was filed by a coalition of Blue states; the one on hold was from the League of Women Voters, and there's still an injunction supporting their lawsuit to block Trump's executive order. And this complicates yesterday's ruling, since there's no way of knowing how the High Court will rule on that.

Even if it turns out that SCOTUS ends up approving the administration plans, there doesn’t appear enough time to put them in operation and change things for the Mid-Terms.  Keep in mind that early voting in 13 states starts in only six weeks. In fact, in four of those states it starts in just one month! It's hard to see how even this "bend-over-backwards for Trump" Court would block mail-in voting if a quarter of the states have already begun voting. Add to this that, while the Court could make other emergency rulings as they did yesterday, they are officially on Summer recess until October.

And if all of this does get heard by the Court and if it gets a favorable ruling and if the Trump plans are able to be put into operation for the Mid-Terms, the most important thing of all to remember is: that doesn’t stop people from voting in person at the polls, including (in just four weeks) early voting. It would only stop voting by mail. In some states.

And that leads to the issue not yet being discussed amid all the legal analysis that I think can backfire on Trump and the MAGOP:

If worse comes to worse (and it would be pathetic if it did), and it turns out that many states refuse to turn their voter roll private information over to the administration, and people in those states have to vote at the polls – or feel confused enough that they decide to instead vote in person – then doing so not only takes more effort than the simplicity of voting at home by mail, but it also means lines to vote at polls will likely be longer than expected.  And with longer lines and with more effort required, the people who are most motivated to vote are the ones who will go to the polls and will stand in the lines, because they are bursting to vote, whatever it takes, even if it means crawling over glass.  And people not as motivated either won’t go to vote, or will go but see the long wait in line and turn around and leave.  And what we know from all polls is that Democrats and Democratic-leaning Independents are by far the most motivated to vote this year, overwhelmingly. And not only are MAGAs not nearly as motivated, but Trump is not on the ballot which is what has tended to drive the party's base to the polls when they could vote for him. So, to make the effort to go out and vote and stand in lines when you're not all that motivated, feel a bit depressed that conditions are so bad with your party in charge, and the one person you want to vote for is not even on the ballot seems a recipe for MAGOP problems if there isn't easy mail-in voting.

In fact, making this push to undermine mail-in voting by Trump and MAGOPs all the more odd is that up until COVID, their own party was the one who historically benefitted most by voting by mail. And still does benefit most in Red states like Florida with its more-elderly population, and Alaska where distances to vote can be so huge, and even in Red rural states that have distant traveling to vote.

To be clear, yes, the ruling was awful and very disappointing.  But there’s a lot of “Well, let’s see what this means” and also – this could also backfire on those happy about it.

Still, as a friend wrote back to me when I sent him some of these thoughts, "I completely agree. But I'm still enraged, as I know you are, at the chutzpah of these ideologues masquerading as jurists, seeking to deliberately ignite  completely unnecessary confusion on the eve of an election.  There's no other way this can be interpreted..  And they need to be repudiated and humiliated with legislation that curtails their sense of omnipotence."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=425GpjTSlS4