Trump's tantrum may have been a political win for Democrats but it's a loss for the country. As pointed out here, we DO need those bridge repairs and new roads for the long-term health of our economy and nation.
1
The benefits of an infrastructure program set in motion now would accrue exclusively to whomever takes office in 2020. Too laggy to have any influence between now and the election. Even an idiot can be right once in a while.
"displaying his unfitness for office...in such a dramatically unhinged way that only cultists can fail to see it"
But 'failing to see it' is exactly the problem. FOX News is the most watched news network in America, and FOX News will not be reporting on this story in the same way - not remotely. They will not re-air Trump's crazy remarks at the podium, they will re-air the press secretary's spin job.
Everyone who watches FOX News will come away with one message only: that poor President Trump can't do infrastructure because Democrats only care about investigations.
Trump had a chance to be presidential & he threw it away with both hands to grandstand for his base.
The Democrats should do whatever Nancy Pelosi tells them to do. She has more political acumen that any of them.
The goal of using public-private partnerships in an infrastructure program is to leverage public spending and limit the debt impact, not to make the program complex or "subsidize the privatization of public assets".
But it's a moot point anyway. The lawyers and environmentalists didn't allow Obama to pursue any meaningful infrastructure projects, even after he signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) into law ten years ago, so they would surely block Trump too. Due to their pernicious obstruction, "shovel-ready doesn't mean shovel-ready" anymore.
1
If infrastructure spending is good, we shouldn’t celebrate the fact the Democrats were saved from doing a good thing under the watch of a bad President. That’s essentially cutting off your face to spite your nose...
A large part of the explanation for the condition of infrastructure isn't just under-investment, it's over-investment in new facilities, particularly unnecessary roads sold on false promises of congestion relief or jobs jobs jobs. Many of these projects were built without budgets for maintenance, forcing public agencies to maintain more roads with the same amount of money - or less. The result is less maintenance and often no maintenance. Replacement schedules run into many decades. Given that federal transportation funds, for example, can't be used for local streets and you get millions of miles of badly deteriorating local streets. Look at virtually any city. Other projects have relied on local or state special funding initiatives - a bump in the sales tax, for instance. That's a reflection of a destructive anti-tax mentality that infects America. People will pay a fixed amount for a tangible, highly visible, project rather than a less well-defined maintenance fund. Politicians are fine with that. There aren't ribbon cuttings for repavings or relined sewer pipes. I doubt any of this is going to change.
You gotta love the stealing the strawberries line, may Herman Wouk rest in peace.
After 21/2 years of trump's shock and awe antics, I think every world leader has a clue on how to handle trump's vanity.
The U.S.President's Cup is 20 cm. higher the Emperor's Cup that was presented to the sumo winner is, I think, an insult, but if Japan gets what it wants, then the slap in the face was worth it.
As for the Infrastructure, if you elect trump in 2020, you will get roads and bridges, you will see trump's taxes, you will have the best health care, and you will be living in the greatest America the world has ever known.
1
Trump may have given the Dems a gift but it's wrong to presume that they will know what to do with it.
Tweedledum and Tweedledee
Agreed to have a battle;
For Tweedledum said Tweedledee
Had spoiled his nice new rattle.
Just then flew down a monstrous crow,
As black as a tar-barrel;
Which frightened both the heroes so,
They quite forgot their quarrel.
That monstrous crow? Surging popular discontent that's bound to make friends of former enemies. The Dems have long abandoned labor and embraced the hedge funds. AOC is a blip not a trend.
The GOP? They're out there covering their tracks to the fossil fuel giants, big pharma, insurance companies and other one percenters with the serenade of racists, misogynists, and xenophobes.
We used to wonder why someone as corrupt as Trump would run for any political office, and then we learned it was to increase his wealth. Then we wondered why someone as untutored as Trump would exhibit his ignorance with glee, and then we learned he loves the uneducated, though we did not assume he was referring to himself. Now we know that there’s always only himself since yet again he asked us to listen to his minions praise him for his temperament of all things. Too late for the 25th amendment, too late for impeachment and woe to us if the know nothings prefer to know nothing again in eighteen months. From W’s election on, even to feckless likable Obama, this place sure stinks of Rome, its fall.
911
@Naked In A Barrel
Trump may have run for president in order to increase his wealth, but I believe he ran mostly to stroke his ego. Further, there are a number of educated voters that support him, for whatever misguided reason.
105
@Naked In A Barrel
I fear you are right: remembering all the times the rule of the people has lost out to rule of the emperor, I tremble.
63
@Naked In A Barrel
My guess Trump ran as a PR campaign for his TV show and other businesses.
My guess is that he never expected to get as far as he did let alone win.
106
What a brilliant observation. The dolt in the WH is so stupid he does't realize how he's playing into the Speaker's hands. GO NANCY AND CHUCK!
1
President Donald Trump body man & White House Director of Social Media Mr. Dan Scavino doctored the videos of Speaker Pelosi & U.S. Representative (D-MN 5th District) Omar.
Trump has always been a fascist fraud president. The majority of his deplorable voters are fascists, while his GOP enablers are the most successful fraudulent scammers in the entire globe. With their multi billion dollar vitriol right-wing cabal of Murdoch's faux, and St Clair networks, etc. they enraging fascists with fake outrage, false equivalencies with bigotry, misogyny, Christian fascism to transferred the wealth of America to their GOP plutocratic masters.
The GOP now is taking their marching orders from the biggest fraud in the global, Rupert Murdoch and the most toxic and evil fascist, Putin. The GOP finally has the government they always wanted to the depredation of the nation.
4
Donnie...show us your college transcripts and put to rest the notion that you're really not that smart.
2
Pelosi and chuck are the children in the game of politics. Our nation is being invaded by illegal aliens at our southern border and they refuse to allocate any funding for necessary border fencing. They are the ones throwing the temper tantrums anytime the subject is approached by the president.
1
Having a loose cannon and impulsive jerk for a POTUS has consequences. Unfortunately for the GOP, they’re still pretty much in the dark regarding the damage this infantile blowhard has and will continue to do.
1
"And I don’t just mean that they should be grateful to see Trump displaying his unfitness for office, which has long been clear to close observers..."
To "close" observers? Prof. Krugman, it is apparent to any person of average or even slightly below-average within about the first 30 seconds of seeing Trump and hearing him speak that he is a fraud, a buffoon, and a moron.
(Which speaks volumes about the IQ of most Americans that so many of them were unable to see this.)
3
PELOSI/WATERS 2020!
@skanda; Pelosi is too old. How about Harris/Buttigieg? And then put Obama on the Supreme Court.
1
Critizing donald amounts to the crime of lese majesty, a crime punishable by death.
You have a computer; you start it up and you get a message: ERASE ALL DATA! You have a virus which will destroy your system in thirty seconds!
Would you believe that? Would you erase all data?
Only an idiot would ... But in 2016 almost 63m people elected a blank brain with pretty well all data already deleted. This walking virus then proceeded to destroy pretty well everything behind and in front of him. The fact that over 71m people had not voted for him was of no concern... Thanks to manipulation via the Internet and by the proudly acclaimed "free press" (which apparently now includes Fox News etc.) there is no way of preventing manipulation on the same or greater scale in the next election (should Trump not find a way to declare himself President for life).
@Bill George; Yes, it is Nero redux. And people are still bringing children into this world? That is the epitome of selfishness.
If I was a citizen who somehow time-warped from an earlier America to this present moment I think I'd only have one thing to say...
"Wow America. What have you done to yourself!??!"
So it goes.
John~
American Net'Zen
2
I find the atmosphere of my grandson's day care to be eminently more stable than the sandbox we call the Whitehouse. By the way, lets replace the genocidal Indian killer from the twenty-dollar bill with a human rights champion and refer to the Whitehouse as the People's House in the future. But that would be too politically correct.
