6 Comments

“Let’s stipulate that, for once in his life, Trump keeps his word, maintains focus, and honestly tries his level best to deliver to his donor.” (Robert Zubrin)

Whatever his shortfalls, Trump has a history of keeping his promises that's far better than most traditional politicians. Zubrin’s suggestion that if Trump truly empowers Musk to supercharge his Mars efforts it will anomaly is simply laughable.

Every presidential candidate since Bill Clinton promised to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. Trump did too. He did it; the others lied.

Trump promised to build a border wall; he tried but only succeeded partially because the Democrats in Congress refused to fund the effort. Harris amongst others called Trump’s plan racist. Now she's for building a wall on the border. Who's the liar; the guy who tried and failed or the repugnant politician who was against the border wall when she thought it was politically expedient and turned on a dime when she thought it would help her campaign?

Trump’s mantra during both of his political campaigns was “drill baby drill. When he was President the search for and extraction of hydrocarbons reached a fever pitch. Harris, on the other hand, made clear that she was diametrically opposed to fracking. Now that she needs to win in Pennsylvania, she's a fracking enthusiast. Who's the liar; Harris or Trump?

The list goes on and on. Trump promised to cut the corporate tax (which was amongst the highest in the developed world); he did it. Trump promised to keep us out of meaningless wars that sapped American strength while resulting in one ignominious American defeat after another; he kept his promise.

Who's the liar, Mr Zubrin, Trump or Harris and her uniparty brethren?

As for Georgia and Moldova, here’s the take-home message Mr. Zubrin; nobody in America cares with the exception of the neoconservative crowd. You know who I mean; its the uniparty crowd who never met a war they couldn't bungle us into or a conflict we couldn't lose. Lets wish the Moldovans and Georgians well, but whether they live under democratic regimes or dictatorial regimes simply isn't our problem. The neoconservative obsession with democracy promotion has made the United States weaker and its made NATO weaker. How many hundreds of billions of dollars need to be flushed down the drain and how many working class American kids need to come home in body bags or sans arms and legs before you will be satisfied Mr. Zubrin?

As for Ukraine, its just another in a long line of American and NATO failures delivered up by the neoconservatives. Joe Biden did everything he could to instigate Putin to invade. Why did Biden and his fellow uniparty monsters do this? He was determined to prove that after Trump, America was back as the leader of the free world. That's why Biden, with a helping hand from Victoria Nuland, sabotaged the efforts of Erdogan, Macron and Naftali Bennett to negotiate a compromise.

Whats the end result? Ukraine lies in ruins. Its citizens face a winter without heat and electricity. Its economy is ravaged. Its losing the war, Mr. Zubrin, and its not hard to understand who to blame. Chalk it up to just one more in a long line of uniparty failures.

Trump wanted a detente with Russia in much the same way that Nixon wanted a detente with the Soviet Union. Neoconservatives would have none of it. They spun Trump’s desire for a peaceful, productive relationship with Russia into a now disproved Russian collusion fairytale.

You're a Mars expert, Mr. Zubrin so let me ask you two questions. Is there anyone more likely to chart a realistic course to a Mars landing than Elon Musk? Who is more likely to work with Musk to achieve that goal, Donald Trump or Kamala Harris?

Expand full comment
author

Really, WigWag? Your argument is that Trump has a record of keeping his promises that's better than most traditional politicians?

Let's see:

1. Covid will “disappear."

2. He won't have time to play golf if he's elected.

3. He'll repeal the Affordable Care Act and replace it with something “beautiful.”

4. He’ll cut your taxes but make the very rich pay more.

5. Corporations will use their tax cuts to invest in American workers.

6. He'll boost economic growth by 4 percent a year.

7. He won't try to cut Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid.

9. The average American family will see a $4,000 pay raise because of his tax cuts.

10. "Anyone who wants a test for COVID can get one."

11. Hydroxychloroquine is great for Covid.

12. He'll eradicate the deficit.

13. He'll only hire “the best people.”

14. He'll lower the price of prescription drugs

15. He'll bring back coal mining jobs.

16. He’ll drain the swamp.

18. He'll protect Americans with pre-existing conditions.

19. He'll build a wall and Mexico would pay for it.

21. He'll lock up Hillary Clinton.

22. He'll use his business experience to whip the federal government into shape.

23. He'll end DACA.

24. He'll give six weeks of paid maternity leave to every mother.

25. He'll end North Korea's nuclear program.

26. He'll distance himself from his businesses when he's in office.

27. He’ll force companies to keep jobs in America.

28. He’ll end the opioid crisis.

29. He’ll release his tax returns.

30. He'll negotiate a better nuclear deal with Iran.

31. He'll enact term limits for Congress.

32. China will pay for tariffs on imported goods; a trade war with China won't cost Americans their jobs; and it won't leave American taxpayers footing the bill.

