• [Mr. Moore] ... spent the morning telling several news media outlets, including The Wall Street Journal, that he would not withdraw and that he retained the full backing of the White House, which was “all in.”
To me, this is far more 'telling' of the man's lack of character, integrity and qualification and a 'telling' sign that he is no more than a Trump doppelgänger than some nasty divorce issues or anything detrimental he has said about women – only good for the 'swamp'.
3
This is good news. So many talented economists in academia and Mr. Trump chooses a non-economist from tony Winnetka in Mr. Moore and a computer science guy in Mr. Cain. Mr. Cain's response about Libya in 2011 was the bizarre non sequitur "9-9-9," that revealed a cluelessness long suspected.
5
Wait what?! The Trump administration is concerned about this know nothing's past treatment of women? That's just too perfect. It literally could not get any more Republican.
2
This could be Trumps new strategy for his nominees: first send in 2 duds as decoys, then the one he really wants nominated. This would disarm the dems who will have exhausted their energy and political capital on first two.
5
cain and moore were just two more attempts by Trump to put allies in positions of power no matter how much damage they would cause to the nation. In fact, I believe it is that damage Trump desires and is working for as a agent of chaos. He uses that misdirection to obfuscate his other misdeeds in office.
5
Let's hope Sean Hannity doesn't want the position.
7
I have (painfully) experienced watching Stephen Moore on Bill Maher and news programs, and it would be difficult for me to find a more obnoxious and loathsome person that Moore (other than El Presidente).
It's good that he will not be leading the Fed. Don't let the door hit you on the way out Steve.
11
@Len I totally agree!
3
That Mr. Moore thought that the White House was "all in" shows how truly clueless he is. He'll join Jeffery Lord in the pantheon of disgraced ex-CNN pro-Trump talking heads.
5
It appears I got it backwards, I had considered his misogynistic rants to be a true reading of his "conservative" core and his economic policies a joke.
10
"It is unclear who — if anyone — Mr. Trump will formally nominate for either of the two remaining Fed seats."
Nominate? What a quaint notion, when an "acting" (i.e. toady) marionette will do quite nicely, thank you very much.
7
Trump believes that because he was caught on tape admitting to groping and sexually molesting women that this type of behavior should be accepted as norm. He won the election despite the voters knowing about his sexual misconduct. But that does not necessarily hold true for any of his potential nominations. Or even for Roy Moore whom he supported for the senate run in Alabama. I think by now the women who voted for Trump should have a rude awakening.
8
A small victory and crisis averted.
10
Finally, a good Trump administration decision - even if it was for the wrong reason. If Miller had Senate support, he would have been nominated despite his atrocious record. If you are too wrong for a Trump nomination, you have sunk pretty low.
10
Since when being unqualified stops Trump and his nominees from using the Stepford Wife senate majority to ram through his choices?
The rumor - yes, rumor, even though by otherwise serious journalists - circulating on Twitter immediately after the un-nomination is that Moore told them he is all in hours ago. Bet he got the news about his own withdrawal from the same tweet!
This is not to say Moore is qualified or should take a seat at the Fed; however, Trump's capaciousness should really be the focus here. When Trump first moved in, people thought they had a bunch of generals to protect the nation, and the world for that matter, from Trump touching the "football." Now the generals are purged - now what? This Moore incident demonstrates it. The Republican senators like Ernst talk a good game now, but there weren't any evident to support their independence. Case in point, Justice Kavanaugh! Isn't life funny, except the fate of America - the World's for that matter - is hanging in the balance!
6
So what’s Sarah Palin doing these days?
9
When the first talk about Moore and Herman Cain being nominated to the Fed was published in the Times, I wrote a post saying that even the most ardent Trumpists in Congress might actually refuse to play along. The Fed is too important to be in the hands of a fool who can't keep his mouth shut. Nobody wants their money messed with.
9
Poor Mr. Moore. How on Earth could he be expected to know, between 2000 and 2016, that all humans deserve to be treated with respect? I mean, it's not as tho there had been a vigorous Civil Rights movement 60 years earlier, or a feminist movement 40 years earlier. It's not as tho the election of a black man in a nation still scarred by racism was so monumental that the "public housing" joke would have struck anyone with any sense or dignity as tasteless.
Poor misunderstood man.
8
I do wish his nomination was torpedoed not because of is comments about women or his personal financial issues, but rather because of his policies and incompetence.
12
The problem with the removal of such an absolute hack who has never ever been correct on economic policy ever is Republicans will use the as their reason his misogynist views and statements. It's literally the title of this article.
His weakness as it appears from their standpoint is not his failure in policy, but as bad public relations optics in changing times.
So what we'll end up with is a quiet sycophant with the same always incorrect views of the economy who has the ability to contain his out loud moments. Basically, if there is an economic version of Bill Barr out there they'll be the new nominee. And all the Republicans will pat themselves on the back for having feigned moral courage and supporting removal of Moore. Then selecting some serious minded looking dough-ball with the same ideas minus the baggage. Think Andrew Wheeler replacing swamp monster Scott Pruitt. No lotion drama...all the behind the scenes destroying the enforcement powers of the agency appointed to lead.
There is just never a silver lining.
8
Always entertaining when a Trump nominee grabs the executive rip-cord to deploy a golden parachute and soften their landing.. only to be informed that splat happened.
Will the next Reality Nominee with a boat-load of personal baggage also play this Victim Card (my critics are “pulling a Kavanaugh against me”)?
I hope so.
It's very appropriate that every one of these needy non-victims identifies publicly with the Supreme Non-victim.
8
How do the Trumpies handle all the winning?
11
Trump wants a liar like Barr, then he will nominate him for fed board.
4
The Moores and the Cains never learn that at best, if they’re very lucky, they’re beards hiding equally-awful creeps with somewhat fewer ceiminal histories.
2
I guess we should all be grateful that Stephen Moore is a paternalistic, misogynistic creep, since his frighteningly inept economic theories would apparently not be enough to prevent his confirmation to the Fed.
21
Maybe this means Trump is vulnerable enough now to get some pushback from his putative allies. Or, perhaps, the Fed is just sacrosanct to some people with sufficient influence. So be it. Meanwhile, Larry Kudlow's reflexive support for each of these two deeply unqualified candidates makes him look like a fool which is fine because that's exactly what he is.
12
Next on the list. How about Accu-Weather's Barry Myers...nominated to be the head of NOAA...OUR TAX-PAYER FUNDED WEATHER SERVICE?!? A man who wants to privatize our weather service for self-serving corporate gain, and then make everyone else, from TV forecasters and farmers and everyday weather fans pay for what we used to get for free, i.e. our taxpayer dollars. If you don't believe me, read Michael Lewis's recent book The Fifth Risk, in which he details the dangers of letting these foul weather friends into our tax-payer funded henhouses.
9
We should be thankful that Trump hasn’t nominated someone whose business address is plot #4758 in a nearby cemetery. Eminently qualified to serve on the Federal Reserve Board by Trump-logic.
2
Somewhere, Mr Ed is smiling.
@db2-
Unless the “Mr. Ed” in question is Economist Ed Hyman.
Lyrics might have been written about him but I haven't heard any.
1
As the President's handling of the economy has reached a new high according to a recent CNN poll, led to think that his influence over the economy should extend to direct oversight of the Federal Reserve, an institution long held to be independent of direct President influence. Herman Cain's and Moore's appointments to the Fed board would have been actions counter to this long-held tradition, and for a good reason.
Trump was handed a recovering economy from Barack Obama that he subsequently "juiced" with drastic tax cuts for corporations and dangerous deregulations, a "sugar high" for the stock market with corporations using the extra cash stock buybacks. Consequently, rocketing deficits have added to the national debt and removal of efforts to protect consumers and the environment will have long-lasting effects.
Reckless deregulation of the banking industry was one of the critical factors leading to the great recession in 2007. Fortunately, the fed under the competent leadership of Ben Bernanke was one of the steady [non-partisan] hands that guided the economy out of this storm.
Herman Cain and Stephen Moore have been revealed to be misogynists, who shouldn't be allowed to hold any public office, let alone a seat on the Fed board. It would have been particularly dangerous to appoint an economic novice (Cain) and/or a Trump loyalist (Moore) to the central bank where their influence can have both immediate and long-standing harmful effect.
4
The 1% big money donors to the GOP did not support putting a party hack on the Fed, and they called the White House and several GOP Senators and killed Moore’s chances. When it comes to things like tax cuts and Fed appointments it is the big money donors pulling the strings. No way that the 1% will ever support such totally unqualified candidates as Stephen Moore or Herman Cain.
12
I'm just afraid he'll pick someone worse. Because with this administration, every time I think it can't possibly get worse, it does.
15
Just read about this guy. Misogynist racist, adulterer, deadbeat dad, tax-cheat. It’s amazing how Trump attracts the worst of the worst. Birds of a feather.
22
The disturbing thing is trump's continued selection of inferior nominees for any/all posts.
I'm pleased that some are running into Rep and Dem opposition, forcing them to back out, but the scary thing is trump will continue bring nominees forward who have the same ignorance and lack of ability as De Vos, Carson, etc. not to mention the quantity of others who have come in and left under shame or a dark cloud due to malfeasance or criminal behavior.