2
Trump is Humpty Dumpty in reverse. He falls up instead of down, his egg-shaped body cracked and oozing yolk but sitting on top of a wall that's partially built and oozing blood. A smart man would agree to an infrastructure plan and include the wall as infrastructure. A stupid man would do nothing. Trump, who's clever but dumb, courts followers who get a kick out of oozing yolk in the form of Tweets and a half-dozen taunts repeated 1000 times to adoring crowds. Humpty Dumpty can't be put together gain, but he's still on his wall, smirking and repeating, all night, "I'm Donald Trump and you're not."
I wish I had the stamina to keep up with all this ridiculousness. I used to be a massive news hound but honestly I don't know how much more I can take. The childishness of the moron in charge, the hate, the lies and the divided country really is too much to listen to on a daily basis. And we have 18 more months listening to this as we gear up for an election (If only we did what they do in the UK and have a 6 week run up to an election). It's all too much to take on and I feel so much better when I don't have to read/listen to this. I am not bowing out, but I am certainly reducing my intake. Death by politics.....
2
Trump is all talk.
The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the Lie became the truth.
-------Gorge Orwell, from 1984
2
Major issues facing Congress:
The "Is" [sic] have it! Infrastructure, immigration, interest rates, intelligence, Iran, Iraq, internet neutrality, income gaps,
IMPEACHMENT!
1
Even if not every Trump spin wins, spinning and blaming is his metier with his bullhorn state-owned Fox Never-News to prop him up. Too bad his voters don't seem to care that the Republicans have done NOTHING for the country but force women to give birth, hand their salaries back to their employers in tax cuts, build useless walls, hate immigrants, and prepare to send their children into another middle eastern boondoggle. No infrastructure, no healthcare, no job security, pensions, decent salaries, no affordable housing, no transportation for cities where workers waste their lives on parking lot highways, no affordable childcare or college, no safe airplanes, drinking water, clean air, or future. Republicans are the party of NO and they have fully succeeded in wasting our tax dollars doing nothing. Kick the bums out in 2020.
2
@Dr. Conde
The Republicans have always been the party of no never more so than when Mr. Obama was POTUS.
They stopped his every move, even those that they, themselves, had introduced.
The POtuS that now sits in the white, now black, house, the liar, cheater and golf crazy "person" must be ousted in the 2020 election along with the crooked GOP.
Here we are aboard the USS Caine. We know that Trump is Captain Queeg, but who plays the other characters? Take a look and see if you can figure it out. I'd love to hear your thoughts:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jw6gwGawbXA
1
It seems to me that many democrats in Congress, now affected by the investigations of the Prosecutor General, were not strangers to the organization of a coup to remove the president !
- Nancy! Am I right ?
Which of these three conflict styles is Trumps?
1. Pound the facts?
2. Pound the law?
3. Pound the table?
2
The present editorial is self-evidently correct of course. The word "tantrum," however, is insufficient. We aren't in tantrum territory anymore. Yes, the miserably unfit Mr. Trump threw a genuine tantrum yesterday. But what he also did on that same day was genuinely malevolent and genuinely deeply troubling. Yesterday Mr. Trump told us that the officials who managed the Mueller investigation had committed treason, which is a capital offense. The officials he has in mind are presumably Obama, Mueller, McCabe, Rosenstein, etc. Moreover, at Mr. Barr's own suggestion, an hour or two later Trump authorized Barr to review confidential information and selectively declassify anything he wanted in order to make public the case (the propaganda) that those officials and their agencies were treasonous, or, as Barr misleadingly and dishonestly claimed, spied on the Trump campaign. Aren't we finally there yet? Can we finally jettison the old euphemisms? Can we finally end the suspense and call Trump and his Trump McConnell Republicans just what they are, namely, textbook demagogue and his textbook fascist party?
2
Trump is acting like Captain Queeg from The Caine Mutiny. A combination of denial and paranoia.
3
Meanwhile the prevailing agony of biggest question persist...
To impeach or not to impeach. Same as: To be or not to be"
To the point of two variety of debates, Slate just had a very good piece, headline reads...
Democratic Reluctance to Even Utter “Impeachment” Is Becoming Untenable
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/05/nancy-pelosi-impeachment.html
I tend to agree, once this precedent is established, how do Congress survive in a long term.
Right now it would look really bad and weak, bad because Congress is not fulfilling it's important constitutional duty and weak is pretty obvious for almost everyone.
GOP will never cease attacking, so should democrats gradually surrender and destroy our Constitution piece by piece.
I don't know if we can win with this right now, all the references to Clinton impeachment seem nonsensical...we're facing different specie and a different time, just check Europe...
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/21/opinion/austria-russia-vice-chancellor.html
They wanted to sell Austrian government to Russian oligarch
Italy...
https://www.ft.com/content/0d33d22c-0280-11e7-ace0-1ce02ef0def9
France...
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/02/world/europe/french-far-right-gets-helping-hand-with-russian-loan-.html
Needless to say Putin is busy starting with Brexit and spreading globally.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/farage-and-russia-will-destroy-the-eu-says-brexit-negotiator-jwvhpk2p3
Putin, Johnson and Farage will destroy us, warns EU chief
1
America's democracy is already in transition, and will continue to rapidly shift, but more into an Oligarchy. The pace of this transition is accelerating under this disgusting administration.
1
First, Pelosi insulted the President, accusing him of a cover up before the infrastructure meeting. Why not do it afterward or the next day? Apparently, Trump knew about the coming insult since he had a nice sign made for his "impromptu" press conference. Smells like neither the Republicans nor the Democrats were ready to spend big money on infrastructure.
For those that think Trump was off the wall, check whether or not that behavior resonated with his base. I'm guessing the act was totally popular with Trump voters.
Trump is a totally corrupt and inept president, but political kabuki theater is not going to win the Democrats any votes.
Trump is living proof that the deep state fantasy is just that..
Donald Trump wears his life of crime like a badge of honor.
Law enforcement doesn’t have the same tenacity as a greedy, selfish, and self absorbed narcissist.
Trump has never been held accountable.
Trump has always outlasted those attempting to hold him accountable.
Will this be another win for Donald?
If so, that is a loss for America.
3
He must have been studying pictures of Mussolini. I couldn't bring myself to flash that pose if I hit the lotto and won a Nobel Prize at the same time. The immodesty is a response to the scrutiny he gets from every angle. He always over estimates his intelligence to even referring to himself as a genius. Even geniuses don't refer to themselves as geniuses. In spite of all his efforts to eliminate any transparency to his history its become the open book he must dread has been out there for all to see. His dominance of the media has become burdensome for millions of us to where I just mute him whenever he threatens to come on the air. This latest supporting of the Saudi dominated unholy war in Yemen, causing millions of children to starve and telling Congress he's going to sell them more weapons is the stuff of war criminals. His supporters are deliberately made to misunderstand the move as bold and all that thumbs in suspenders cringe worthy testosterone hemorrhaging. We're living in times that are not better times. That picture reveals that he reeks of unhinged immodesty.
2
Yes it is like the bad actors keep piling it on. Trump has a flair for showy entertainment, so he is one up I guess, at least by Republican standards, on his predecessor George W Bush, whose foolishness was delivered with false gravitas.
1
The ‘temper tantrum’....
Since this has occurred in the White House kindergarten maybe somebody who ‘watches’ POTUS could just send him to a corner.
He’s been having too much fun throwing sand in the sandbox.
It is obvious that at this point in his time at the helm the ‘kid of chaos’ is in very desperate need of getting some ‘quiet’ time. And just think what could happen if and when the kid ‘grows up’. If ‘the child is father to the man ‘ well I’ll leave it to others to prognosticate.
The picture with this article is great. Donnie looks just like his hero: Benito Mussolini.
I’m no Trump lover, but to rejoice over political sumo rather than regret that the country, its workers, all of us are the losers here seems the hight of blind partisanship.
Trump's obvious and accelerating mental deterioration is the biggest problem we face as a nation, fixing the pot holes can wait.
I'm not a psychologist, but I can say Trump is crazy just like I am not a veterinarian, but I know that skunk by the side of the road is not taking a nap: It's just that obvious.
