What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[The Minsky Moment]

I think the other side of why this is negative is it's the new baseline for any future administration on trade with the US. A future US President could use the EU lowering tariffs as a "win" to sell lowering US tariffs - but with this deal that's not there.

I think that's one of the reasons I suspect Trump's policy here - and more protectionist approach in general - will have become bipartisan consensus by 2029.

A future President could just cut the tariffs as a form of tax relief.

Whether protectionism becomes more entrenched depends on the path the US economy takes over the next 3 years, which is really out of Trump's hands, at least in terms of his ability to turn it in a positive direction.  (He could very well do more things to increase the probability of a negative outcome).

[The Minsky Moment]

Countries may not, but the petty dictators (actual or wannabe) running them do.

Just so.  Trump interest is not the same as American national interest.

[crazy canuck]

The EU did not really get anything out of the deal as Trump's unpredictable temper does not guarantee stability. And that's the only potential upside of this deal. Everything looks like Europe kowtowing to the bully.

I think the other side of why this is negative is it's the new baseline for any future administration on trade with the US. A future US President could use the EU lowering tariffs as a "win" to sell lowering US tariffs - but with this deal that's not there.

I think that's one of the reasons I suspect Trump's policy here - and more protectionist approach in general - will have become bipartisan consensus by 2029.

I really really wish you would stop making posts which assert that Trump has a national long term policy or a strategy.

He is at best erratic, and your assertion of a long-term plan has changed multiple times since his election.

[Baron von Schtinkenbutt]

[Zanza]

Even without a plan the current tariff level - if deemed constitutional - sets an anchor for a future administration. So Sheilbh's assertion here seems valid.

[crazy canuck]

Even without a plan the current tariff level - if deemed constitutional - sets an anchor for a future administration. So Sheilbh's assertion here seems valid.

Not much of an anchor when it changes on a whim.

[Oexmelin]

I think it's a mistake to underestimate, not the level of Trump's coherence, consistency or policy-making, but the degree to which he helps reveal latent ideas, impulses, and sometimes amorphous beliefs that have a much larger appeal. Trump may flip flop on this and that, all in service to his ego and reputation of "tough deal maker/winner" but his stance on tariffs has not wavered much, and it has helped to crystallize latent right-wing protectionism. That protectionism go hand in hand with isolationism, and might-make-right stances, which I think will very much outlast Trump.

[crazy canuck]

I think it's a mistake to underestimate, not the level of Trump's coherence, consistency or policy-making, but the degree to which he helps reveal latent ideas, impulses, and sometimes amorphous beliefs that have a much larger appeal. Trump may flip flop on this and that, all in service to his ego and reputation of "tough deal maker/winner" but his stance on tariffs has not wavered much, and it has helped to crystallize latent right-wing protectionism. That protectionism go hand in hand with isolationism, and might-make-right stances, which I think will very much outlast Trump.

How has his stance on tariffs not waivered much?  Do I really need to recite the dramatic swings in tariff policy that has occurred from the beginning of his Presidency, or the explain that what he says he is doing is very different from what is actually happening. The latest case in point being the "agreements" he has said he has made.  If anyone can point me to the text of those agreements, I would be much obliged.

 

[PJL]

I think it's a mistake to underestimate, not the level of Trump's coherence, consistency or policy-making, but the degree to which he helps reveal latent ideas, impulses, and sometimes amorphous beliefs that have a much larger appeal. Trump may flip flop on this and that, all in service to his ego and reputation of "tough deal maker/winner" but his stance on tariffs has not wavered much, and it has helped to crystallize latent right-wing protectionism. That protectionism go hand in hand with isolationism, and might-make-right stances, which I think will very much outlast Trump.

How has his stance on tariffs not waivered much?  Do I really need to recite the dramatic swings in tariff policy that has occurred from the beginning of his Presidency, or the explain that what he says he is doing is very different from what is actually happening. The latest case in point being the "agreements" he has said he has made.  If anyone can point me to the text of those agreements, I would be much obliged.

 

Trump's stance on the principles of tariffs has not changed at all. The major swings in policy on this has been more to do with figuring what level is acceptable to the markets.

[grumbler]

Trump's stance on the principles of tariffs has not changed at all. The major swings in policy on this has been more to do with figuring what level is acceptable to the markets.

Trump's stance on the principles of tariffs has not changed because he never had a stance on the principals of tariffs.  He has proclaimed three incompatible goals for his tariffs, and he ignores knowledgeable advice and experience in favor of his bizarre belief that the principal of tariffs is that they are just wonderful, full stop.

[Neil]

He's been pretty consistent about using tariffs and deregulation to create Gilded Age levels of economic expansion and concentration of wealth. 

Sure, what he's doing won't work, but that doesn't mean that he doesn't believe that it will, no matter what evidence you put in front of him.  He's going to get richer, and that's the only metric that he really cares about anyways.  Just as with Putin or Xi, information from outside the bubble doesn't get to him, and he wouldn't want to hear it if it did.

[PJL]

Trump's stance on the principles of tariffs has not changed at all. The major swings in policy on this has been more to do with figuring what level is acceptable to the markets.

Trump's stance on the principles of tariffs has not changed because he never had a stance on the principals of tariffs.  He has proclaimed three incompatible goals for his tariffs, and he ignores knowledgeable advice and experience in favor of his bizarre belief that the principal of tariffs is that they are just wonderful, full stop.

Thanks to Google Gemini AI and tweaking the wording, the following is what I wanted to post without getting into pedantic wordplay (I simply used my initial post and put it through the AI).

'Trump's underlying principle of using tariffs as a tool to rebalance trade and protect domestic industries has remained consistent, is is the application and level of those tariffs that has shown significant policy swings, often in response to market reactions and ongoing negotiations.'

[frunk]

Trump's foreign policy is easier to understand if you realize he doesn't care about long term consequences, he knows he doesn't really understand any of it very well, and he wants to extract money and prestige from it.

He's latched onto tariffs because they are an easy way to manipulate the market and make money from it while not doing too much short term damage.  He (or his allies) make money on both the direct market movements and by blackmailing companies over them.  That's also why it's so important for him to be able to set them unfettered by Congress or the courts.

The prestige aspect is why he's so anxious to get some sort of peace deal, somewhere, whether it is in the Middle East or Ukraine.  Unfortunately he has no clue how that would get done, so it's all about making random inflammatory statements to see if something will happen.  Once again he doesn't want to actually do much, as he doesn't understand either conflict and doesn't want to cause any short term problems that could be traced to him.

That doesn't mean Trump will always be passive, as with the attacks on Iran, but he certainly won't take the lead.

[Bauer]

Or it could be much simpler that Trump just likes to bully people and make himself feel like the man.  He's discovered that threatening tariffs gets instant reaction around the world and he loves that attention.

[Oexmelin]

All of this could be true. My point is simply that, whatever Trump thinks about tarifs, or about presidential authority, it has awakened and helped crystallize political positions in others that I think will long outlast him, and gain great her coherence and traction.