6
It is very hard to play by the rules when your opponent has no rules and loves to play dirty.
It may be possible to outsmart him if you play a good chess game. Be prepared to maneuver with dexterity.
Another of Donald’s TV personalities that hasn’t work an honest day in his life. Economist? Ha! Doubt it? Go read his biography.
3
Stephen Moore has zero academic or career credentials for being on the Fed. Moore is as profoundly ignorant of economics as his clueless benefactor, Donald Trump.
14
What a clown.
5
Stephen Moore is a "culture-war provocateur"? What a cute way of saying he's a racist and a misogynist!
14
How putrid of a misogynist do you have to be to fail among the most cowardly, soulless, misogynist Senate ever to befoul DC? It wasn’t enough that his idiotic “economic” ramblings were infamously stupid, always wrong, laughable. No, he had to also make your stomach turn with his woman hating. Stay classy, Republicans.
12
Plan B: Trump will make him head of the Centers for Disease Control.
6
A gold standard advocate? Why don't the conservatives want Trump to nominate someone who wants to return to using abalone shells as currency?
You would think there has been actual inflation visible at some time in the last generation.....
5
@Cfiverson : "Abalone shells" -- made me laff aloud. Thanks!
“I think it’s probably a good thing; I think it’s an important thing,” said Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, who had expressed reservations about the nomination"... [though was fully committed to voting him in if Mitch McConnell wanted her to]
8
Moore is a conservative commentator and don’t need to be an expert in economics, just appear to be an expert. I learn more about economics than Moore does by reading Dr. Krugman columns in New York Times. May be Moore should do the same. Then, he may get a chance to be nominated by Trump in his second term, assuming there will be one.
2
Next up: Jim Cramer from “Mad Money”? Or howzabout Maria Bartiromo? I mean heck, they’ve both got great ratings! And either one one can truthfully say “I’m not an economist, but I play one on TV!”
And there’s always Mr. Larry ‘let’s do another line’ Kudrow...
15
Is he the millionth disgraced Trump sycophant?
6
There is only one "qualification" an individual must possess to be nominated by the president for any position: complete, unquestioned loyalty and sycophancy. (Pence can provide requisite training.)
13
Oh boy! The next name to be floated wants a return to the gold standard. Hello Trump depression!
5
The swamp is almost empty, now. Where will trump get nominees?
6
Amazing that a guy who has shown absolutely no character in his personal life whines - how Republican is *that*? - about 'attacks' on his character.
It's not an attack if the reports are true, it's just reporting fact.
Amazing that there is any level of hackery that Republican in Congress will reject.
10
Stephen Moore has said,“I’d get rid of a lot of these child labor laws. I want people starting to work at 11, 12” and if that wasn't Trumpian enough, “Capitalism is a lot more important than democracy.” These statements made him the perfect Federal Reserve Board candidate for the GOP, so what gives?
7
Finally! Due to his lack of qualifications, Stephen Moore should never have been proposed in the first place. Now, who's next?
2
@Donna Isaac. Either Lou Dobbs or Neil Cavuto.
1
"Steve Moore [is] ... a truly fine person," opines the President of the United States. That says volumes more about President Trump than it does about Steve Moore. But then, the President knows white supremacists who are very fine persons, too.
6
Stephen Moore knows nothing about the workings of finance and the economy. Moore is an ignoramus, like everyone else who surrounds Trump (who is also an ignoramus, as are the vast majority of his supporters).
The cult of ignorance is perhaps the most salient feature of the US' morphing into a giant Third World country. This is patently clear to those of us who know the Third World first hand. Americans, on the other hand, don't have a benchmark against which to compare what is happening. Trump and his mob will provide that benchmark for generations to come.
10
We are now in the realm of the blind leading the blind and pretending to be all seeing. Sooner or later they will fall off a cliff. Lets hope for sooner.
3
Stephen, how bad can you be that even before you get a job from Trump, he throws you under his bus. Enjoy the company under there!
7
Completely incompetent nominee complains that he has been vilified as completely incompetent, and withdraws. Who's next?
11
Finally, Ted Nugent and the Papa Johns guy will get their chance to serve on the federal reserve board.
14
Moore is lucky.
Trump doesn't get to eat his soul.
If he has one...
3
It’s a cult, right?
3
“He served on the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal.”
An didn’t pay his ex-wife child support
And owes back taxes to the IRS
What’s not to love about him?
Next stop Supreme Court?
13
Will the Heritage Foundation dump him, too?
4
Another insensitive, unqualified bum paraded before the public as a candidate for a very high and serious office. This guy was so unqualified that even typically reluctant Republicans had to speak up.
As has often been the case, this bum didn't even get nominated because his past was so despicable. Nothing to see here folks. Just business as usual for the current President.
And also as usual, neither U. S. Senator from Texas said a word because Trump has eaten their souls.
12
What a pathetic, misogynist fool.
In other words, a completely predictable pick for this incompetent, retrograde "administration."
8
It was not until Joni Ernst just a few days came out and definitively said she would not support him, that this nomination was officially sunk. Lisa Murkowski - "I think it's probably a good thing.." Really- Ms Murkowski - you can't even call this completely flawed nominee unfit with no hesitation? So very frustrating that one cannot expect our elected officials to do the right thing quickly-- this one was an easy call.
14
"a truly fine person" is Trump's equivalent to "great personality and a wonderful sense of humour."
1
Now that Trump has withdrawn Stephen Moore's nomination to the Federal Reserve board, he should consider nominating Elizabeth Warren.
Unlike his other nominees, Ms Warren has the knowledge, intelligence, preparation, background and integrity to strengthen the board and be a force for accoountability in its mission.
Not only that, but it might persuade her to not run for the presidency, and at this point, Trump needs all the help he can get, wherever he can find it.
7
Patriots - true blue - big-thinkers, economists with compelling theories, God-fearing loyalists who will follow unquestioningly (for a price) and know it's right to be right, are the sine qua non of the Trump administration.
Stephen Moore’s crackpot economic ideas should have been enough to sink him. It’s discouraging that it took his comments about women to do the job. The next person that Trump proposes will likely have the same crazy ideas but if he is not an embarrassing Neanderthal like Mr. Moore, the Republicans will confirm him.
17
Just one more of "the best people".
10
Throw the next choices in the ring, open the metal gate and let the Lions decide. Whichever one is left uneaten, he is not chosen. Not even tasty enough for the Lion to eat. Nominate the one the lion ate.
1
I wonder if Stephen Moore had any idea how repulsive he is before this spotlight forced him to consider....
13
Stephen Moore's hubris is astounding.
I'm sure he got a pretty good salary as a conservative speaker, pundit on television, and utility shill. Then he reached for something over his head, the Fed Board. Now, his views on women have been codified. And his failure to provide child support have come to light.
I doubt we will see him again on Bill Maher, CNN or even Fox.
He was a tool of the 1%. Now the tool has become dulled and unuseful.
His life has gone down several pay grades because he got too big for his pants. Good for him.
13
Was Stephen Moore's refusal to pay child support supposed to be a joke, too? It wasn't funny, either.
30
Stephen Moore says he will survive this humiliation. He has taxes to evade, courts to be contemptuous of, women whose looks he needs to insult, and tax cuts to shill for. His dance card is full.
37
So many expert economists in the comments section.
Perhaps they should submit themselves to be nominated....... or not.
1
What a farcical circus. Stephen Moore could have done a favor to himself, before he was maligned, by refusing to go along with the current brutus ignoramus, as he tried to influence and disrupt the needed independence of the 'Fed'. Executive interference by Trump suggests he thinks is above the law, as if managing his turbid real estate by decree (.my way or the highway').
5
It's good to see one things are still sacred to the republicans
1
There isn't even any more honor among comedians.
3
It'll be quite a challenge for the White House to find a candidate who's at least as unqualified for the job as was Miller.
However, I'm confident that they're up to the challenge.
14
The suggestion that a nominee’s writing be read, while good, is lost on Trump who either can’t read or is unwilling.
Seriously, I wonder if the problem is that the people doing the vetting are afraid to tell Trump his pick is a bad choice?
5
For those who still doubt Trump takes direction from Putin, Trump's picks to place on the Fed to destroy its effectiveness is proof positive. Although I did not agree with all that the Fed did to pull us out of a recession, going back onto the Gold Standard, cutting interest rates in this economy and other policies advocated by Moore are sheer lunacy - so who is really surprised that Trump embraces them
Glad Moore won't serve on the Fed - now need to dodge next bullet
15
I am a bit surprised this article failed to mention the real reason Moore was withdrawn-
In an interview with Bloomberg, Moore stated he DISAGREED with Trump on whether the FED should lower interest rates.
Got it?
He disagreed with Donald Trump.
The withdrawal has nothing to do with all of the nasty things this man has said about women over the last ten plus years.
9
@GasLighted
He didn't disagree with him at all. He was in lockstep.
And The White House withdrew his name before Moore had time to compose his phony withdrawal note.
Moore was never going to be confirmed by the Senate.
Most of the GOP know that Moore is an unqualified hack.
2
@Futbolistaviva
Prior to his withdrawal, Moore said Thursday in an interview on Bloomberg Television that “I’m not so sure I agree with the White House that we should cut rates by an entire percentage point,” adding that “I just don’t see the case for that right now.”