Almost ever analysis of Trump I read fails to factor in Trump's accelerating madness: He is crazier this week than last week and he will be crazier next week than he is this week and we have over 60 weeks before the election!
The only good thing to come from " The Time of Trump" is the exposure of the Republican/ Conservative/Evangelical Party as the lying hypocrites and crooks that they are.
Nice!
Way back I heard a certain democrat say there was a "right wing conspiracy" against her and her husband, but everyone laughed at her for "exaggerating". But I wasn't laughing when someone has the courage to speak the truth. You can round up a herd of cattle and lead them to the slaughter, and you can do the same thing to people. The only tool you have to prevent mass ignorance is a well rounded education. Learning can be hard- you may watch the clock impatiently for 3pm to come, but you'll never again get the chance to fill up your empty brain with math AND history, science AND literature. And in the meanwhile the world outside of your stomach and your TV set comes into greater focus with every passing day. When I graduated high school I was issued a draft card. The Vietnam War was in full swing with no end in sight. Had it not been for my student deferment I would have been shipped off to the nastiest, deadliest place on earth. So I went to every protest meeting and marched, and had to sometimes run with the police chasing me. I saw the Klan hold their counter-rally nearby. And when the Ferguson riots broke out, it reminded me again. There is but one way to take the propagandists down. Frontline just ran a special on McConnell and the Federalist Society, chipping away at the "liberal" courts for opposing Bork's nomination. EXPOSE the lies behind the lie- hypocrisy in the legislature, the church, the judiciary. Light up the darkness, read, stay alert, do what you can.
Fortunately the democrats just went right out and passed an infrastructure bill. What do they want to rebuild - the physical infrastructure of public schools! Brilliantly played - another populist issue. There was and is very little support for privatizing education. Betsy DeVos is one of the most hated people in the administration. She has obvious self interest in private education and loan servicing for education. Fortunately she has very little power, other than to make gays, trans, girls (basically anyone except white boys) worse off and less safe in their public schools, which suits her just fine. She can then spread a false story that private schools are better. Democrats should pick up public education and teachers' salaries as a core issue in 2020.
1
I couldn't agree with this opinion more. So, Trump's orchestrated tantrum was a gift to the Democrats. Meanwhile, the country is crumbling. Is that also a blessing in disguise?
Only if you don't drive on that broken bridge!
1
Trump's infrastructure offer was dead before the meeting. He did not even have the approval of his own chief of staff, much less Mitch McConnell. Trump had to bluster his way out of a trap of his own making. If he had cut a deal with the Democrats and could not get his own people in line, he'd look even weaker than he already does.
1
Sixty-five per cent of Americans and ninety-nine per cent of the rest of the world's people wonder how it is that the men posing as our leaders can be devoid of all benevolence toward our country?
My one-year-old granddaughter has better wishes for us than do Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell or Chuck Grassley.
3
Most governments are infected with 'short-termism,' seeking economic 'good' news to coincide with the political cycle, and in this respect at least Trump is no different. It takes rare wisdom for a government these days to support infrastructure investment unless it involves some form of public-private partnership where most of the financial burden can be offset onto private investors rather than tax payers. It's the obsession with lower taxes that keeps government from undertaking direct investment that every country needs for its future economic growth, and as a cushion against downturns.
3
For sure this present government has none of the rare wisdom of which Tom speaks.
Perhaps Pelosi pushed Trump's button to get the desired response. If so, then it was Pelosi who saved the Democrats - not Trump.
All disheartening. Trump as president has lowered all and we now have a deficit that must be shocking, but no GOP seems to care as they have in times past. We have an immoral/amoral president, an adulterer extraordinaire, but the GOP seems not to care as they have, with zeal, in times past. We steam towards Iran, after the debacles in Iraq/Afghanistan, now Yemen with planes sold to SaudiArabia, all for some rumors upon rumors of intelligence reports, but the GOP favors this and do not care. The wall, and the builiding of it, has been stopped by a federal ruling for certain parts under his jurisdiction. Oh, now the GOP does care. Pelosi needles Trump who pushes back with engineered recordings of her speaking somewhere, making her appear as on drugs or simply loaded. The GOP does not care. I do appreciate this column from Krugman for ths insight into the tantrum. What an inglorious president, present. We do live in interesting times.
6
Buy yourself a US president, In Trump's case it was easy. This US president is obviously for sale that's why Putin, the Saudis, and others pay him. Very clearly part of the deal he made for Putin's help in 2020 with his re-election is to declassify any intelligence about possible informants in Russia.
Currently he is flitting around the world making back-channel deals without oversight. Enriching himself and his cronies. He uses media to fool his followers, and by stumping throughout his first term but not actually governing other than deregulating the environmental protections, and taking away health care. I pray for America
7
The Dems have been on a tantrum since Trump was elected. It goes BOTH ways.
Barely-adequate try, but this particular door only goes the one way.
2
So this is what has become responsible governing? Denying a horrible president a win, so that he is weaker in the next election, while the nation’s infrastructure collapses? Sure, that’s what Republicans do, but I thought Democrats were the adults in the room. If we want people to vote for Democrats because we are the party of good government, because we have principles beyond just electoral success, because our ideas are better, then we need to start acting like it. I’m not sure that Pelosi and Schumer planned the meltdown to avoid letting Trump have a win, but Krugman’s suggestion that this was a smart move is way off the mark.
1
Krugman (and NYT journalists) ned to write clearly about the fundamental differences between Republican and Democratic infrastructure plans. Democrats want to repair, rebuild and strengthen our infrastructure making sure that our transportation, communications, water, sewage, and power infrastructures are public. Republicans want to privatize everything -- including access to clean water.
Also Krugman was horribly wrong when he wrote that we have been neglecting our infrastructure for "years". It has been decades!
2
So Nancy has stolen Donald's strawberries. It's a clever and revealing strategy, but what really matters is how much time and how many tantrums will have to pass before President Queeg is twirling ball bearings at a competency hearing. When will the Congress find the guts to stage a 25th Amendment-based "Caine Mutiny"? The Ship of State is already on the verge of foundering and somebody has to step up and right it!
2
This nonsense has entered the realm of total lunacy. THIS is how the world works? People SUPPORT Trump and his enablers? I use to wonder why certain things happened...things like war and starvation (while there is plenty of food) and illness (while there are available medicines) and blah, blah, blah. But I'm thinking now that the Earth IS flat and we have gone over the edge.
3
I don't think everyone knows that at all. What are you doing? You're and economist, I thought. I'm a total liberal but I don't appreciate false exaggeration, especially by and economist.
My father, long now dead, constantly warned, 'don't cut off your nose to spite your face," a piece of wisdom I thought of the second I read what Trump had done last week with Schumer and Pelosi. As Professor Krugman points out, Trump needs infrastructure spending even more than the Democrats desire it. That spending, unlike defense spending or Trump's golf trips, which have no useful life, creates jobs and carry a multiplier effect each time a dollar is spent, which in politics is the best money you can spend.
Trump truly has become a Shakespearean despot, a mad Lear or manipulative Richard. And, he is now walking around without a nose but he could have been walking around with both a nose and a smile if he wasn't so darned vindictive and impulsive.
1
Yes, I was thinking, too, that a GOP plan would involve sweetheart construction contracts with Trump buddies followed by interstate highways with Apply-Pay stations every ten miles or so. So, Phew! Good thing Trump used Speaker Pelosi's "He's doing a cover-up!" comments (so, true, by the way) to throw a monkey wrench into the deal, forswearing any need for Dems to shake hands with the devil. But too bad we cannot again look forward anytime soon to another Infrastructure Week.
Taking an objective stance, but I respectfully submit that Mr. Krugman's logic is flawed at worse or his view is intentionally skewed. The phrase "obviously amount to a coverup of something" is without merit if one is willing to study Mr. Trump's history. Simply put, he baits people by his actions. He has baited the democrats and Mr. Krugman. Trumperino excels at distracting people from his real intentions.
