Posted on by Nathan Riley

Normal Relations With Russia?

I am not pro Trump, but early indications offer convincing evidence that he is not a clown. His upheaval suggests he wants to change history and put the United States on a new path.

His policies may have their roots in isolationism. I am not a student of U.S. foreign policy, so I have no opinion on this subject, but from the start of this administration Trump challenged U.S. power centers.

The shutdown of the U.S. Agency for International Development dealt a hammer blow to a CIA operation. To be sure, the agency feeds starving children and stops the spread of disease. Its humanitarian work is praiseworthy, but it is also linked to soft power, a U.S. tactic.

USAID is tied to political demonstrations to oust foreign governments. Leaders were deposed in Tunisia, Yemen and Libya. In Egypt, Hosni Mubarak left office in 2011. In 2014 U.S. Foreign policy mavens dreamed that if China crushed the Hong Kong Umbrella Revolution, it would revive the “unfortunate” memories of the massacre in Tiananmen Square. The most extravagant dreamers hoped sympathy demonstrations would leapfrog across China creating general instability.

At the other end of the globe, Ukraine’s Maidan Revolution started in 2013, and by 2014 a new pro-European Union government would become a NATO proxy.  The pro-Russian government was ejected.

The sharp economic contraction following breakup of the Soviet Union, brought USAID into Ukraine in 1992 and by 2022 in addition to programs supporting health and education, 80% of Ukrainian media outlets relied on grants, mostly indirectly, from American sources like USAID. Ukrainian political commentary is funded by U.S. dollars.

Trump’s hostility to USAID is an attack on the deep state, and one of his first actions. A promise made a promise kept. His new Defense Secretary slammed the Military Industrial Complex by insisting on an 8% budget cut.

Musk’s DOGE search for corruption and waste made it difficult for members of Congress to object. DOGE’s demands for personal details is not directed at you or me, but it is certain to make members of Congress cautious. At a U.N. security council vote the United States split with its European allies by refusing to blame Russia for its invasion of Ukraine. This was too much for a few Republican Congressmembers. Senator John Curtis, Republican of Utah, went on social media and said he was “deeply troubled by the vote,” which had “put us on the same side as Russia and North Korea.”

No Democratic leader would have taken on deep state institutions in this public fashion.

In West Asia, Trump’s personal envoy, Steve Witkoff, pushed Netanyahu into accepting a cease fire. Trump, his Vice-President, and new Defense Secretary challenged the Biden narrative that the Ukrainian invasion was unprovoked aggression by Russian dictator Vladimir Putin.

Trump will not make Russia an ally, but he will recognize that when Putin came to power Russia was broke and unable to guard its nuclear weapons. 35 years later Russia fought a war with a U.S. proxy, did not run out of weapons, and seized 20% of the disputed territory. Russia has reemerged as a great power, and President Trump is insisting that normal relations be established with Moscow. Putin is no longer an unspeakable dictator. He is President Putin.

It was revealed that under Biden the U.S. had virtually shut down the Russian Embassy in Washingon and ended diplomatic discussions, a mistake Trump quickly corrected. Putin insisted that Zelensky, the Ukrainian President, be excluded from negotiation and Trump refused to turn the Russian condition into a roadblock.

Biden had insisted Ukraine had stopped the Russian military; Trump said Ukraine had all but lost and could not act like a winner.  

Peace discussions over Eastern Europe were only one dramatic change in U.S. policy, the destruction of Gaza ended with Palestinians free to move in their own country and Hamas celebrated as heroes. Hostages were released. The ceasefire is holding, but its future is up in the air.

Trump’s preposterous suggestion that all Palestinians be removed prompted an Arab alliance and the drafting of a $20B plan to start the reconstruction of Gaza. The resumption of war is possible, even likely, but so far the ceasefire has cooled the fighting.

European nations are hesitantly considering negotiations with Russia as the U.S. President relaxes tensions with Moscow.

In a matter of weeks Trump has placed U.S. foreign policy on a new footing and opened the possibility of normal relations with Russia. Trump is not a clown, and he is challenging the deep state institutions that prospered during the Ukraine war while Russia was treated as an enemy.

Posted on by Nathan Riley

What Do I Get For My Taxes?