2
Moore represents the financial interests that want to lower interest rates just like what brought about the mortgage crisis
5
(Who knew) "people would be looking at my writings from 20, 25 years ago"
How about 5 years ago!
2014: "What are the implications of a society in which women earn more than men? We don’t really know, but it could be disruptive to family stability"
12
He raised a question that academics (in areas of sociology, economics and cultural studies) have discussed. It’s an inert topic that simply raises a potential finding among family interrelationships and is not something he dreamed up because he’s this misogynist you and others would like to (salaciously) make him put to be.
So how do you explain away the back taxes and support?
8
President Trump closed his remarks by saying, "I am disappointed that Mr. Moore will not be able to serve on the Fed, but I am completely confident that I can find someone even worse to replace him. It won't be easy, but I've got my best people working on it."
19
Moore said that his sexist writings were meant to be a joke. Many thought his economic writings were also a joke.
35
I suspect the women are just an excuse. The Repubs are willing to put incompetents in charge of the government, but not in charge of the money (which is what really matters to the Repubs.)
13
Moore complains in his letter to Trump that the
"unrelenting attacks"
have
" become untenable for me and my family and three more months of this would be too hard on us"
"Unrelenting attacks", "untenable for me and my family"
Now he knows what it feels like for us patriotic Americans to wake up every morning with Trump and his sycophants in the people's White House. We can wish it were only three more months.
15
Moore's comments seem quite typical of what most Republicans believe. Trump might have to start finding nominees from Democrat ranks.
2
I'm glad this hack is finally out of the picture. It's not lost on me that Trump can stack all sorts of government and public positions with cranks, crooks, mediocrities and hacks. But as soon as we start talking about the one post that can directly impact Wall Street, a semblance of sanity sets in. Tells you all there is to know about whom our government really cares about.
8
The main disqualification for Moore's nomination to the Fed is that he is not, nor has he ever been, a qualified or practicing economist. He's a long-time lobbyist and polemicist. On matters of economics, he has consistently been wrong on the facts -- historical and current -- and misused economic data. Hanging around anti-tax, Gold Standard loons is enough to endear him to party fundraisers and cable news, but it doesn't make him an economist.
17
Obviously, Mr trump doesn't have the capability or moral standards to pick a qualified candidate.
15
It's SHOCKING to hear the lying fraud "president" WON'T nominate an obviously unqualified "candidate" for ANY job!
7
The nation is spared from another utterly unqualified, "voodoo economics" zealot, whose ignorance was manifest for all to see, as soon as he started yapping... And whose irresponsible zealotry was truly shocking to anyone who doesn't want another financial melt-down!
10
The Totalitarian playbook is to seize control of all aspects of government and then devour, and if necessary, destroy. This is not about just his views about women. I want to know how he got this far as a CNN and MSNBC pundit when his views are idiotic. Maybe better vetting on the part of the media before giving obvious grifters a platform. I am afraid IQ does matter in this case and he is sorely lacking one.
9
America has met a perfect storm involving all its political hypocrisies. Trump does not read the stuff on his desk because (a) he couldn't care less about anyone outside of his family (b) Trump has a learning disability and CAN't read the stuff on his desk. Of course, Trump is way to insecure and shallow to admit his disability.
THE RIGHT is so monumentally power hungry that they don't view the left as part of the USA.
THE LEFT is so pathetically PC that they can't demand that Trump accommodate his learning disability (which in this day and age shouldn't even be embarrassing).
3
@Kajsa Williams
Is this an example of Russian meddling?
3
The the going gets tough, Trump gets going, in the opposite direction.
6
@EW Trump is a member of the "I'm right because I'm rich and I can make you suffer" persuasion.
4
Moore is a nobody who threatens material economic harm to this country. I’m not going to argue with any reason for keeping him off the Fed.
7
I have an idea -Alex Jones. He's on Tv isn't he?
7
I didn’t read any attacks on Moore’s character in the NYTs. None.
I did read some of his verbatim quotes about women.
And I read about his child and spousal support issues, and IRS debts.
But these are facts not attacks.
23
Have you not heard the expression: “The truth hurts”? Moore equates hurt with attack.
5
@MOK78 Among the many consistencies characterizing today's Republicans is extremely thin skin wrapped around the bluster.
Add now hypocrisy, greed, prevarication and bloviation.
4
The deep state, united in its respect for basic common sense and human decency, strikes again. And speaking of the deep state, how deep is the Fox bench, anyway?
3
I keep wondering why Trump nominates all these fringe characters that can only blow up in his face.
I've arrived at the fact it's because people are disposable to him.
Accepted, rejected? No matter to Trump. Next!
6
For Heaven's sake! For the life of me I cannot see how some of Moore's stated views about women are relevant to his being qualified for the Federal Reserve Board. Those views, and other personal views, are not all relevant. It looks like it is impossible for one to have any personal opinion that is not conventional if he/she wants to assume any position of significance. That's dangerous.
Moore isn't qualified to be on the Board for other reasons, e.g., inadequate experience, being in the President's pocket, etc. I'm glad he's not a candidate, but for those kinds of reasons, not what he may happen to privately believe.
3
@Bill
Well, Bill, let me try to explain this to you in "heavenly" terms:
When you are a public servant, it's important that your private thoughts and more public pronouncements that you may feel comfortable expressing -- even if they offend others and may even taint (or be thought to taint) your public service and public decision making -- not make the people you are supposed to serve feel in any way demeaned, dismissed or diminished.
Mr. Moore, as privileged and disconnected from the other 99% of America as he is, doesn't get why his true lack of experience and expertise,coupled with his disdain for half the citizens, should be any issue.
But then again, neither did our "so-called" president...
17
@Bill - He has shown that he only considers 49% of the population to be worthy of respect and that all the financial spoils go to the men. Not paying child support to the point a judge has people break into your house to prepare it for sale shows a deep, deep lack of character. He was going to in a position where he had say over the strength of the US economy, the value of our currency, and our place as a leader in the global economy. We should expect better.
15
@Bill - You can have all the personal opinions you want, but speech has consequences. If you don't believe me try telling your boss just what you think of him/her and let us know how that works out for you.
7
Telling that GOP senators would reject the off-balance Moore based on social issues (i.e. votes) rather than his provable economics ignorance.
6
And just when you thought the Republicans were a bunch of foot kissing cowards with no spine, a sliver of what might pass for one has appeared, and that sliver came from the fact that Mr. Moore might actually have had some negative affect on their pocketbooks, not to mention the pocketbooks of those wealthy corporations and and people that put them in offoce.
12
Kings are known for having mistresses and not necessarily always the gentleman around women. King Midas, in spite of his golden touch, could never stand a chance as Fed chairman in today’s climate either.
@John Doe
How do you know that kings are not gentlemen around women.
3
@John Doe : Last I checked, the US is a republic with elected officials, not a monarchy, so the activities of kings has no relevance.
Btw, that creaky "kings and mistresses" recalls the Edwardian era. We *have*moved on in the past 110 years.
2
It should not be the job of the media to background-check and vet every Trump nominee, which appears to be the case with the 2 Fed candidates. I can think of 1/2 dozen more over the past years who have withdrawn after the media has found skeletons in their closets.
Just another sign of the ineptitude of this administration.
17
@Fred And that's EXACTLY why we NEED the Fourth Estate, and the Founders were well aware of that fact.
13
@Slann
True. Jefferson supposedly said that given a choice between a government without a free press, and a free press without a government, he would choose the latter.
2
So Trump says that Moore has withdrawn his candidacy, much to Moore's surprise. Another bit of back alley diplomacy from El Jefe The Orange.
In the churn of the latest doings, I think I'm beginning to detect the stench of the end of the beginning if not the beginning of the end!
12
With regard to publicly denigrating women Trump probably didn't want the competition.
19
Mr. Trump is picking candidates for the Fed in his own image; another example of his thinking that he is God.
3
In his letter to president Trump withdrawing himself from consideration for the Fed post, Stephen Moore says “the unrelenting attacks on my character have become untenable for me...”
I think it would have been more accurate to say “the unrelenting revelations about my character have become untenable for me...”
34
The President's next nominee should be Roy Moore. I have no doubt that he is completely unqualified for this position, but the Republican-majority Senate might confirm him anyway just to remove the possibility (and it is a very real one, based on recent polling in Alabama) that he would win the Republican nomination, AGAIN, for next year's U.S. Senate election against Doug Jones.
6
@Rick
T was thinking about Clarabell the Clown, but since the guys that played him are no longer around, I'll go along with your idea about Roy.
11
@A. Stanton
Well, OK, my prior post was tongue-in-cheek (you presumably figured that out already). I doubt that even President Trump would stoop so low as to nominate Roy Moore for this position. In any event, Moore is perhaps the only prominent Republican in Alabama that Jones can beat, so I hope Moore does get the Republican nomination for the Senate seat.
4
@Rick I vote for Sheriff Joe Arpaio...
Or maybe Ollie North.
3
Not valuing women is certainly repugnant and should be disqualifying. However, it is utterly dumbfounding that Moore's incompetence regarding economics and the role and function of the Fed didn't even make the list of the reasons why Republican senators wouldn't support him.