Also, don't forget that Donnie beat Hillary by 51 points amongst voters who thought neither one was qualified to be President. Plus, he won by 17 points with the 18% of voters who held negative views of both of them. He's like that obnoxious, foul-mouthed and odorous Uncle who keeps showing up at family events uninvited and has a good time while the rest of the family stews. His advantage now is a Democrat presidential candidate field of socialists, bigots, and youngsters. Write him off at your peril. He can lawyer up and fight the fight well into late 2020.
The very first sentence is priceless!
Krugman still can't figure Trump out. Trump's "tantrum" didn't "save" Democrats. Trump is furious at Pelosi for pushing his buttons and for not being baited by him. There was nothing spontaneous about this, it was planned, with Americans as the marks.
Trump supposedly spontaneously stormed out of a meeting with Speaker Pelosi and Senator Schumer and just happened to have posters attached to the podium for a fake news conference with the press which were about how the Democrats were picking on him over impeachment. Trump actually wants it because he correctly thinks he'll win. It's why Pelosi, who is correctly employing a death by a thousand cuts strategy, won't give it to him.
There was nothing about a $2 trillion infrastructure package Trump agreed to last month because he'd always been lying and never intended to go through with it.
Every word out of Trump is a lie. He claimed to have walked into a room and been ambushed by Pelosi when it was his cabinet room and Speaker Pelosi and Senator Schumer just walked in because Trump invited them so he could pretend to talk "infrastructure". Trump just played a successful real estate character on a fake reality show filled with scripted stunts. As his already discovered tax returns show he's the biggest loser ever. He isn't good at making anything, just running cons and stealing our tax money.
Trump pretends Democrats prevented anything from happening on infrastructure because of Speaker Pelosi, and Krugman plays along.
2
I can't help but smile when I think of what so called conservatives have wrought. Low taxes and small government have cost you the only kind of government that offered options.
The failure to nourish all your children means you will need large powerful government to keep you safe.
In 1775 Dr Samuel Johnson the man who defined conservative wrote a letter to The Congress of the United States that defined the responsibilities and the contractual obligations of the citizens and their government. Titled Taxation no Tyranny it is essential in understanding that forgetting a fundamental foundation of conservatism has allowed the GOP to destroy America.
http://samueljohnson.com/tnt.html
America has no options if it wishes to survive it must become a liberal, very liberal, or democratic socialist Liberal Democracy.
3
So, 2 questions:
(1) Is it good for Democrats?
(2) Is it good for the country?
Apparently, if the answer to the first is "yes," the answer to the second is "who cares?".
What a callous position.
1
Callous.
This from people cheering for a guy who—and this is just for openers—has had over 3000 kids separated from their parents, in many cases without anybody knowing how to find them again.
And we’re callous.
Unbelievable.
1
I have mixed feelings about $2 trillion for infrastructure anyway. Number one, road-building contracts are always crony capitalist field days, with well-connected developers getting the inside track. If it was just about repair and maintenance and safety improvements, I'd be all for it, but it will also be about new road construction that is always environmentally destructive and with no EPA at work, no telling what damage will be done. Secondly, public works construction is a predominantly male occupation and except for the engineers and computer technologists in the design phase, the actual construction requires no college degree. at a time when we have a surplus of young college graduates, with debt loads to pay off, who need good-paying jobs, many of them women. And lastly, if we have $2 trillion available in the budget, the best thing to spend it on is Medicare for All and tuition debt relief which would put thousands of dollars a year in the hands of consumers, unleash entrepreneurs from employee health benefit "job lock," create millions more jobs in the healthcare industry nationwide, including rural America, and, incidentally, keep people alive and well enough to provide for their families.
@abigail49 "... if we have $2 trillion available..."
Current U.S. federal debt: $22 trillion.
I dunno. Maybe if everyone checked under the couch cushions one more time?
1
Mr. Krugman is wrong with his Machiavellian musings. Such a cynic approach often leads to self harm and this is no exception.
Starting infrastructure spending is not easy. It takes a lot of time and effort. So if Trump started now he would have very little finished by the time of the next presidential elections. It might help improve his image in history books but will provide little help in the elections.
On the other hand, when Trump makes the preparations it will mean that the next Democratic president can hit the ground running - with even some Republican support.
I think Mr. Krugman errs when he says Trump did not act out of political strategy; Trump knows that because of his terribly irresponsible tax bill, and his thralldom to Koch-style economics, there's no money to pay for a major infrastructure program short of reversing at least some of the tax cuts. He needs a way to protect the support of his base, which swallowed his promise to address infrastructure, on Democrats. What better way than to hang his failure on Pelosi (and, take advantage of the misogyny that helped propel him to the Presidency)? While I'm at it: God has had more than two years to do something; it's going to take action by us.
3
Paul Krugman wrote, "So if I were Pelosi and Schumer, I would be quietly expressing thanks to Trump for throwing a tantrum, and extricating them from a potential political trap."
I would think that's exactly what they've been doing. Forgive me if someone else has already said that. I can't take the time to read through the 1131 comments that have already been posted on this piece. :)
2
"They see any form of public expenditure, no matter how justified in terms of narrow economics, as problematic because it may seem to legitimize a larger role for government in general."
Yet they have no problem with a larger role for government when it comes to controlling women's bodies via forced-birth policies.
15
Explain something to me.....If McConnell hates Federal interference with the economic welfare and planning of the country,
why doesn't he run for a State or City office and "serve" the country from that perch, a locale which he seems to believe is the only rightful place from which to govern..............or is there a personal economic reason which keeps him tenaciously, doggedly
where he is.......in the swamp?
I wouldn't mind seeing his tax returns while we're at it.....
10
Either we need an infrastructure bill, or we do not. It should not be about a Trump trap or 2020.
2
@Pen, while I share your sentiment re Nancy Pelosi, the fact is that as long as Trump is not impeached or jailed, he is winning. It has been 2 months till the Mueller report and not one person has testified. No republican save one has come out for impeachment. Each time he corrupts a department such as the FBI or the judiciary, he increases his odds about winning. Now he is talking about executing ex-FBI agents, and is assaulting the press with these charges against Julian Assange. He is proving that deviousness and lawlessnes is winning over the lawfulness of Nancy Pelosi, no matter how grand her strategy.
4
Very good chance that Nancy Pelosi set up the meeting to discuss the "i word" and issuing the "cover up" statement just before the infrastructure meeting with Trump knowing it would be just the thing to set him off. She owns him.
4
"... it was just his immaturity and insecurity, but even more obvious than usual."
Maturity and self-esteem aside, you can't discuss infrastructure plans when your advisers and the leaders of your party have told you, as they must have, that a) they have no infrastructure plan to offer, so the only plan on the table would be a Democratic one; and b) there won't be a Republican infrastructure plan unless the president agrees to rescind a good chunk of his tax cut for himself and his chums, because spending that much more money will require a significant hike in interest rates to get the rest of the world to pay for all that extra debt in the next decade. An impending rate increase might result in a slowdown in the economy just before the election, and even higher deficits. The president's ability to be miffed if the whole world doesn't make his life a bed of roses is an easy excuse to use and, among the "totally deluded people," appears macho, appearances meaning everything to them and substance meaning nothing. I am a bit surprised that Dr. Krugman prefers that the Dems do nothing. Apparently, just like the immigration "crisis" is a crisis only in the minds of the president and his core supporters, the infrastructure crisis is not really a crisis, since action to remedy it is less important than political considerations. Ditto opioid "crisis," healthcare "crisis," cost of education "crisis". Giving the American people a win seems not to be the highest priority.
1
We experience the same treatment as does Venezuela and all those S. American countries historically where they can't be allowed to demonstrate that government can gain a foothold and run the country. Republican foreign policy has been running roughshod over South America for decades ...as if it hasn't been written about enough. Not attending to infrastructure epitomizes how inattentive republicans are to the interests of the 98% unless as a by product and Flint was the threshold we experienced and witnessed that. Let them drink lead while a Czar of Michigan was assigned to make it so. It makes your head spin that it was even possible to evict elected office holders from their posts; Marshall Law come to mind. Republicans are always rampaging their way to avoiding little people interests and they're Pro Pollution ...sounds absurd but check the record.