Ralph Nader is a sharp critic of the Democratic Party. For example, he believes the Party made a fatal mistake when they abandoned most states to the Republicans.

Like many critics, he thinks the D’s dug a hole when they devoted their efforts to impeaching and damning Trump. Sensible voters want to know, “What will you do for me?” Hating Trump does not answer this question.

Nonetheless, Nader remains pragmatic. “We’re sick of not having the government return the benefits of massive taxation to us.”

 “All we hear about is empire abroad. All we hear about is more military budgets.”

His attack on the Defense budget is widely shared among left voters. The attackers wish this agency was a giant piggybank that could pay for programs that voters will love, like the expensive proposition of providing healthcare for all. This view is untested in elections. No candidate besides Nader has pushed it, and when he ran he was damned as a spoiler: a vote for him was viewed as a vote for Republicans. Like most Americans, Nader believes the nation and the party is controlled by wealthy donors. Having good ideas for changing this dominance would be popular and improve Democratic chances.

Good advice, even from an unfriendly source, deserves serious consideration. His test: making the government return the benefits of massive taxation is realistic and a guide for supporting or rejecting Democratic policy ideas.

He clearly lowers the importance of helping the transgendered, people of color, women, and other groups. His criterion is good policy is universal. It can answer the question “What will it do for me?” Using this test, the Democrats top priority should be finding policies that bring benefits to every voter.

The most obvious example is ending the copays and the costs of medical insurance. It’s an ambitious idea, saying that a person seeing a doctor shouldn’t have to reach for their wallet will be expensive. It would require constant political support. European countries regularly limit their medical budgets to keep costs in line. Obviously, that restricts some medical care.

 Such a program may be impossible in the United States, given the opposition to taxation. Countries like Sweden devote 41.4% of their gross domestic product to taxes, in return for free college, free medical care, and comprehensive laws governing vacation time, hours of work. A degree of government supervision that would make most Americans apprehensive.

Nonetheless, Democrats should find ways to reduce the cost of medical care. It is a basic program that voters will greet with approval.

Their recent record is discouraging. Since 2023, Congress has passed laws to bring high-speed internet connections to rural areas and schools. The thought is there, but nothing happens. On January 6, 2025, the new Congress updated the laws and time will tell if the high speed connections are installed. The failure by the Democrats to translate the thought into deeds is a reason why rural states are red and backed Trump.

It should be easy to do. Democrats and Republicans favor the idea. It would be a real-life example to the question, “What do we get for our taxes?” Hopefully, these connections will finally go into effect.

Reviving the Democrats requires actual changes to people’s lives. It is one thing to see the need for improving infrastructure, but voters are clearly correct; they want to know what actually got built. Joe Biden made this a priority, but the Democrats never convinced the public that the construction made the United States better.

Nader’s test showing voters how high taxes improve their lives is pragmatic and sensible. Democrats should adopt this test. Surely, the voter who asks, “I pay all these taxes, what do I get?” deserves more than a pat on the back. He or she should actually see the benefits. Reviving the Democratic Party means doing things, not talking about them.

Posted on by Nathan Riley

Biden and the Left

Why are left Democrats supporting Joe Biden?

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders and AOC, the member of Congress from the Bronx and Queens, don’t want him to leave. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez believes it is “crazy” to think the Democrats can drop Biden and preserve their momentum in November.

On Instagram Live, she supported the President and thought an open convention would lead to trouble. She believes party leaders show a “lack of thought” on how to confront legal challenges associated with replacing the nominee.

She called it “disturbing” that wealthy donors and social media “groupthink” are driving the debate. It could bring charges that would weaken the support that Biden has from union members and older Americans.

Obviously, Sanders and AOC don’t think Biden is perfect, but they also know that in many areas the Democrats are accepting left ideas. The President’s power to appoint is also the power to set policy. Government agencies under Biden have opened policy debates that would die with a Trump presidency, and whose fate would become uncertain with a new presidential candidate.

The National Labor Relations Board is willing to listen to workers’ complaints about unfair practices from bosses. This is big plus for unions. The Federal Trade Commission has started anti-trust actions that will need years to resolve. A new President might go in a different direction. Even if that direction is a positive one, the change in policy would harm the initiatives started by the Federal Trade Commission.