22
@StarMan Absolutely! Was my point in my comment yesterday, too (Times Pick)
How many more incompetent hacks is Trump going to propose to nominate?
11
Another of Trump’s great appointments. “Only the best people”, he bragged. Now we see once more how low he aims.
17
Cannot believe that some Republicans are looking at their non-support of Moore as a Profiles in Courage moment. This party is totally morally bankrupt.
17
Since Trump didn't care that Moore was not an economist, at this point I wouldn't be surprised if he nominated an aroma therapist to the Fed for our nation's economic health.
10
@Mike T Isn't a wedding planner his HUD rep in NY?
7
@Mike T
That works. An aroma therapist is just what they need to hide the stench around Team Trump.
7
Mr Moore's statement referred to 'relentless attacks'. These 'attacks' merely comprised media outlets publishing statements he had made orally or in writing, some quite recently. He is a political hack, not an economist in any sense of the word, having never worked as an economist, conducted research nor published peer reviewed work. The Fed Board members should be individuals who are widely respected by other economists and by Wall Street - the cream of the crop.
8
The only reason they are backing away from misogynistic Moore is that individual GOP senators are worried about their re-election prospects in 2020 (like Joni Earnst, et al.) and Mitch about losing the Republican majority in the senate.
9
@PK - Join Ernst just got out of a bad marriage where she was physically and emotionally abused. This may be hitting too close to home.
After once hearing this man deny the science of climate change on a cable TV show, I realized he was not the sober-minded economist that the country needed in this role.
But more to the point, this suggests yet again that chaos reigns at the White House, especially when it comes to basic vetting processes. No Fortune 500 company would function this way. And the fact that so many of these men seem to have issues with women really tells you something.
15
@Brian
Never mind sober-minded economist. The basic mechanism of the greenhouse effect is so simple and inescapable that anyone who tries to argue it’s not real, is little better than a voodoo priest. That’s about the right way to look at Moore.
2
If this sycophantic GOP Senate couldn’t confirm Moore, just imagine how awful a nominee he must’ve been.
23
The tactic of continuing to lower the bar for "qualified" nominees is to prepare for Spanky's nomination of Eric.
8
Stephen Moore and Herman Cain weren't qualified to be a Trump court jester.
They are both qualified to be Senior White House Advisers. Except that their daddy/ father-in-law is not President of the United States.
8
CNN better not rehire Stephen Moore back !
11
Another one bites the dust. For a man who didn't believe in the Fed and wanted to abolish it this isn't worthy of print. Good riddance. Anyone in the WH vetting these losers in advance?
3
Good grief, a Trump crony making disparaging comments about women? You'd think he'd fit right in, given the Donald's own ugly history of smearing women. Of Carly Fiorina, a fellow Republican, he said, "Who would vote for a face like that."
13
His misogyny is concerning, yes, but surely the foremost reason that he's unsuitable for the Fed Board is his blatant incompetence in all things economic?
29
Trump returns to the bottom of the barrel and will continue scraping.
28
@Susan,He is sure to bring a swamp thing to the surface since he promised to drain the swamp. LOL.
4
Don't worry. Trump will find someone worse, if possible.
26
I know this won't make any "Picks" lists but I'll say it anyway, since it's all I have to say:
PHEW!
10
Gigantic laughing cat emoji here!!!
'All the best people'. !!??
16
Trump's plan was to put two toadies on the Fed and to hopefully have interest rates lowered to rev up the economy in advance of the 2020 election. Smart & dumb at the same time...
8
Maybe Simpson is available. Homer Simpson - he's Republican, right? Must be smart, works with nuclear reactors.
11
In a letter to Mr. Trump, Mr. Moore said “I am respectfully asking that you withdraw my name from consideration. The unrelenting attacks on my character have become untenable for me and my family and 3 more months of this would be too hard on us.”
Mr. Moore added, “Also, I am utterly unqualified for this important position and a totally disgusting human being who deserves no respect.”
26
Divorce? Not paying alimony? Making disparaging remarks toward women? Sounds like the perfect Trump man to me. And since when have such matters such as this bothered the GOP and religious right, the Freedom Caucus, etc?
27
@Bill Bidwell RE: your sentence about the GOP: such matters only bother the GOP when they are up for tight re-election campaigns. Otherwise, they're all willing to chuck their principles and continue supporting the bigot in the White House.
11
I know a really nice, well-mannered, smart 10 year old that lives in the neighborhood, with the added the benefit of having no disqualifying paper trail. Think that I'll send his name along to the White House for consideration. MAGA!
11
"Spaghetti on the wall" government. What could go wrong?
11
So, to the GOP, it was Moore's attitude about women that got him in trouble, not what Paul Krugman calls Moore's "zombie" economic theories?
15
Who's Next? Lou Dobbs and Papa John?
18
Republican objections to both Cain and Moore are convenient covers for why they really rejected both men. Neither is qualified to sit on the board of the Federal Reserve. Both are partisans whose personal eccentricities take second place to their ignorance of economics. It is entirely fitting that Trump, a misogynist entirely without any moorings when it comes to either morality or economics should have pushed these two.
12
The irony here is that what sunk this guys nomination is his writing about women, which while abhorrent on his own, doesn't take into his sheer and utter cluelessness in matters of his supposed field - economics...
16
Although Trump is quite fond of his first name, Stephen is not loyal enough. He's looking for someone more like the Renfield character from the 1930s Dracula movies - someone who adores his master so much he suffers from delusions that compel him to eat 5 Big Macs in his bed along with a bucket of KFC in the hopes of gaining Trump's self-proclaimed "stamina" and "perfect memory" (except when it comes to the questions Mueller put to him).
2
Apparently it’s not so easy to find someone with a clean record and actual expertise who’s willing to brown nose Trump.
7
Trump has a serious problem, and because of him the US: nobody who is competent and has dignity will accept to work in his Cabinet, because he/she would have much to lose and nothing to gain.
That is why he surrounds himself with cartoonish characters such as Kellyanne Conway, Sarah Huckabee, John Bolton, Larry Kudlow, etc ... But with the last two nominations, nothing less than for the Board of the Federal Reserve he reached an extreme so low that not even his associates in the Senate, where he has the majority, accepted them and had to push them aside.
First it was Herb Cain, famous for not knowing that Afghanistan was a country and that Libya is in Africa and then Stephen Moore who writes so many follies that most newspapers do not accept even his letters to the Director, because everything he writes are lies and fabrications.
11
Could it be that the Moore/Cain Fed nominee trial balloon was a subterfuge by Trump to change the subject from the Mueller Report? Their announcements came when the Mueller Report was released to the DoJ; Cain's balloon crashed on the release of the redacted report; and Moore's balloon deflated after Barr's testimony.
Say what you might about Trump, but he is a master of distraction and changing the subject.
6
The 1% don't care what incompetents Trump selects for agency heads. They will make money through deregulation and killing the environment.
However, putting Cain and Moore on the FED will cost them money.
Never gonna happen.
10
Maybe Ivanka could do it, if she wasn't vying for VP 2020
4
The last time the Fed was run competently was under Volcker.
After that , its policy became to fight the collapse of the previous bubble it blew, by blowing a new one
From the NY Times
"To fight this recession the Fed needs more than a snapback; it needs soaring household spending to offset moribund business investment. And to do that, as Paul McCulley of Pimco put it, Alan Greenspan needs to create a housing bubble to replace the Nasdaq bubble."
Paul Krugman , NY Times, 8/2/2002
And that, folks is what Greenspan, than Bernanke did.
Hard to see how Moore could be worse :-)
3
@Carl You forgot Janet Yellen, who was the previous Fed director. She did a good job. We also have to give thanks to Obama for having the foresight to nominate her.
9
Senator Moore's advice would be sound-if the President ever read anything beyond a tweet or the crawl below a TV broadcast. While Trump's advisors might be well read (and that is quite a stretch), he never heeds the advice his advisors provide. Thankfully, we occasionally have a thinking minority in the Senate that is waking up to Trump's idiocies. Whether the minority of senators have upcoming Democratic challengers/tight races, or the mere possibility of a 2nd thought about Trump's competency, I'll take it.
2
Opinions persist that the Trump administration is incompetent, and unable to perform adequate vetting. They are not fully comprehending the Trump vetting process. Trump does not care about corruption or even violence. His search involves identifying those who will blindly obey. It is even better if they have some shady past, and indicate they can be bought ... all the easier to get them to do what you want. With these candidates for Federal Reserve, Trump is boundary testing ... what are minimum requirements for appearance sake? He thought name brand businessman might work. Trump can continue to throw up candidates as he refines criteria.
13
I am shocked that Mitch McConnell did not bully the Republican senators into keeping Mr. Moore as a candidate. Will he and fellow Senators such as Joni Ernst now challenge President Trump regarding his treatment of women?
9
@Howard Herman Certainly not, especially when we're in the midst of an election.
3
@Howard Herman
A leopard doesn't change its spots. Why mix things up now?
3
@Howard Herman
Of course not. The only priority that the GOP and McConnell has right now is to put as many conservative judges into the judiciary as possible. They had 8 years of obstruction under Obama to make up for. That they are getting a little bit snippy with Trump suggests they think his time as a useful idiot is starting to come to an end. I don't think they'll ever *impeach* him, but they won't cry if he's run out of office.