3
And to think - that success is only measured by political gain? I thought we had a country to govern. Mr. Krugman your economic argument counters your political cheering.
2
I think Trump knew that the GOP does not want infrastructure addressed, at least not now, since tax increases would be necessary. His tantrum was staged.
8
“One answer is that Republicans in Congress have no interest in infrastructure spending. They see any form of public expenditure, no matter how justified in terms of narrow economics, as problematic because it may seem to legitimize a larger role for government in general.”
Infrastructure spending is important yet the GOP eschews it. On one hand, I do not Trump getting credit for anything positive. So, the DP back off it and start selling themselves for 2020. It is important to capture the vote with programming that appeals to everyone’s wallet. That is the bottom line.
2
- Building infrastructure is expensive, slow, and unsexy, so naturally nobody is in a hurry to actually fund it. The current president and congress will be the ones to fight over it and raise your taxes (or run up the debt) to pay for it. The next president or the one after that will attend the ribbon-cutting ceremony. In between, nobody is aware of a project except construction workers getting paid and drivers stuck in traffic while a bridge gets replaced, except when something goes seriously wrong (the Boston Big Dig or the Seattle highway tunnel). A week after the ribbon cutting, it will be distant history with no glory, forgotten until the next bridge collapse or water shortage.
I'm a civil engineer. I sometimes work on big water projects that can take 20 years from concept to delivering the first gallon. That's just the nature of the beast.
5
Unless the Trump tax cut is repealed, the idea of going ahead with an infrastructure program seems unwise.
We have no idea why the stable and calm genius blew up the idea, but we should take him at his word. He is afraid what will be turned up in the investigations.
8
Isn't Mr. Krugman's perspective eerily like that of Mitch McConnell during the Obama presidency? "Let's deny this president a policy win that'll make him look good/normal, even if the result would be good for the country."
How will we ever address big, genuine needs if our first concern is how it'll make the opposition look? This is the path toward 2nd world status.
I understand that Trump is not in any way comparable to Obama or even to what anyone used to consider a normal (and acceptable) president. I will not vote for his re-election. But for how long will such considerations get in the way of doing necessary things?
4
@dgruber: The difference between McConnell and Krugman, is the latter merely stated an observation.
6
@Raul Campos: Oh, yes; Trump is extremely transparent, alright. It's painfully evident that everybody except his base can see right through him.
Did you know that putting words between quotation marks is supposed to mean that someone actually said them?
If I understand Mr. Krugman’s point , Democrats are so against Trump that they would be in a trap if they agreed to work with him on an infrastructure renewal plan. I think that this kind of analysis perpetuates the polarization we are experiencing in this country ever since Trump was sworn in.
I agree with Mr. Krugman most of the time, but this time I do not like his analytical conclusions.
Hopefully we will only have another year of Trump’s garbage to endure and after that we will have to re build our democracy based on the principles which have been eroded by this administration. Namely checks and balances, respect for the separation and cooperation of the executive and legislative branches of our system of government, respect for the Justice and Intelligence Departments, etc etc.
But this kind of liberal rhetoric, while understandable in expressing great frustration, is not helping to ultimately heal and reunite this country into a working government of the people for ALL the people.
4
At first, I wanted to scold Professor Krugman for giving away the game to Trump. All he needs to do is read this piece to figure it out. But on second thought I'm not too worried about that happening. However, the real problem is that if Democrats succeed in denying Trump a win, they are denying the nation as a whole a win. I have two problems with that. First, it is a Democratic replay of the Republican strategy during Obama's term, which is unseemly and lowest common denominator. Not a good look for the party. And second, who's to say the Republicans will refrain from returning the favor when the tables turn? They've repeatedly shown it's one of their favorite plays in the book. Get infrastructure done anytime you can! Better sooner than later.
2
We keep receiving constant reminders of how unbelievably critical regaining control of the senate is. Dems cannot do anything without it. Analogous to the electoral college issue, these red states getting two senators regardless of population is making real action impossible on everything from learning what's in the Mueller Report, getting an infrastructure deal done, dealing with climate change, viewing tax returns, selecting a supreme court judge, all the way up to impeachment. In my opinion, bringing reason back to the senate is even more important than getting Trump out. Please everyone read a real newspaper (this one or the WSJ if you are conservative), and then vote in 2020. 33 seats up for grabs.
10
@Anderson
McConnell is on equal footing with Trump for bizarre autocratic behavior.
1
@Anderson I think Democrats can walk and chew gum at the same time. We can work to turn the senate blue by continuing to expose trump's inadequacy.
"...complex public-private partnerships that would in effect subsidize the privatization of public assets" e.g. just like the ACA, which subsidizes obscene private health insurance profits just so the Republicans would vote for it. Please, Democratic congress members, pass an infrastructure spending bill that is in the American people's interest, and while you're at it, an amendment to the ACA adding a public option ("Medicare for all.") Let's end corporate bilking of the public purse and use government spending for the benefit of the lower 98%.
8
That is not why the ACA offers those subsidies, and lefties need to start learning what they’re talking about rather than just doing what every Trumpist does—shout talking points.
I couldn’t understand why the Democrats were so eager to make a deal with Trump for the reason made by Mr Krugman. Only a scorched earth tactic used by the GOP during the Obama presidency can work to flip the White House, sad as that is. Yet there will always be Democratic weaklings, such as the three who voted to confirm Barr, and the self-interested Bernies, who prevent a cohesive strategy and who will hand Trump a second term.
11
• to see Trump displaying his unfitness for office, which has long been CLEAR TO CLOSE OBSERVERS*....
... 'close' to anyone who cares enough to see, hear and smell the rot.
“When we hear news reports, we don’t decide what happened and then decide what to do about it. Rather, we know what we want to do, and we interpret what happened in the way that will best help us do what we want to do.”
~ JONATHAN HAIDT
Social psychologist and professor at New York University’s Stern School of Business
3
What's to say Trump won't change his mind on Infrastructure and strike a deal?
2
So the politics are more important than national progress? . . . How are you different than the nitwitted, obstructionist conservatives who hamstrung Obama's infrastructure ambitions for 8 years, Dr. Krugman. This is shameful.
6
Beyond the minor technical detail that the Dems showed up with a 35-page infrastructure and Trump showed up in a snit, this isn’t what Krugman said.
20
The "very stable genius" in the White House scares the life out of me. Who knows what stratagems lurk in that small mind? What is the next idiocy he will pull out to distract us from the fact that our country is falling apart? I hope Nancy Pelosi is praying very hard and very often.
4
Will trump do anything that will truly help the people? Never worry. He'll make a grand show of building infrastructure that will be significantly full of pot-holes, scams, a way for the select few to profit.
6
I honestly don’t know what it’ll take to get it across to a whole lot of liberals, lefties and progressives that Pelosi and Schumer have not been doing nothing about Trump, that the House has passed a whole passel of useful bills, and that the Democratic leadership showed up for this fiasco of a meeting with a 35-page proposal on infrastructure.
Oh, and that the sole reason this meeting blew up is that Trump pitched a fit, partly because he thought it’d look good on FOX, and partly because he really is a baby.
Anyway, folks, stop buying Trump’s account of where the problem is. And this time round, get off yer duff and vote. Intelligently, one hopes.
14
"And when recession does strike, it will be too late to get a major infrastructure program going. Better to have it already underway."
Ding. Ding. Ding.
5
Did any one in their right mind think there would be an infrastructure plan. And a bipartisan one no less? With Trump being a main negotiator?
A show of hands and keep them up so I can slap you all upside your heads!
It should have been clear the "agreement" made a few weeks ago was a farce. Im guessing Pelosi knew that. Schumer Im not so sure,as he still looks like a deer in the headlights. But Pelosi knew it, and I expect she expected these meetings to crash and burn. Knew of Trumps state of mind before ever walking into that room. There are no secrets in this WH. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that whatever papers Pelosi did bring to this meeting they were a few pages from her grand kids coloring books.