For the first time, federal agencies are discussing caps on rent for landlords receiving government tax breaks. The agencies are considering a limit on rent increases for those corporations receiving the tax benefits. It’s the first time the federal government has considered an activist policy to curb rent hikes. Traditionally, that has been a local matter. A federal restriction would benefit millions of families.

It’s not just abortion where the Biden administration has done a good job. Rents, restrictions on the power of Google, and assisting unions trying to organize workers have benefited from Biden’s influence.

It is no wonder that AOC thinks that the involvement of big donors spells trouble that might harm these Biden programs. It is unlikely that big donors want to make life easier for union organizing or to have rent increases restricted. By focusing on Biden’s infirmities, they could be laying the groundwork to rejuvenate conservative Democrats.

Sanders and AOC are being prudent and perhaps clairvoyant, but elections are almost always laced with judgment calls, and 2024 is no different. We don’t know what November will bring.

Posted on by Nathan Riley

Stranger Danger

          Joe Biden’s troubles shouldn’t change Freedom Democrats’ minds. We support him even with health problems.

Stranger danger is one reason for staying away from Republicans. It’s a basic Republican principle that strangers should make decisions that in a free country should be the responsibility of one person.

Becoming a mother is a responsibility that lasts decades. It should be the mother who decides to accept this responsibility, but Republicans insist that government—that is, the strangers—law enforcement, and churches should be equal partners. Although the fetus never expresses an opinion, right-to-life sympathizers inject themselves into a decision that realistically is the responsibility of the mother. These strangers believe they know what will protect the child and in fact that they can ignore the mother’s choice.

This is absurd. Consider a good thing; a referendum proposal in Arkansas that would permit  abortions up to sixteen weeks and in cases with special medical needs. This is a good faith effort to find a middle ground between pro-choice advocates and right-to-life diehards by permitting a procedure. If the bill gets on the ballot, it should be supported.

However, four months is a reasonable period for an adult comfortable with her body, but what about a fourteen-year-old girl who has an irregular menstrual cycle? She could easily take more than four months before she recognizes her pregnancy. These types of problems are aggravated by stranger danger. At least to my mind, I don’t want a child to become a mother unless her family is willing to accept the responsibility. This is just one of the dozens of real-life examples that make it difficult, if not impossible to write rules about the complexity of human relationships.

In a free society, the mother should choose. Strangers have no business making rules about complicated problems like this. It’s already a difficult decision, and allowing strangers to make it more difficult is destructive and impinges on freedom.

This is only one of the areas where thoughtless government officials and their public supporters allow private matters to become the business of strangers.

These decisions can be fatal. When it became clear that OxyContin was making some users have a compulsive habit, little help was offered to them, and public wrath was unleashed on pharmaceutical companies for making the drug.

Users were simply told, “Stop!” To nobody’s surprise, while some stopped others entered the illegal market. Politicians thoughtlessly expanded crime. Nobody tells a heavy person, “Stop eating!” But the powers that be, without thinking, huffed and puffed and said, “No more. You can’t get this drug. We’re going to make it illegal.” By doing this, the government forced drug users to enter the illegal market and get close fentanyl. Thousands have died because strangers thought they could tell a person what pills they can use.

What’s worse is that the strangers are accepting magical beliefs in the power of these illegal drugs. People who use drugs have individual reactions to their choice of highs. Some drug users go to work, live responsible lives; others get wrapped up in depression, and the law cruelly magnifies their problems. Very few homosexuals are child-molesters, and the number of drug users whose lives are ruined  by their high is far smaller than lawmakers claim. Once again, strangers who have little experience are making life-and-death decisions that properly belong to the individual and his doctor.

Sex work also runs the gambit of human behavior. Some are graduate students working on their PhD. Others are homeless and distressed. Making their life illegal allows strangers to interfere in private concerns, when the object in a free society would be to help people live their lives even if they rent their bodies, abort their pregnancies, or choose to take drugs.

Obviously, the Democrats are only occasionally helpful on drugs and sex work. They almost universally want to keep strangers away from decisions about pregnancy.

The key difference between the Republicans and the Democrats is a willingness to learn. At one time, many Democrats were against abortion-law reform; today, the party is nearly unanimous. In the areas of drugs and sex work, many Democrats are open-minded. Democrats are far more willing to consider stranger danger than Republicans, who self-righteously insist they know how individuals should live their lives.