7
This demonstrates in a powerful way why Wall Street is firmly in control of this government. It will let Trump trample on you and me. It will let Ms. DeVos trample on the Student Loan Forgiveness Program that Congress has authorized. However, when Herman Cain or Stephen Moore are proposed as destroyers of sane monetary policy, that crosses a line, that our controllers allow to be crossed with us daily.
Wall Street will not let Trump's corps of destroyers threaten the sanity and technical reverence of the Federal Reserve Board. Wall Street depends upon its sanity and predictability. This is a functional lesson in how an oligopoly works.
18
Trump, those who serve him, and all the rest of us would be so much better off if we knew the secret formula to get him to change his mind when he has a distracting or problematic thought or hears a whisper in his ear that leads to such thoughts. It should not take an economist, or a rocket scientist, to realize Moore and Cain were at best plants to do no good but react when told to. Thank you, President Trump, or whomever make him jump.
3
Finally, a rational outcome. Moore was hopelessly unqualified. If the position was Fed Governor responsible for making incorrect economic predictions, Moore was well qualified.
8
@Damian McColl I agree with you, but it wasn't Moore's zombie economic theories that got him in trouble, it was his attitude towards women. GOP would have supported his economic ignorance, but couldn't overcome the bad press focusing on his misogyny.
4
This is a direct result of the Trump Administration choosing people without first vetting them. They seem incapable of vetting anyone. Maybe its because Trump makes the decision based on his personal feelings. Recent history has shown that the president is not well equipped to make any selection for any senior position. Trump makes all decisions based on his own personal needs, not the needs of the nation.
Don’t get me wrong, there are responsible people at senior levels who want to do the right thing for the country. Trump is not helping them.
The election in November 2020 will be very important for the nation so I encourage all eligible voters to get out and vote. Think about who and what you are voting for and what you want you nation to be.
8
The only vetting that matters to Mr. Trump is undying loyalty.
10
@Bill Bidwell I agree. Incompetence and general horribleness are not relevant factors so why bother looking?
3
I cannot help but be amused by the Republican's concern that Stephen Moore has made comments denigrating women. It seems a different standard applies when they evaluate their own President.
36
How many here have read and heard the things Mr Moore has written and said about women?
This is not some hidden stuff, in an archive you don’t have access to.
There are WP and NYT articles with excerpts.
The very fact that didn’t deter GOP initially tells me all I need to know about him. As if they went looking for the most incompetent economist and misogynistic man out there... and, lo and behold they found him!
All this drama now, is backpedaling to save face.
21
One more Trump nominee must withdraw,
An event sure to stick in Trump’s craw.
But he’ll find someone worse,
The Fed’s business to curse,
And who has no respect for the law.
10
With all of this information fairly readily available, WHY was he an analyst for CNN prior to this nomination??
11
@Megan An excellent comment, I often have real concerns about some of the people hired by CNN
7
@Megan Because CNN wants to have the appearance of representing both sides.
8
@Megan
He was on CNN for the same reason that they had people like Corey Lewandowski and other Trump clones on.
CNN attempts to "balance" coverage. Unfortunately, with few exceptions, his representatives are clowns like Moore and Lewandowski.
11
So, bottom line is, if the “several republicans” didn’t already say they wouldn’t approve him, trump would’ve nominated him anyway. Because, after all, “he’s a fine man, and a great economist.” Why didn’t republicans step up and speak out for some of the other “fine men” trump nominated? Barr? Kavanaugh? Mulvaney? DeVos? Ya know, all these “fine people” that he said would be “great in their position, and they’re doing a wonderful job!” He’s not only inept at running the government, but he’s worse at nominating people that “will do a wonderful job!”
7
“The unrelenting attacks on my character have become untenable for me and my family and 3 more months of this would be too hard on us.”
Maybe he should have thought a bit about that when he skipped on his alimony payments and took food from his children’s mouths. And now we are supposed to feel sorry for him? Disgusting.
25
From his letter to the president, minor editorial note: media was reporting his own words and actions. If his own words and actions are "attacks on his character", they are self inflicted wounds. Moore's deflection was pitiful.
13
Back to the drawing board for Trump. Surely he can find someone worse. He always does.
16
@Patricia
Don't call me Shirley.
5
Right outcome. Wrong reason.
Moore is unfit for the position by reason of his wacky economics. He probably holds a modern record for flawed forecasts and lousy policy advice. He is one of those economists who are mocked by statements such as "He forecast six of the last two recessions."
His poor advice and policy positions were grounded in Republican orthodoxy, not economics. Those pesky facts, however, kept proving him wrong.
Good riddance. He can go back to providing comic relief on CNN.
36
@thomas briggs. I doubt that CNN will want him now. Fox News will likely be his new home. That and Trumps re-election campaign. It was screwball economics that put forward the idea of Tariffs and the NAFTA/TPP debacle. Just in case you missed it - America lost on those deals.
5
"In a letter to Mr. Trump, Mr. Moore said “I am respectfully asking that you withdraw my name from consideration. The unrelenting reminders of the many troubling things I have gone on the record saying - on TV and in print - is totally unfair. Reminders of my many policy flip-flops and the incorrect predictions I've frequently made regarding the economy and policy are mean, too. It's not like I'm being considered for independent and clear-headed thinking.
How the current President is going to find yes-man appointees who have no baggage like mine yet are still willing to serve this Administration by pandering to the whims of the guy at the top makes it difficult to staff the Executive Branch.”"
18
Eric Holder shows us that contempt of Congress really means nothing. He served two years after the finding and even contemplated running for President.
@Hank
Nothing like whataboutisms from the bone spurs camp. We are in the here and now.
10
@Hank You do not seem to understand. Eric Holder should not have been held in contempt of Congress. Please Hank, tell us that you are not a supporter of Donald Trump and the discredited Republican Party.
6
I find some measure of hope in that public outrage from the press, social media, and even some in Congress can elicit any change from a backward-looking White House.
7
Stephen Moore’s failure to pay back taxes, alimony and disrespect of equal pay for equal work for women is vintage Donald Trump. No wonder Trump considered Moore qualified for a seat the Fed.
41
Trumps has maxed out his family and friends discount from the vetting process.
10
The co-founder for the national group "Students for Trump" has just been indicted for wire fraud. He's charged with soliciting work online while pretending to be an attorney and cribbing resume info from a prominent NYC law firm. Now if only he had pretended to be an economist and delivered a fake resume to the White House. That along with his credentials as a Trump acolyte could have won him a nomination to the Fed.
21
Is Ringling Brothers still around? I'm sure he could he could find a job in the circus.
7
@Jim Anderson Yes Jim, he could find a job in the circus, but do you really want to see Stephen Moore in tights ?
4
@Dennis C
Good point.
@Dennis C - Thank you for the much needed laugh.
1
“I am respectfully asking that you withdraw my name from consideration. The unrelenting attacks on my character have become untenable for me and my family and 3 more months of this would be too hard on us.”
So along with misogyny, financial dishonesty and general incompetence, it seems that Moore shares Trump's victim mentality.
19
Wow, a grossly unqualified Trump nominee rejected for a responsible government position. This must be a first.
18
@LIChef In fairness to President Trump, he only nominates unqualified people on days that end in a y.
2
Thank you, Stephen Colbert.
12
The last two candidates previewed for the FED were economic illiterates with no demonstrated ability to learn from their mistakes...in short, not that different from Trump and the apparatchiks in the Republican party itself.
As such, being incompetent for the job wasn't viewed as a non-starter because the party of stupid doesn't value competence or expertise. The GOP has a serious problem with women voters across the board and confirming these men , one with a public history of sexual harassment, and other with public statements demeaning to women and unwillingness to support his family after walking out on his wife, was just too much for at least a handful of Republican senators. Trump and the Fox talks heads who advise him remain clueless and insensitive.
6
"questioning their [women's] right to attend sporting events." hey, what's wrong with that? Women are not allowed into stadiums in Afghanistan either /s.
7
Still chuckling about Mitch's request to our President to stop sending up candidates that can't/won't be confirmed. Seems a tall order. And yet he has all the best people.
9
Maybe Trump is coming to his senses. Stephen Moore is inept in the field of economics.
Trump will never come to his senses. It’s more like maybe some republicans in congress are finally coming through and speaking out! Now, in order to possibly win over some republicans in congress, both Graham and McConnell need to be gagged. As bad as McConnell has been with defending trump, I believe Graham is worse! How on earth could any of them possibly believe that Barr didn’t lie at his hearing.
3
It’s scary his name was even mentioned.
1
Forget his racist and ugly comments about President Obama, his misogynistic comments, his total lack of qualifications. No, I'm not referring to trump, but yes there are parallels. The GOP senators are scrambling for fig leaves to hide the fact that trump, in his zeal to control the FED, was attempting to nominate a hack, that even by past cabinets picks, is wholly unsuited for any job beyond fright-wing punditry. And he's not too good at that.
7
But Dow Jones is reporting the Moore says he is not withdrawing? I'm confused
1
Reality check for Trump: "truly fine people" don't owe 300k in child support.
13
@Ivy Please lower your standards, in today’s Republican Party this is a very fine person.