33. He'll lower tuition costs.

34. He'll protect the American steel industry.

35. His tax cuts will pay for themselves.

36. He'll negotiate a better climate deal.

37. He'll sue all the women who say he raped them.

38. He'll put America first.

40. He'll deliver universal health care.

41. He'll launch a $1 trillion revenue-neutral infrastructure plan.

42. He'll reduce the number of tax brackets from seven to three.

43. He'll end Common Core.

44. He'll cancel visas to countries that won’t take back criminal immigrants.

45. He'll lower the business tax rate from 35 percent to 15 percent.

46. He'll create ten million jobs in his first term.

47. He'll impose a ban on Congressional reps becoming lobbyists.

48. He'll pass a law to protect vital infrastructure from cyberattacks

49. He'll reduce crime, drugs, and violence

50. He'll propose a constitutional amendment on term limits

51. He'll completely ban foreign lobbyists from raising money for US elections.

52. He'll cancel federal funding to sanctuary cities.

53. He'll allow Americans to buy health insurance across state lines.

54. He'll increase funding for local police training.

55. He'll enact new ethics rules to reduce the power of special interests.

56. He'll create tax-free savings accounts for people with young and elderly dependents.

57. He'll let Americans deduct child and elder care from their taxes.

58. He'll replace Obamacare with health savings accounts.

59. He'll revitalize manufacturing and bring back 7.7 million manufacturing jobs.

60. American workers “won’t lose one plant.”

61. Jobs “are all coming back.”

62. He'll let the federal government negotiate the price of prescription drugs for Medicare.

63. He'll renegotiate a "much better deal" than NAFTA.

64. He'll ban federal employees from lobbying the government for five years.

65. He'll tighten the rules defining a "lobbyist" instead of letting people call themselves "consultants."

65. He'll ban senior government officials from lobbying for foreign governments.

66. He'll end the offshoring of jobs.

67. He'll be the president for "all Americans."

68. He'll be "the best president we've ever had" for veterans.

69. He won't "let Wall Street get away with murder."

70. We'll have 4 to 5 percent annual growth.

71. We'll wipe out $19 trillion national debt in 8 years.

72. Apple and our other major companies will make iPhones, computers, and other products in the United States.

73. He'll "open up the libel laws."

74. He'll appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Hillary Clinton.

75. He'll rebuild the Marine Corps to 36 battalions.

76. He'll make a further federal investment of US$20 billion for school choice.

77. He'll cut spending 1 percent a year.

78. He'll remove all undocumented immigrants.

79. He'll dramatically scale back the Education Department.

80. He'll eliminate gun-free zones at schools and military bases.

81. He'll stop the AT&T-Time Warner merger.

82. He'll triple ICE enforcement.

83. He'll eliminate wasteful spending in every department.

84. He'll kick China out of the WTO.

85. He'll end birthright citizenship.

86. He'll impose a hiring freeze on federal employees.

87. He'll have mandatory minimum sentences for criminals caught trying to re-enter the United States illegally.

88. He'll impose the death penalty on cop killers.

89. He'll establish "a commission on radical Islam."

90. He'll increase the size of the Army to 540,000 active duty soldiers.

91. He'll build a safe zone for Syrian refugees.

92. He'll bring back waterboarding.

93. He'll change the name of Mount Denali back to Mount McKinley.

94. He'll balance the federal budget "quickly."

95. He'll deport Syrian refugees.

96. He'll ban Muslims from entering the US.

97. He'll eliminate the carried interest loophole.

98. He'll build a military so strong "nobody's going to mess with us."

99. He'll negotiate a "great deal" to get us out of Afghanistan.

100. He'll make the world "respect us again."

You know very well I could go on like this for pages and pages. Trump says and promises absolutely anything that pops into his head. When he keeps his promises, or tries to, it's usually the part about destroying something. It's never the part about replacing it with something better.

If you really believe Trump is outstandingly good at keeping his promises, do you believe he'll keep the promises he's been making about persecuting his opponents and deploying the military against them? If so, do you think that would be a good thing? If not, how do you divine which promises he's apt to keep and which he's apt to forget? How reliable is your method for doing so? Have you subjected it to careful scrutiny to see if it works?

You seem to think it a bad thing if NATO is made weaker. His former advisors say he'll pull out of NATO. Does that seem like a good idea to you?

You say no one in America cares about Georgia and Moldova but a bunch of neoconservatives. I guess there are a whole lot of neocons out there, because polls show overwhelmingly that Americans believe Russia's expansion is a threat. It's only the MAGA wing of the GOP that doesn't, and if Trump loses, it will be because the rest of the GOP finds his eagerness to submit to Russia repulsive and unfathomable.

Finally, you've again restated a nonsensical conspiracy theory about Joe Biden "instigating" Putin to invade. We've been over this a hundred times before, so I won't go over it again, but if anyone reading this wonders if there's even a microgram of truth in this, rest assured that your first reaction is correct: This is nuts. An enormous amount of credible work and reporting has been done on the origins of this war. Not a bit of it supports this conjecture. Russia invaded Ukraine because Russia is a revanchist imperial power under the rule of a dangerous autocrat.