Posted on by Nathan Riley

Trump Shows Signs of Running a Professional Campaign, Making Democrats Worry

Clearly Trump will be harder to beat this year than he was in 2020. The election was held in the middle of the Covid epidemic, and glaring errors hurt Trump’s chances for reelection.

When Trump, at a news conference with public health officials, started thinking out loud, he suggested “it would be interesting to check” whether bleach could kill the virus and restore health. This mistake added to confusing messages he had been sending about the virus and wearing face masks.

This mistake was good news for Joseph Biden, who was trying to oust Trump from the White House. Biden’s aides quickly realized that Trump had hurt his chances of being reelected: “this was stratospherically insane and dangerous.” In 2024, the evidence is growing that the Trump campaign is avoiding errors that work to Biden’s advantage.

The Republican campaign is showing signs of professionalism that have to make Biden’s team nervous. The thorny question of who will be Trump’s running mate was presented for public comment when Donald Trump invited Doug Burgum to ride on his campaign airplane. It wasn’t an announcement, but it clearly signaled that anyone objecting had better make their case now, before the announcement. This is standard operating procedure, and it is a sign that this year Trump will be avoiding the mistakes that helped Joe Biden’s campaign win in 2020.

Doug Burgum is a native son of North Dakota who has amassed a considerable fortune and is in his second term as governor. He is the epitome of the self-made man and has a career that probably appeals to Trump. While still in college, he became a chimney sweep, a lowly beginning that is played up in his biographies. He started a software company that did business in Midwest states like North Dakota. It was a success, and Microsoft purchased the company. Governor Burgum has a knack for impressing people. Microsoft placed him in charge of Microsoft Business Solutions, selling Microsoft products to other businesses.

After leaving the software giant, Burgum went off on his own and started a technology venture capital company and a real-estate development firm. The Republican establishment backed the State Attorney General in North Dakota for Governor, but Burgum had the money and the personality to easily win the Republican primary.

In other words, Burgum has a career that may appeal to Donald Trump. In another sign that Trump is running a professional campaign this year, Burgum addressed a massive Trump rally on the Jersey Shore. 100,000 people showed up at the Wildwood rally. Beyond this show of enthusiasm, the rally took place in the Philadelphia media market. Trump found a way to mobilize his supporters and make a big impression in Pennsylvania, one of the battleground states for this year’s election.

This adds up to a campaign triumph, and it makes Biden’s job more difficult. Four years ago, Trump’s mistakes helped Biden win the election. That seems less likely this year.

Posted on by Nathan Riley

Suspended Animation

Donald Trump is leaving the country in a state of suspended animation with conservative and liberal forces evenly matched.

The next big test is the election of two Senators in Georgia. Republican control was eroded on election day and Mitch McConnell currently has 50 Senators supporting him. If even one Republican is elected in Peachtree State, he will remain in power and able to stifle big initiative by President-elect Biden.

If by some stroke of good fortune, the Democrat take both seats, they will control the Senate.

Politics has changed. The Democratic candidates in Georgia are a politician who personifies suburban distaste for Republicans and the minister from the Atlanta church where Martin Luther King used to preach. Democratic hopes in this deep South state rest on the election of a Black and a Jew. Political change is staring us in the face.

The bad news is that on Nov 3 the Democrats had fewer votes for the Senate than the combined votes that went to Republicans but no Republican reached 50% hence the January 5th run off.

The Democratic candidates are Jon Ossoff who has run for Congress in suburban Atlanta almost flipping a Republican District, and the Rev Dr. Raphael Warnock. He had the most votes on Nov 3rd, but he was running against two Republicans. Their combined total was 636,633 more votes than the minister received.

The Republicans have the advantage, nothing is certain because this has been a year of massive turnouts. Politics is changing.

In 2016, Donald Trump’s 2.09 M votes easily topped Hillary in Georgia. This year the President’s total jumped 18% to 2.47M nonetheless Biden did way better than Clinton. His support surged 32% to 2,474,507. In four years, he added 596,544 votes, making him the victor by 12,670.