2
Stephen Moore is one great ignoramus. With a "long paper trail" of bad behavior, being wrong about everything and misogyny, did he not think none of this would come out. I hope this whole debacle makes it hard for him to spin his nonsense and find employment. Good riddance.
13
I suspect even a few Republican Senators were petrified about the kind of mess Moore could make of the economy if appointed to the FED. I certainly don't believe they were all that concerned about his attitude towards women.
So anyway I'm relieved, or in slightly reduced anxiety for the moment.
Who is it going to be next? Who's the most impossible, know nothing, pretender in the batting box?
8
@cheryl, not to mention the mess he’d make of their rich donors’ fortunes.
4
Any other president, Republican or Democrat would have no trouble getting nominees. But Trump's requirements are somewhat different. Absolute loyalty to Trump, not to the country and the ability to defend and spout nonsense smoothly and convincingly. And even when you find someone like that, they're already making tons of money semi-ethically in the private sector.
7
A small victory for democracy in a dismal week. He was totally unqualified for the Fed Board as a non economist and someone who did not know basic taw law taught in Taxation 101. However if you are in the large size 46 chubby coat pocket of Trump qualifications are just optional.
13
Stephen Moore, one of the greatest economists, especially in pro-growth economic theory, would have been a great addition to the Federal Reserve but because he is not politically correct, because he is not a feminist, he is disqualified. I disagree. What has happened to our nation? Putting political correctness of talent, skills, and ability. America will not survive it it continues on this path! Thank you.
@Southern Boy Moore is completely unqualified. If you understand anything about macroeconomics, you realize that Moore's recommendations for tightening the money supply when things are not going well and loosening it when the economy is humming, is exactly backwards. You don't need a PhD to understand that. More money = more spending equal more buying and selling, and in an economy that is doing well, that leads to too much inflation (a little is good).
39
@Southern Boy Why do you believe that making women feel unsafe and uncomfortable is the correct thing to do?
7
@Southern Boy Moore is not an expert on anything but running his mouth and, it appears, disrespecting women.
BTW, identifying yourself as a citizen of CSA, why do you care what happens to America?
11
"The unrelenting attacks on my character have become untenable for me and my family and 3 more months of this would be too hard on us.”
But it's okay when Trump does it?
So if I go back to Moore interviews and tweets I'm not going to find him attacking one of Clinton or Obama's nominees?
You think Trump would have learned by now: Have a list of names, vet the names, float the names for support and then make the nomination.
21
Up next: Bernie Madoff. He's available, by correspondence or Pardon.
SAD.
102
@Phyliss Dalmatian
Pretty soon Donald Jr. and Ivanka will be joining Bernie in prison. For them it will be because of The Trump Foundation fraud.
5
@adara614 I can not wait until the New York Attorney General indicts all of the Trumps including the Donald. The show is going to be fun to watch. I love perp walks.
5
@Phyliss Dalmatian
There is nothing wrong with Bernie Madoff (I mean, there is no longer anything wrong with him). I would vote for him. The law said he should go to jail, and into jail he went: that makes him a law-abiding citizen.
Madoff 2020!
1
Oh too bad. Trump's TV cabinet isn't coming together as he'd hoped. Perhaps Erik Estrada is interested.
14
@Martin X Yes, but maybe he can get Tony Danza or Scott Baio.
2
So the President does not think background checks are necessary. Lucky that Paul Krugman did this one for him.
36
maybe donald can nominate ivanka---i heard she took an economics class in college and is good with numbers
119
@Mike Ransmil. People are saying great things about Frederick Douglass. Maybe trump should consider him?
18
Trump is becoming a little more effective. You need to know when to hold and when to fold. It was clearly time to chop Moore. The key question is. Why are the background checks on so many candidates for senior Government positions in the Trump administration so sloppily completed? Something is rotten in the state of Trump.
48
@Milton Lewis - "Why are the background checks on so many candidates for senior Government positions in the Trump administration so sloppily completed?"
They are completed. The only questions that mattered to Trump are: "Does he agree with me?" "Will he do as I say?" "Will he be loyal to me no matter what?" The rest, failure to pay $300K in child support, failure to pay $75 in back taxes, contempt for people - especially women, just aren't issues of any import to Trump. They look perfectly normal to him.
43
@Milton Lewis Moore came out and totally contradicted Trump on his wanting to cut interest rates by 1% and do more QE. This was the real deciding factor on not following through on his nomination.
4
@Marie This is exactly correct.
7
Trump was really scraping the bottom of the economic barrel when he came up with Cain and Moore as nominees for the Federal Reserve.Both of them were nixed and quickly.Surely , Treasury Secretary Mnuchin can guide his boss to so,e more responsible and respectable choices.He has not been through five bankruptcies as Trump has, I assume.
11
I am always amazed when our always defiant King Trump still listens (however little ) to adverse but moral public opinion regarding any thing he chooses to do.
Sad this not happen to the Kavanaugh supreme court appointment.
10
@Carlyle T.
Chances are that's because Republicans were not going to vote for him and they have told him so (i.e. Graham). In Kavanaugh's case, they were going to vote for him + Bush the lesser had called Senators personally to get them on board for another born-again fellow.
2
I hope that Lin Manuel Miranda and the team who created "Hamilton" are taking notes. Just imagine the musical they could make out of this president and his minions - a casting agent's dream:
Trump: Nathan Lane
Melania: Patti Lupone
Pence: Steve Martin
Mrs. Pence: Barefoot Contessa Ina Garten
McConnell: Don Knotts (hologram)
Mueller: George Clooney
Wm Barr: Jack Nicholson
Ivanka: Anne Hathaway
Jared: Gwyneth Paltrow
and the list goes on and on and on . . .
60
Paltrow playing Jared is perfect.
3
"...after several Republican lawmakers raised concerns about the conservative economist’s previous comments denigrating women."
But they were very happy about the fact he is totally incompetent as an "economist" and would be a great representative of all the ultra right wingers who do not have a clue about how an economy works.
68
Nobody should be surprised by Trump's picks for government positions. Trump's own astounding insecurity means that Qualification # 1 (and 2, 3, 4 ... ?) for potential hires is always a list of crippling weaknesses, personal and professional. His hires must be meek and morally plastic people who Trump knows he can push around with impunity.
21
Just goes to show that Republicans do have a limit regarding how much incompetence in government they are willing to tolerate when it comes to Trump.
And they draw that red line firmly at the border where bad management may impact their personal wealth.
Good to know.
18
What a joke. On those grounds alone the Repubs should be demanding Trump resign.
23
The only surprise in this latest sorid example of incompetent WH personnel vetting is how long it took Republican politicians to forsake Moore.
14
Moore is trump's idea of a 'truly fine person.' Good riddance.
Can't wait for trump's next 'best' nominations. After Caine and Moore, the bar has been set lower than a snake's belly. I wonder if Ivanka is on trump's list; she is so good with numbers.
24
@say what
And she soooo understands "complicit."
5
The circus parade of incompetents just keeps on rolling.
23
We know that Trump is looking for a certain kind of man to serve on the Fed. One who, like Trump, treats women appropriately, and lives his life with humility and candor. Who does Trump turn to, now that Moore and Cain are out? I have the perfect candidate - Harvey Weinstein!
18
Next up at the batting plate : Sean Hannity who thinks baseball should be played with a hockey puck and hockey with a volleyball.
11
Mr. Trump, the Hack-in-Chief, loves to nominate people just like him. This is only normal. Larry Kudlow is another one.
15
Mr. Trump was never serious about nominating Mr. Moore. This was just one more sideshow in Trump Circus, the real purpose of which (like most of the sideshows in Trump Circus) was to keep us distracted from the Ringmaster's liabilities, lies, and inadequacies.
11
Only the best people!
9
What? The only reason is his misogyny? While repugnant, what about his qualifications? He is nowhere near qualified to influence the economy for 330 million Americans.
15
He picks two shaky nominees, they get rejected , the next two will be selected, they will be less shaky then the first two, but, shaky. trump wins.
6
Like Meadows, Trump only wants people who have made money and have a significant net worth...that’s why it was a quick pull. Besides, doesn’t Moore owe the feds money, a conflict as usual?
6
I remember when Trump came down that escalator and we all laughed. He is doing exactly what he did on day one, but we are no longer laughing. Oh no, far worse - we are accepting it as the new normal.
12
Mick Mulvaney has a couple of hours free . . on Tuesdays.
Will that work?
70
"Only the best people", nominated by the most thoroughly corrupt, incompetent huckster to ever soil the Oval Office.
113
Moore is a clown and should never have been nominated. The fact that anyone would list their time as an Editorial Board Member of the WSJ should be enough to disqualify them from any job. The WSJ editorial page makes Fox News look like like a legit news organization.
28
"Trump Won’t Nominate Stephen Moore for Fed Board"
Good.
I wonder what additional kooks Donnie has up his sleeve, now that Cain and Moore fizzled. Eric? Donnie, Jr.? (After all, they are running such a big business, right?)
17
Tired of the "unrelenting attacks" on his character? We were all tired of Moore's unrelenting charade as an economist and his unrelenting sexist remarks. Maybe now we'll get a better candidate. Oh, wait--Trump is making the nomination, right? Well, there goes that notion.
78
Ok, I guess James Woods is option C and Scott Baio D.