Pelosi is right in her approach. Trump is Trumps own worse enemy. His shtick is worn thin. It might work on his core base, and the always Republican, Republicans - but for anyone who tossed the dice and voted for him, its worn out. IMO, most of them wont be voting in 2020. And of the fewwho do, it wont be for him.
Trump is proving, all by his lonesome, week after week that he is NOT a deal maker. That making deals is the farthest thing from his mind. Mostly because he doesn't know how and/or care to, but also he might know, is told - that McConnell is gonna kill anything anyway. So why bother? Why not do the easiest thing and keep playing the reality TV celeb. All while his minions go about trouncing on every bit of progress made over the decades everywhere else.
8
@Boregard
Trump ties so many strings to progress he makes it impossible. Next he'll want an addition built onto Mara Lago funded by taxpayers.
Funnier Krugman than usual. So, thanks.
Pelosi's takedowns of Trump are awesome, and sooooo witty. As far as Kellyanne Conway, who apparently thinks that she runs the White House, the Pelosi takedown of refusing to talk to her and other WH staff about policy was, well, just perfect.
Oh to have an image of Kellyanne's face at that moment.
11
Much of the stuff going on is immature by democrats and republicans alike. The "S' Wonderful"chicken sandwich by Wendy's International...?
Let's move forward, instead of living in the past. Everyone has their musical preference. The other stuff is childish. This is about marketing in a weekend market. We want good trade policy. We don't need another Great Recession.
1
Anything Trump agrees to will be a potential political trap. His one and only aim is to win again and destroy his enemies.
6
@RichardHead
Exactly right. They always look for the op to make dems get on their knees to unrelated interests they want to hatch. Never more than dishonest ….republicans. I'd never buy a car from one.
Trump was not prepared to engage when meeting with Pelosi and Schumer that day. He was supposed to come to the meeting offering how tp get the money for the infrastructure project, which would have been a win-win-win for Dems, GP and the people. He simply had nothing prepared. He is incompetent and lazy.
12
@James Lochrie
Republicans don't do populism unless it happens as a by product of taking care of wealthy interests. Let them drink lead.
6
The Republicans want to loot the country for their corporate and Putin sponsors, blaming our problems on an ever-expanding group of villains (the elderly, the poor, non-whites, "illegal" immigrants, Muslims, LGBTQ people) in a pickpocket's diversion to delude Americans into believing that they don't have to be educated, do their homework about the various candidates, and their backgrounds, and go out to vote, no matter what obstacles the Gerrymandering Old Party puts in their way.
Trump is just the latest symptom of this. He, and his grifting family, will pass, to be replaced by heaven-knows-who as the GOP candidates
11
@Carl Ian Schwartz
As much of a capitalist as Mitt would have been he wouldn't have been worse.
Thanks for the laugh! I was in a sad and bad place over what has happened and is happening to our country. Truth does rise to the surface! If it can happen after years with Nixon, it will happen to trump. Since trump's faux stability, faux intelligence and faux class cannot measure "up" to Nixon, it should happen sooner. trump's will continue to do it to himself. trump is Bankrupt Bully-Boy in every way imaginable!
3
GOP doesn't want show the country that Gov can do big things. They just want to know what women are doing in the bedroom and or bathroom. They want to hide behind the unborn to get their religious laws implemented. For 40 yrs the GOP mantra is to shrink GOV so that they can drown it in a bathtub. So here we are a drowning country. The GOP wants tax cuts for the top while the bottom pays and pays. Farmers will be used as patriots as they go bankrupt. Just like the price of owning guns in America is your kids lives. FOX host Bill O'Reilly quote.
9
"totally deluded people – i.e., around a third of the country" -- How do we fix this? I'd like to see every op-ed columnist write a column proposing concrete measures for how to create a media landscape that doesn't produce deluded people.
2
To those wondering what are the 100 pieces of legislation that the Democrats in the House passed and that McConnell has bottled up in the Senate, Google is your friend:
https://www.vox.com/2019/5/24/18637163/trump-pelosi-democrats-bills-congress
In the meantime, McConnell's strategy was well-honed on Obama:
“There are enough of us to block the Democratic agenda as long as we walk in lockstep. As long as Republicans refuse to follow [Obama’s] lead, Americans will see partisan food fights and conclude Obama failed to produce change.”
- Mitch McConnell
8
To me it just looked like another desperate, pathetic attempt by the baby billionaire (thousandaire?) to "pressure" the Democrats into leaving his skeletons in the closet where he thinks they belong. Hey Trump supporters, did you forget that Don promised to show us his tax returns? Let's take him at his word (haha) and get them out for all the public to see.
6
Turn up the heat until he pops!
7
Tantrum - it was not spontaneous. Podium with signs set up outside, reporters summoned and gathered. Just another diversion. Keep it up Cadet Bone Spurs. People for the most part are not stupid. Personally, I see a supreme narcissist - and one clearly afflicted with the Dunning Kruger Effect. Vile to the core - nuttier than a fruitcake. The noose is around his neck and he continues to let out more rope. Definitely prime material for the 25th Amendment.
6
Trump's Tantrum? "Like a Bull in a China Shop". Dealmaker huh?
1
The Trump Tantrum? It's all about "Shock and Awe" intimidation from the man. Dealmaker? Stealmaker!
The Trump Wall st White House is a racket.
5
I live in a rural area in North Carolina where the water and sewer providers are deep in debt and have deteriorating physical plants. My own water and sewer authority is public and created in 1942 for a WWII army base. Its infrastructure has been ignored for decades and it it on its "last legs." It is already in debt for 50 million and would need t o borrow more to keep up with deterioration. No way they can survive. The state says this is typical throughout rural areas in the state and that it would take 26 billion dollars to fix up all the failing water and sewer plant systems. But the state only has 30 million to allocate.
So NC is in near disaster in this regard.
I suspect there will be no 1 or 2 trillion dollar infrastructure bill from DC so I can't imagine how these sewer and water system will survive. America in decay. America heading for failure.
10
@Frank Then vote for representatives from NC that will do something besides obstruct.
To dissent in part: Trump walked out because he couldn't do his homework. Republican legislators won't pay for an actual infrastructure program so Trump couldn't provide the Dems with a plan to finance any substantial infrastructure program that did not involve selling the American commons to private companies.
4
Love the column, hate the headline. Please stop making verbs out of nouns.
1
There is no such thing as a word that can only be a noun. The part of speech is determined by usage, not by that list we got in fourth grade.
One may boat, whine, truckle, surf, and all the rest. And one may most assuredly tantrum. Some uses work better than others, but pretty much every word in English can be used as any part of speech. And if you think I’m kidding, contemplate the English band, “The The.” Second one’s a noun, okay?
You can say, “But me no buts,” or, “Don’t ‘and,’ me, kid.”
Sorry. It’s how the language works.
Meanwhile.... "Rome Burns" from insufficient infrastructure investment.
Guess things are only going to get worse, before they get better (i.e., vote only for DEMOCRATs in 2020)!
2
I am afraid of what's to come, what follows Trump.The racists, the fascists, the war criminals, the very worst of us have been given, if not free reign, a normalcy and legitimacy that defies any morality and quest for human decency. It seems to have always been there, like a malignancy lying just beneath the surface. A recapitulation of the German experience but motivated , not by terrible economic times like the Germans experienced in the 20's and 30's, but by an unchecked evil that resides in many even in the best of times.
11
America will come to see that the 2020 election is about whether we keep our republic or fall into a Putin style monarchy. The politics of hate are not enough to take us fully down that dark hole. I sincerely hope.
114
@rich
I would remind you that, during every presidential election cycle, there are a chorus of voices predicting the end of our democracy. During the 2016 campaign, Hillary Clinton (who I voted for, anyway) said; "I'm the last thing standing between you and the Apocalypse." We all knew what she was saying, but it was too hyperbolic to be persuasive.