This is the puzzle rattling President Trump; how could he dramatically increase his vote and still lose. To no one’s surprise he shouts robbery. Compounding the agony, the Republicans stopped Democrats from controlling new areas when election boundaries are drawn up after the census is completed. The number of Democratic and Republican state legislature is unchanged. Another sign of the stalemate between liberal and conservative forces.

This surge in Republican support has made Donald Trump flounder when asked to concede. His explanation for the Biden victory is the Democrats cheated. But in fact 2020 is a historic election where more people voted than ever in history.

To explain Biden’s victory by a shift in suburban votes is false news. This election had the biggest turnout ever. A majority of whites voted for Trump. Democracy Now TV anchor, and Rutgers University Professor Juan Gonzalez reports that exit polls showed that even 58% of white woman voted for Trump.

A Republican shift to Democrats or gaining a new white suburban constituency does not explain Biden’s win. The added Latinx, Black, native American tribes and Asian votes pushed Biden over the top. Gonzalez argues “in an election which saw historic turnout, people of color — and especially Latinos — had an unprecedented increase in voting.” More people voted than ever before. More Republicans voted, more Democrats voted and the Democrat often did not get a majority of the white vote. Other voting groups put the Democrats over the top.

Gonzalez states flatly, “for the first time in U.S. history Latinos’ turnout appears to have reached comparable levels to the rates for white and Black Americans. 20.6 million Latinos went to the polls in this election.”

It marks a turning point for Latinx voters. 64% of the 32 million eligible Hispanic voters’ showed up the polls. In previous election cycles Gonzales said, “the turnout had been routinely below 50%. In raw numbers, 8 million more Latinos voted this year than in 2016. That’s a 63% increase over the last presidential elections.”

Yet this good news is obscured by stories in the Times in LA and New York. These two newspapers described Latino support as disappointing because Latinx support in South Florida helped Trump win the Sunshine States.

An acerbic Chuck Rojas, Bernie Sanders Latino specialist, asked the LA Times why discuss Latinos “underperforming.” when in fact “Joe Biden won Latinos in Florida statewide, while losing white people,” It is white people who should be the focus said Rocha, “That’s who we should be talking about.” Democrats are deluded if they forget whites supported Trump, while the other groups backed Biden.

 When all the votes are counted Latinx votes are Democratic and a key to victories in close states like Arizona, Nevada, and Georgia.

In Arizona, Trump’s popular support soared 34% from 2016. His vote rose from 1.25M to 1.66 M in 2020, but he still lost; Biden’s total climbed 44% to 1.67M for a narrow victory.

Florida’s Cuban and Venezuelan refugees from Latin American socialism may back Republicans, but when all the votes were counted Rocha said Florida Latin voters back the Democrats. In other States the Spanish-speaking also backed Democrats.  But not exclusively, Republicans won a decent share of Black and Spanish-speaking voters.

“Black men on the other hand have been inching away from the Democrats in recent elections,” reports NY Times Columnist Charles M Blow.  They “continued that drift in this election. In 2008, 5 percent of Black men voted for John McCain; in 2012, 11 percent voted for Mitt Romney; in 2016, 13 percent voted for Trump; and, this year 18 percent voted for Trump.” Vivid proof of this trend occurred in Utah where a Black Republican beat a Democrat member of Congress.

Democrats lost the house seat to a former NFL football star. Burgess Owens a strong defender of Trump who flipped Utah’s 4th Congressional District back to Republican, one of at least nine seat the GOP gained in this election.

This growing Republican strength may increase Black bargaining power with Republicans

The Republicans hold 50 seats in the Senate, the Democrats need two more seat to create a tie which would give Vice-President Kamala Harris’s a vote giving Democrats a majority by the thinnest of margins.

This electoral stalemate appears to handcuff Joe Biden. He should go to Georgia and explain to the voters he needs two Democratic Senators if he is to do his job. But the totals in November are discouraging. Biden could put his prestige on the line and then lose. He may light no path that bring voters back to the polls in large numbers and then his prestige takes a substantial hit.

Unhappily, a divided congress will also harm Biden’s prestige. It will make him look weak and frustrated as his plans are thwarted or watered down.

Going to Georgia would require that Biden blame Republicans for failures in the first term. It would require an excited and pugnacious leader, unfortunately Biden is pledged to work with Republicans. It didn’t work for Obama, the Republicans stifled change and then won the election with Trump, perhaps they have learned a lesson.