17
It is an interesting though typical display of incompetence by this WH to continuously nominate unsuitable candidates on a purely ideological basis for what are supposed to be independent offices. Of course, everyone is entitled to their political opinion, but trust in nevertheless unwaveringly balanced and capable persons in bodies such as the Fed and the SC are crucial to public faith in a democratic body politic, which is under attack by populist politicians and media worldwide.
Though the "withdrawal" of these two candidates is to be welcomed by all, I feel it is for reasons not primarily relevant to the job. There were far more valid reasons for them not to have been nominated in the first place.
180
@Ramesh Biswas
It is not WH incompetence.
This WH wants absolute loyalty along with an obvious lack of ability to outshine our exceedingly dim bulb of a president. Violence toward women and sexual predation are also big plusses along with cruelty.
Moore was the perfect candidate for Trump until too many Senator Republicans figured out Moore might be able to destroy the economy for the next couple of elections.
Republicans are bad for the health of the planet and the nation. Moore just made that a bit too obvious.
30
@Ramesh Biswas
I agree it would be nice to be able to cite their inexperience, incompetence and lack of knowledge as the reason to have scuttled these nominees. But that requires reasoned thinking and facts and . . . BORING!
It's so much easier to cite idiotic, demeaning comments that they can't claim are fake news.
In the end, it's still a win, just feels kinda sleazy, as befits these nominees.
11
Apparently, the GOP still believes that Moore is a good economist. In fact, he’s not an economist at all. Having been wrong on every economic prediction in the last 2 decades wasn’t a disqualifier for them. Indeed, that’s what made him a nominee in the first place. Such is the state of the Republican Party.
365
@PK
At least we now know that the only thing republicans fear is women.
28
@PK. Indeed, Moore is not an economist under the generally accepted definition that an economist is a person who holds a Ph.D. in economics. Moore does not.
12
@PK. There was no way that the big money GOP donors would ever allow a completely unqualified loose canon like a Stephen Moore or a Herman Cain to ever get on the Fed. The financial damage these appointments could cause was way beyond the pale in terms of risk for the big money donors to not nix their appointments.
4
Self awareness is a critical asset ...Stephen Moore has none.
15
Trump is nominating all of his “men’s club” cronies. Is it really any surprise that most of them have issues with women? They probably participate in the exact same “locker room” talk as Trump as well. Interesting that the GOP is now resisting... Better late than never.
12
"A truly fine person...", come on! Just like all the other fine persons that surround Trump and lie for him.
12
Susan Collins "expressed concerned."
I'll bet she did.
18
@Disco
Susan Collins ?
I'm going to Maine and will work for who ever runs against her next year.
9
Do you want think she will run? She has lost many voters.
2
That’s all she says and does nothing.
3
"What is the absolute worst pick for (fill in the vacancy) that we could possibly make?"
-- Trump administration
12
No problem with presidents choosing like-minded nominees to the Fed Board of Governors - Bush#1 appointed Lawrence Lindsey, another supply sider, to a term. But Lindsey was a Harvard PhD, NBER economist and Fellow at the [then] non-partisan Manhattan Institute. Steven Moore cut his teeth at the Club for Growth lobbying front and then matriculated through the usual right-wing organs going from easy to tightening the money supply according to which way the winds on the right were blowing. There a hundreds of better choices...
10
It's said that becoming a member of the Trump "team" could forever taint someone's reputation. Now if you're too controversial to pass the smell test of this rancid administration well...
7
This was not unexpected! Neither was President Trump's tweeting afterward that Moore is a great economist and a truly fine person! Our President keeps going lower! The Gutter Has Come To Power!
9
Trump’s obsession with nominating dovish, growth-at-any-cost individuals to the Fed is driven by one consideration ... next year’s election. Trump knows that if the current asset bubbles pop on his watch, his re-election chances are doomed. He just needs the Fed to kick the can down the road for another 18 months. Once he’s secured the election, the devil can take the hindmost for all he cares.
8
Trump will really have to work to find someone as odious as Moore but I'm sure he'll manage it.
12
A joke (pseudo-) nominee washes out ignominiously, because of his old jokes.
Poetic justice!
4
At first trump was impressed with Stephen Moore's rigid, unwavering gaze. On second analysis he figured out the man was merely born without a neck. And we know how trump feels about the disadvantaged.
2
Starting to look like the GOP has remembered there's elections next year.
6
I hope Moore also vanishes from being commentator at CNN!
8
@André
CNN has already announced he will not be returning.
Trump needs to do a better of job of pre-screening these people, even trump supporters must be annoyed by trumps inability to manage even simple projects. Democrats biggest gains in the next elections can simply be to show how utterly incompetent trump is managing his job duties. A good campaign poster can be a mock job review, poking fun at his poor job performance.
5
Ivanka is next in line.
6
Trump has so little competence or leadership in appointing qualified people for office in his administration that even Republicans will not approve them. His nomination of Cain and Moore for the Federal Reserve is so laughable that it could be a skit on SNL. But, given his disastrous businesses and bankruptcies, this is not surprising. What is surprising is that people who voted for him and continue to support him are clueless about his past failures and continuing failures as he pretends to lead the country.
16
@MEM
"What is surprising is that people who voted for him and continue to support him are clueless about his past failures and continuing failures as he pretends to lead the country."
They're aware of it; they just don't care, as long as he continues to threaten the people they hate and fear. It's pretty pathetic.
7
My car mechanic, landlord, owner of my favorite bar and the manager of a convenient supermarket have un-PC politics. Should I change them?
@The Wizard
And this has what to do with having a seat on the Federal Reserve board exactly?
22
@The Wizard Moore is unqualified. Any time a person talks disparagingly about "PC-ism," it reveals that they resent basic manners and the behavior we teach our children: be polite and try not to insult people. It's as simple as that.
16
@ the wizard I would
7
Here's an idea: Trump should try to nominate someone who is qualified and of good character.
63
@JackC5 he doesn't know anybody like that.
21
@JackC5 He can't. He only sees what he knows and that is his own self-image.
7
@JackC5 I'm sure Trump thinks that only Ivanka can fulfill your requirements for any position in government. He thinks she'd make a great president but since he knows nothing about being president that was an easy suggestion to dismiss.
5
Trump's next pick will either be Jared or Ivanka. They are a couple of know-nothings so he will think they are qualified.
10
Alex Jones is sitting by the phone.
15
Of course, both Cain and Moore were completely unqualified to be on the Federal Reserve. Their only “qualification” was being Trump sycophants. However, what’s truly ironic in both cases is that Republican Senators were fine with their total lack of qualifications for the actual job, which apparently is the main requirement to serve in the Trump administration or to be a Trump appointee, but some Republican Senators objected to accusations of sexual harassment by Cain and to Moore’s misogynistic and sexist writings about women. But Republican Senators, Republican House members and 90% of all Republicans are in lock step with our Sexual Predator In Chief Presidential Trump, who has openly bragged about sexual assault, and is openly and constantly misogynistic and sexist.
85
@MC They looked at a calendar and remembered 2020 comes right after 2019.
8
@MC >Cain and Moore were completely unqualified to be on the Federal Reserve.
Whats the scientifiically proper amount of counterfeited money and credit?
1
This is a perfect example of why we need more women in office. I can't believe that this article mentions only 5 republican senators who opposed this nomination -- and three are women. Men! Be better allies! A bad person towards women is just a bad person. Know that. See that. Act (and vote) on that information.
53
@B G - Agreed. Don't Republican men have sisters, wives and daughters? I know they all have mothers.
Would they really want someone talking like this about the women in their lives?
6
@DR
Actually, women should matter to their lawmakers regardless of how they relate to men. Even if they are no one's sister or wife, they still qualify as humans with rights. Stop framing women in terms of their relationships to men.
10
@LH - I'm a woman and I'm well aware of my humanity and my rights, but I'm pointing out that Republicans don't seem to care about an issue unless it personally impacts them or someone they know.
4
Moore meant “More Debt – a Trump favorite!
Dan Coates, Director of National Intelligence, said about our national debt during his Senate testimony:
“…This situation is unsustainable, as I think we all know, and represents a dire threat to our economic and national security.”
Jerome Powell, Fed Chair said, “I’m very worried about U.S. Debt.”
CBO, GAO, and others repeatedly warn: “US Debt is unsustainable”.
How is the president and Congress addressing this? By cutting taxes, spending Moore, borrowing Moore and declare “We are Winning!” We don’t need Moore!
We must find a way to hold self-interested and self-enriching Elected Politicians, government officials, their staffers and operatives from both parties personally and financially liable, responsible and accountable for the lies and half-truths they have told US, their gross mismanagement of our county, our $22 T and rapidly growing national debt (106% of GDP), and our $80 T in future, unfunded liabilities they forced on US jeopardizing our economic and national security, while benefiting themselves, their staffers, their party and special interest donors!
3
Guys like Moore and Cain really don't want to be in the game when it's always better for them to be on the sidelines. Where they can Monday morning quarterback every move the Fed makes (or doesn't make). Fox news and the right wing media /think tanks will pay them big bucks to say " if only the fed had done what I suggested things would be either better". Next name to be floated will be Maria Bartiromo.