10
@Allen
Perhaps that was because prediction does not have the weight of evidence.
Donald Trump has provided the weight.
15
@Allen
.....unfortunately, it's turning out to be true!!
5
All Trump's problems are entirely self-created. If he had voluntarily produced his tax returns in 2015, when the other presidential candidates did, almost none of the investigations into his financial shenanigans would have been undertaken. That one simple act of cooperation and transparency could have changed the entire direction of his presidency. It would have changed his life, too, in that his financial transgressions could have been exposed. So, he made his choice and continues to make choices that run counter to his best interest. It's doubtful he ever understood that being president would expose him in ways that being head of the Trump Organization never did. Unfortunately for him, and his family, the scrutiny he now lives under only gets more extreme the more he resists. I believe he will lose in the end. His self-sabotage makes it inevitable.
9
That’s the problem Paul. Being thankful that Trump blew a good opportunity for something the country needs because it might have helped him. Our politicians don’t work together because if it’s not their idea or it helps those currently in power, be it the Congress or the Presidency , it cannot be good. I am no fan of Trump but this inability to get anything worthwhile accomplished is killing this nation.
Term limits. We should have a national referendum on term limits don’t allow those in Congress and the Senate to decide their fate. We the people, decide their fate.
4
Dr. Krugman has predicted the end of Democracy in America with Trump when or if he ever leaves the office of president.
1
I understand the sentiment to deny Trump any victories for the sake of preventing his re-election. But we still have a country to live in, and that country must still be run. "Crumbling infrastructure" is not just a slogan, it's not just a bargaining chip. It is a vital threat to the continued well-being of our country. "Crumbling" is a literal description, and crumbling bridges and roads do not merely look bad to voters, they kill people. It can't wait until MAYBE we have a new President in January 2021.
I want Pelosi and Schumer to be frustrated that they can't address this. If they can't induce this toddler president to do the right thing, then this should be impetus to throw him out and see if Pence will do the right thing. And if Trump or Pence DO the right thing? Great!
Look, we can't just keep campaigning on how successful we are at stonewalling the other party. If nobody can govern without a clean sweep of Congress and the White House, we will have not government at all except in two-year fits and spurts. That's a recipe for decline and fall. If the Democrats cannot manage to turn "we worked with a difficult President to help this country" into election gains, then they are terrible communicators and terrible politicians and will deserve to lose their offices.
2
If, as pointed out, "around a third of the country" are "totally deluded people" and they must be considered above the age of reason to achieve that status, there is little or no hope for the survival of our children.
I joke, but this isn't funny.
6
@Ian MacFarlane It becomes even more not-funny when you remember that those one-third have presidential voting power above that number, thanks to the Electoral College, and well above that number in Senate representation.
Why doesn’t the Dem house pass their own infrastructure bill, their own healthcare stabilization bill, their own prescription drug act? Can’t they pass these important bills and force Mitch McConnell to table them in front of the American people?
7
@Stephen Galloway
There are already about a hundred bills backed up in the legislative digestive tract of the Senate. You think piling on more will make things start to move? Not with McConnell keeping things blocked.
3
Thanks, Dr. K, for assuaging my jangled nerves. After the past couple of days with two fat men (Trump & Barr) conniving to further destroy the republic, I needed some talking down. However, I am not sanquine about the future.
6
If it was apolitical trap then why not question the competency of Pelosi and Schumer to willingly walk right into it? Pelosi stated in an interview with MSNBC that they needed to find common ground with Trump! How naive. Trump doesn't stand on any ground but quicksand.
@Wilco I think they should try, if for no other reason than to continue to expose trump's inability to ever do the right thing for the country.
2
"As everyone knows, Trump stormed out of a meeting on infrastructure, apparently out of uncontrollable rage over Pelosi’s remarks ". NOT true. we don't know that Aside from the words of Pelosi and Schumer there have been no witnesses to confirm that Trump ''stormed' or was 'uncontrollable'. these adjectives are not facts.
1
I take it you did not watch his bizarre press conference, or whatever the heck that was.
8
There won't be money for infrastructure as long as $1.2 trillion a year goes to the merchants of death. The Democratic Party has become the pro-war party. And if most Democrats hesitate about pulling the trigger, they hand the gun they loaded to Trump. Trump brags about selling US-made weapons to US allies in NATO and the Middle East. So does liberal CT Senator Chris Murphy. Trump, Murphy and friends are the merchandisers of death. Repairing infrastructure or profiting the death merchants - that's the choice.
4
I don't think so, Paul.... tantrums are to be found everywhere these days including the Isles of Congress. Although I do belive Ms. Pelosi is out of gas.
1
The problem is that about a third of our country is relatively uneducated and childish.
I say "relatively uneducated" in that some have been to college but they really don't want that education (just the degree), don't use it, and don't continue to learn.
They really believe the "billionaire" thing, and for them money is the ultimate achievement. The fact that Trump has left others holding the bag and ruined businesses (his and others') doesn't matter to them because he still lives like they'd want to live.
In interpersonal relationships, they'd like to be able to act like he does: declare he won't do anything more if they don't stop doing whatever he doesn't like and walk out.
And in international relations, they believe that everyone should bend the knee to the US and never talk back. If another country doesn't slavishly do what we want, then we should send in the military and teach them a lesson.
It's destructive and primitive, but that's as far as their mental images go. I'm sure his fans think Trump was "strong" in making demands and walking out.
Authoritarianism is not based on sophisticated strategies or detailed knowledge. There's a reason authoritarian religions attract spouse abusers and authoritarian regimes end in disaster.
11
Why don’t the Dems just introduce an infrastructure plan in the House with a reasonable plan for funding and let the Republicans respond? Don’t let Trump drive the agenda off a cliff.
7
I'm fairly sure that Pelosi set him up -- and it gives me some hope. Not for infrastructure, of course, but that tRump is overplaying his hand and is constitutionally unable to stop himself (no pun intended).
6
Trump is one of the worst of the worst, but to imply that the Dems should not support this infrastructure bill that would provide good middle class jobs and be a real serious investment in our country is absolutely wrong.
4
Well, all he did was call a spade a spade and after her statements about him, he had every right to do so. The Dems feel they can say anything they want about Trump and then he should play nice. Maybe not.
The man has a spine which is more than can be said of the Dems.
3
I believe it is Trump's fear of discovery that is driving the entire Infrastructure saga (today's example). He is trying to release the shackles of oversight and will do anything (even self-destructive) to keep his Financial Records out of the hands of Congress. Trump is in self-protection mode. He is loyal to nobody but himself and his personal advancement. He is a Machiavellian and will do anything to protect himself. His Financial Information (past and present) is most likely going to open up a Pandora's Box of money laundering, shell companies, tax dodges, schemes, and crimes. He is willing to shelf Infrastructure (even at political cost) to protect himself.
4
Trump, as bloviating as he is, is still just a puppet for the far right and the donor class. McConnell has the keys to that car. They got their tax cut and less regulation. Fait accompli. Stall until 2020 and don't rock Trump's boat which is sailing along in the south and the heartland states. Keep fighting China, Mexicans and Muslims to preserve the working class votes in Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, and PA. Who needs roads and bridges?
160
@Al Singer
Don't billionaires needs bridges and roads? Or do they get around with helicopters and planes? Still, their servants have to drive to get to the helicopter or plane or mansion . . .
Don't billionaires need clean water and air? Don't billionaires need educated servants? Don't billionaires need a certain level of common prosperity in their country / world for their own security and pleasure? Say billionaires have no spiritual reasons to see to the well-being of their fellow humans, does it not benefit them if the populace has a certain level of health?
How much money do these parasites "need"? Isn't a million enough? Isn't a billion enough? Or is it not about money? Power maybe?
27
@Al Singer Sad but true-Owning the libs and defeating the immigrants is the most important things to the Trump guys and he knows it.
18
@Al Singer
In 2018 Trump said to his rallies, "vote as if I am on the ballot". The nation did, and Trump lost more than the House. He lost the ability to get away with past, present and future crimes.