Expand full comment

You wasted your time developing the exhaustive list you’ve published here. It contains nothing but the same half truths and exaggerations that all politicians, including the past several presidents and presidential candidates engage in. It also includes cases where Trump attempted to keep his promise but was stymied by Congressional Democrats. Trump is a serial exagerator and he's perfectly willing to lie if it serves his interests. This makes him exactly like Harris (I support fracking/I’m against fracking), Obama (if you like your health insurance you can keep your health insurance), Kerry (I was for the Iraq War before I was against it).

I could go on and on. The fact that Trump both lied and exaggerated doesn't mean he didn't cleave to the truth more than most politicians do. He did.

As for persecuting his opponents, Trump can't hold a candle to the Biden/Harris/Garland team. They've indicted him twice on plainly nonsensical charges and Democratic District Attorneys in New York and Georgia charged him with crimes with even less basis than the Federal charges. The New York conviction has a zero percent chance of surviving on appeal and the misbehavior of the Georgia District Attorney has delayed that trial perhaps permanently. The federal indictment in Florida was thrown out because the Special Prosecutor who investigated it was illegally appointed. The Trump team will make the same argument in the DC circuit about the charges there. The trial judge and the DC Court of Appeals will rule against Trump on this issue before the Supreme Court reverses them and hands Trump a well-deserved legal victory.

Its true that Trump has threatened his adversaries with legal action. When he threatened Hillary it was all bluster on his part; his Administration never pursued it. Then the Democrats adopted their policy of politics by law-fare. If Trump wins, I hope his Attorney General does indict a couple of his opponents; Nancy Pelosi and her insider trading would be a good choice. So would Mark Milley who should be ordered back to service so he can be court marshaled. It doesn't matter whether they’re convicted. What matters is providing Democrats with a disincentive to stop their despicable urge to pursue legal action as a political strategy.

Americans may dislike Russia; those who don't, should. But how many of them do you suppose have ever heard of Moldova? How many do you suppose think of Georgia as anything other than the home of the Atlanta Braves and the Atlanta Falcons?

If you ask Americans how many tens of billions of dollars they were willing to expend defending Moldovan or Georgian democracy what do you suppose the answer would be? Is there any chance that anything that happens in Moldova or Georgia might justify American or NATO military action?

As for the Baltic nations, it should now be apparent that admitting them to NATO was just another in a long line of blunders. NATO is weaker not stronger because they are members. If Russia did decide to invade those nations it is highly unlikely that the United States or NATO could do anything about it. As has been pointed out, a lack of a credible NATO response would destroy NATO’s credibility, probably forever. There was never any chance that the American public would sanction putting Americans in harms way to protect Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia. That's why those countries should never have been admitted in the first place. Its just one more example of Western hubris turning into a geopolitical disaster.

Ukraine is losing, Claire and its clear who's to blame. Its all the foreign policy experts who thought Russia could be cut down to size by inviting Ukraine to join NATO. We were told that the ATACMS would make all the difference; they didn't. Then we were told the Abrams tanks would turn the tide. Wrong again. Next it was the F-16s that would guarantee victory. Since the jets were delivered, Ukraine’s position has gotten worse not better.

Ukraine has been decimated and NATO is in terrible shape. The United States is more divided than ever and our most important European allies are even more politically divided than we are. With friends like Starmer, Macron, Scholz and Trudeau, who needs enemies? The most masculine leader of a NATO nation is the very feminine Giorgia Meloni. Under these dire circumstances who did Europe decide was perfectly positioned to lead us out of this morass? Our European friends selected Mark Rutte to lead NATO and Frau van der Leyen to lead the EU. Not exactly the second coming of Winston Churchill are they?

By the way, after the Ukraine invasion who would have guessed that Russia would be be enjoying economic growth while Germany would be a declining economic power. Do you remember Biden’s promise to make Putin a pariah with a helping hand from the ICC? Just last week he hosted a meeting of the BRICS nations. Countries are dying to get in. Its unclear who's heading to pariah status more quickly: Putin and his allies or Biden and his. The Secretary General of the United Nations attended the Summit too. Apparently he doesn't think much of the ICC or Western sanctions.

The failure of the West has been a long time coming. It didn't have to be this way. Led by the United States and the neoconservatism of the Uniparty, we’ve squandered our strength on the delusional prospect of exporting democracy. We failed.

The Great Powers of Europe experienced irreversible decline because they were exhausted by the two world wars of the 20th century.

The United States saved the day. Sadly, it looks like American defeats in Iraq (twice) and Afghanistan have terminally weakened our country. Could our failure in Ukraine be the final nail in the coffin?

Expand full comment

Well, I pretty much agree with everything you said. Let me add that the first responsibility of defending Ukraine against aggression is the Ukraine, followed by the rest of Europe, which is more directly affected by Russian aggression that the USA. Trump and Vance quite rightly oppose direct US involvement in peripheral conflicts that do not affect US interests. USA first.

Expand full comment

"If Trump is elected, we are looking at the pending dissolution of not just “the rules-based international order”— which is an abstraction—but the free world itself."

Um...no. Trump is bad for America and the world. Harris is as bad, and for different reasons. Neither being president will bring about the end of the free world itself.

Expand full comment
Nov 1Liked by Claire Berlinski

Don't you hate it when people write "Um...no" all condescending like that? Sorry... :-)

Expand full comment