5
@MM
Yes, why not, put the Money Honey on the Fed! Although seeing how Trump lambasted a Miss Universe title holder for gaining "massive amounts of weight", I'm not sure if Maria would fit the bill.
1
Thank goodness! One of the minor miracles of the disastrous Trump presidency is that he nominated Powell as the head of the Federal Reserve board. Powell's decisions seem to be consistently guided by reason and not political obeisance. For this he is constantly pummeled by the very man who nominated him.
Moore's nomination would have been a terrible signal to the country and the world that the Fed was becoming an abject political tool of the White House. It is another miracle that it has been stymied.
I just hope The Fed is not running out of miracles.
21
@Gary A. -- "One of the minor miracles of the disastrous Trump presidency is that he nominated Powell as the head of the Federal Reserve board."
Thus proving the adage that "Even a blind hog finds an acorn every so often"?
6
Who is promoting these ridiculous suggestions for nominees to Trump, or is he "thinking" them up on his own?
Given their pathetic track records, I could also imagine that Jared and Ivanka or Stephen Miller are the culprits. It's bizaare beyond reckoning.
21
@JFR: By now you should know that whatever comes out of Trump's mouth is his and whatever is read or a Tweet written in good English comes from an adviser. The advisers do what they can to give this loser a semblance of normalcy while Trump works hard to give the people a show that features abnormality as exciting.
3
Stephen Moore was a typical Trump pick -- a person of low character and few real qualifications, whose chief selling point was his willingness to prostitute himself in service of whatever Trump wanted, in this case, lower interest rates.
Moore's withdrawal will temporarily hurt my stock portfolio, but in the long run, it will be good for the country and good for investors. A Fed that is totally pliable to the President's whims will "prime the pump" when it is not necessary and will leave the U.S. without a significant financial weapon when the inevitable recession does occur.
Stephen Moore has been wrong about everything for most of his professional life. For once, he has made the right decision, helped along by a few Republicans who know the score.
40
Thanks to those republican senators who said NO to Steve Moore. But let’s keep in mind he was also unfit and unqualified to be on the Fed regardless of his writings on other subjects, including his disrespectful opinions regarding women. His ridiculous economic theories have been debunked repeatedly by qualified experts. Even had he been respectful of women, he should still have been disqualified for his lack of true economic expertise. His real qualification was being another Trump sycophant.
43
Lord knows Republicans would never "raise concerns" over Moore's fundamental unsuitability for a position on the Fed Board.
4
What is there to say? Thank you? I don't think so. This merely indicates how far beyond the pale, how unqualified, how inappropriate someone must be for Republican legislators to actually get up half the courage of the cowardly lion in "The Wizard of Oz" to do the right thing. They deserve the same congratulations as a mass murderer when he kills himself rather than subject the rest of us to his trial. That is, none at all.
17
Yet another example of the "Be Best Brigade"
7
Whom does he nominate next? Ivanka?
9
@SParker
You might be right. Trump did say she was good with numbers.
3
@SParker Tiger Woods is due at the WH for a medal... and he can putt. Seems like a no-brainer
1
But...but...Moore said this morning in an interview with Bloomberg News that he was “all in.” Methinks Individual 1 is lying about it being his decision to withdraw.
9
Trump keeps selecting people just like him and they keep getting shot down as unqualified hacks with insane policy ideas who are biased toward their own interests. I wonder why
10
Thank you, Paul Krugman, for doing more than anyone to stop the destruction of yet another critical institution in DC. Could you please start working on the DOJ?
63
@Michael Some credit also belongs to Catherine Rampell of the Washington Post. Her absolutely humiliating takedowns of Stephen Moore on CNN exposed him as unqualified to be the local dog catcher.
3
Please--the Fed, "which is historically independent"--has been a self-serving political swamp oozing money as required from day one. Not the intention but still the reality.
To suggest Moore isn't "virtuous" enough to serve even Wilson would laugh.
More important, to say board members aren't partisan and are pure of heart might be true if they didn't pass through the Senate first. QED
1
Good. I contacted Lisa Murkowski this week and urged her to vote no if he came up for confirmation.
If Moore is a 'truly fine person', I wonder what kind of person Trump thinks is a not very fine.
26
@Run Wild Probably someone who is actually a very fine person.
10
Please Trump, select someone who’s not morally flawed to the extent that they are in trouble before anyone does a background check. Please select someone who pays taxes and alimony owed. It really is not to much to ask. Remember, you promised to DRAIN the swamp, not stock it with invasives.
14
@BillOR
AS IF he knows anyone who might pass those tests. Surely you jest.
13
@BillOR The problem with your request is that trump likes people who are like him. Or willing to be toads to his power (see Wm Barr). Integrity need not apply.
15
@BillOR
Not morally flawed? The applicant pool must be awfully shallow. No one respectable in monetary policy wants to become associated with a Trump appointment. Even if they do their job well, their reputation is forever tainted. I certainly wouldn't stick my head in that noose.
You start to wonder how many conservative economists have already been privately approached without accepting. The world of conservative economics is not exactly known for responsibility and good faith. However, I still wouldn't expect anyone with self-respect to step forward on Trump's behave.
Everyone suddenly has the powder flu.
3
Breathtaking ... While trump may feel sympathy for a fellow-traveler, when his own party won't back his own nominee (don't forget the pizza guy), then being simpatico kinda-sorta gets in the way of good politics or in this case, worse politics
7
Must be election season. A traditionally sexist party under an incredibly sexist President now find sexism in the Fed inappropriate. Never mind that both Cain and Moore were grossly unqualified to lead the world's most influential monetary institution. Details, right?
I wouldn't trust either of them with a toaster oven and Republicans were seriously entertaining the idea of handing over the keys to the Fed. That's like handing a child a lit firework without any explanation. "Have fun!"
Says a lot when the GOP can't even credibly oppose nominations on their merit. The party of "meritocracy" has to resort to sexism before they'll back off outrageously bad candidates.
163
Anyone paying attention for the last 2 years knows that Trump will now pick someone worse than Moore, out of spite.
125
@RP Smith Trump will pick someone of his own likeness: Ronald McDonald.
8
@RP Smith
I propose a contest to guess who will next:
1. Sean Hannity
16
@RLD No Lou Dobbs. Look, he's on Fox Business, must be qualified.
21
After seeing a selection of his recent videotaped comments, it is clear that he and the president both have serious trouble with boundaries. Nope. They're both unfit for public office of any kind.
91
How about Dobbs, Varney and Hannity?
They’re all experts, right?
9
let's face it Stephen Moore is the perfect trump nominee--arrogant, snide, misogynistic, immune to the truth, ethically corrupt. I wonder who trump will go to as back up for perfection?
234
@rodo Possibly the REAL author of Trump's tweet, Kudlow?
11
@rodo Trump's swamp of unfit candidates for any position is endless. Witness Barr's sad performance yesterday and cowardice today. Slime attracts slime and Trump proves it every day with his "best people" who are perfect for no job in government.
28
I guess, if truth isn't truth, then Moore is less!
Methinks, the alternate facts caught up with him.
3
Only the best people.
11
not to mention his lack of understanding of economics...
24
I love that this incompetent buffoon was made aware of his decision to withdraw the same time I learned of it.
25
The Fed is the one and only institution that the ruling rich elite care about and they will not let Trump mess with the Fed. Stephen Moore and Herman Cain never had a chance of getting on the Fed board.
7
Now for a refreshing change of pace, how about the president nominates somebody with actual experience and gravitas to this extremely important role in the financial life of the American republic?
12
I suppose it shouldn’t surprise me after two and a half years, but I continue to find it gobsmacking that there appears to be no advance vetting of so many of Trump’s nominees.
40
@SiubhanDuinne They are vetted . . . for exactly what the administration desires . . . these desires are in direct contradiction to any qualities having to do with the position and responsibilities, or the ethics and character of the individual being nominated. This is a clear and obvious pattern throughout this administration.
8
@SiubhanDuinne
Oh, I think there is extreme vetting, as trump promised. The question is what are they vetted for. From the last two nominations, it appears that complete fealty, pandering, lying on trump's behalf, and pursuing an agenda that suits trump's immediate re-election needs are the key tests.
11
@SiubhanDuinne The voting public clearly didn't vet Trump so why should he ask for qualified people to fill positions in the government?
5
Help Wanted: Financial position under the direction of busy executive. Must believe in keeping federal interest rates low at all times. Unquestioned loyalty and obsequious to executive required; economic experience or sense of ethics not necessary.
243
@jrinsc
Well Moore certainly fit that description. You have to be pretty bad to lose Trump’s favor. Moore fits that description as well.
10
@jrinsc And ensure to goose the economy through the 2020 election regardless of the long term financial damaage
15
@Andrew
Moore did not lose Trump's favor. Enough Republican Senators said that they wouldn't vote for him that it forced Trump to withdraw him. He is still very much in Trump's favor.
20
Try as he might, Trump is not going to be successful filling the Fed with those who would pressure Powell to lower rates when it's not appropriate to do so. Trump needs lower rates so he and Jared can refinance all their real estate debt. Just as Trump bullied to get his tax plan to benefit him more than anyone else, he's trying to do the same at the Fed. Cain the pizza chef and Moore the man whose own finances are very poor, would not have been helpful to the country, only to Trump.
49