14
The more parsimonious explanation is that Trump had no plan in the first place. If Democrats had called his bluff and said, "Okay, we'll stop investigating you. Now what is your plan and how will it be funded," the result would have been the same - sputtering and withdrawal.
How many failed "Infrastructure Weeks" does this make now? Infrastructure Week is just the placeholder until he can come up with another distraction.
6
Paul, you say: "And Democrats would have had a hard time avoiding making him this gift." THAT is precisely what is wrong with our political system, and comments like that only foster more of the same.
Remember McConnell denying Obama any "wins" even though he was, in some cases, promoting ideas previously put forward by Republicans? I suggest that you be more careful what you say, because of your influential role with such a wide audience.
3
Do you also think Trump purposely blew up the meeting because he had no good answers on how to fund the double sized infrastructure package with a price tag of $2 trillion? With the government already running at a $1 trillion annual deficit during an economic growth period how could he explain tacking on another $2 trillion since we all know he wouldn't increase taxes. Also private investment wouldn't kick in anything close to the $2 trillion pricetag he promoted.
3
I think Mr. Krugman is premature in making a final judgment on the fate of the infrastructure proposals. In our current politics, today's setback is tomorrow's inevitability.
Both Trump and the Dems want a "win" on infrastructure -- after all, who doesn't like spending money, particularly on bridges, etc.? But neither side wants the other to get the benefit of a win.
So i think it likely that we will see repeats of this dance on several occasions in the next year. Until finally the House passes an infrastructure bill, overloaded with expensive goodies, and, when the Senate says no, the Dems will try to blame Trump for everyone's failure on the subject.
As heretical as it is to say, Mr. Krugman, sometimes it's not just Trump's fault, it's the fault of both sides.
1
Sadly ironic that Republicans revel in a trillion dollar tax giveaway, but cannot bring themselves to support infrastructure spending.
7
Not working on infrastructure and getting publicity (it’s all good, even the bad) makes for a good day for the President. And I loved the ensuing “unplanned” press conference. Better yet was the farmers’ press conference where loyal staff with no warning gave impromptu support to Trump’s assertions he was calm during his snit against Democrats. The stable genius reigns.
5
Seems like Pelosi might be the best DEM candidate for president. Trump has not got a clue how to deal with her maturity and gravitas.
6
This article, and its train of thought, is exactly what is wrong with the Democrats. It seems the Democrats are anti-Trump, and not pro-anything. They are anti-Trump, with no care if this is bad for the country, with no concern for the infrastructures this country badly needs. They are happy to bring Trump down, even if this collapses the country. Yes, next time I will vote for Trump, and don't be surprised when he is reelected.
2
(Second comment after more thought). It seems that Mr. Trump wouldn't be inclined toward discussing the nation's infrastructure with Democratic leadership of the House and Senate because:
a) it's not a subject that allows him to be a bully, or to swagger, or to ostensibly look powerful--in other words, infrastructure doesn't serve him in any way, so just forget it;
b) politically speaking, a meeting in any setting with Democrats doesn't allow an attitude that he cherishes in how it makes him look to his "base": being negatively obstinate and pushy in his position which supposedly makes him appear to be in charge of any situation. Speaker Pelosi and Senator Schumer are so far ahead of Mr. Trump in any regard that he has to avoid those settings to protect himself from looking ineffectual and buffoonish.
3
Donald was supposed to show up with a plan for funding two trillion dollars of infrastructure jobs. The Republicans don't have a plan.
So Donald did what Mike Pence did when he dropped into a football game only to make a big show of leaving when the players knelt during the national anthem.
It was all show. Made for TV. Campaigning on a workday.
16
...and meanwhile our infrastructure continues to crumble while leadership continues to peddle political theater. Step up and lead. Where ever we are.
4
Excellent explanation, Mr. Krugman. If Trump continues on this path, as I'm almost sure he will, it will pave the way for enormous success for the American People in the future (low-hanging fruit), providing that the Democrats can increase their collective negotiating position, after (hopefully) retaking the Oval Office.
5
The primary reason infrastructure is going nowhere under Trump is, it's not about Trump. The Wall is about Trump. Period. North Korea is about Trump. Putin is about Trump. Saudi Arabia and MBS are about Trump.
Back in the 30's Hoovervilles sprung up like toadstools across the South and the West, populated by people from the same class as those who now support Trump. With the next depression (not, please note, recession) Trumpvilles will not be paved with gold. They won't be paved at all
Trump's grasp of economics, of trade, of war, and, primarily of history is as flimsy and diaphanous as his coiffure.
21
@Glen That would be the south and the mid-west. Out here in the west, we don't support trump's destruction of the country.
4
As much as I like Prof Krugman, I have to object here. He says that a clean infrastructure bill would be fundamentally good. And then he says it's a good thing that it's not happening because of some guess about how it would play politically.
This is indefensible. If progressives aren't going to call for progress because they're too busy out-thinking themselves, then conservatives are going to keep winning elections.
8
@Jeromy Yes, IF it was a clean infrastructure bill. The bill Republicans want to pass is loaded to sell OUR infrastructure to private companies. That's not a clean bill.
23
Mr Krugman, myself, and many (but not all) others feel that delaying the bill for a year or two would be for the greater good.
Trump needs to go because he's doing long term damage to the economy and the country.
If you believe that Pelosi's position is that an infrastructure bill delivered two years later and crafted from a position of strength is better than delivering a bill now, if it means a better chance at removing Trump. It was a political calculation I'm glad she made.
12
Donald Trump IS NOT the most transparent President that has served this country. He refused to release his tax returns or provide adequate information about his financial assets. He was actively working behind the scenes strategizing HOW to fire Mueller. Leader's who repeatedly lie and/or are dishonest are the antithesis of transparency. Donald Trump is a habitual LIAR. No one appointed to a key government position is more devious than Donald Trump. His compulsion to Tweet up a storm has nothing to do with transparency, it is fueled by his manipulative, conniving and narcissistic perspective. Infrastructure... Donald Trump doesn't care about infrastructure unless it puts money in his bank accounts and those of his buddies. Only Putin and his ilk have rational grounds to thank Trump, he's proved to be an effective puppet.
17
Trump is a terrible businessman with the exception of his self promotional skills that approximately one third of Americans naively buy into.
Like all extreme narcissists, Trumps destiny is self-destruction.
15
@Al : That certainly seems inevitable. The truly frightening thought is how much of our nation's value will he take down with him?
4
I think that this is close, but it's more like Trump blew up his own charade. He never wanted an infrastructure plan, and has only been faking it, never even sending a plan to his Republican congress, never pushing his Republican senators to agree to one. Now he's torn off his own mask.
It's the same as when he told Chuck and Nancy in front of cameras that he'd gladly shut down the government.
Trump is a mighty liar but he can't fake being a real president.
11
There are so many things which are very bad about Donald Trump and the people around him, we should be grateful for one thing which will get us through this national nightmare.
The one thing which saves us is that Donald Trump, as he keeps shooting off his mouth, also keeps shooting himself in the foot.
9
Cool! Krugman's take is that badly needed infrastricture was just torpedoed, and that's a good thing because actually good things help Trump, so we ought to root for bad things!
1
@Keith
There never was a plan. Republicans broke the piggy bank for the billionaire tax cut. Nothing was torpedoed except Trumps dog and pony show to pretend that he cares about anything or anyone but himself. But I'm sure we'll all tune in for Infrastructure Week, Episode 8.
15
"totally deluded people – i.e., around a third of the country"
I could not agree more with this statement. What I don't understand but would like to, is the underlying cause of their idiocy!
10
@bag piper: I enjoyed your comment! May I suggest that the reason for the "totally deluded people..." is based in part on the statistical fact that the majority of Mr. Trump's base aren't college educated. I'm not trying to sound elitist here. I taught college-level history courses for 14 years after receiving my master's degree at age 50. In earning my degree I found that just being exposed to a wide range of ideas for those eight years, learning how to read and write at a better level, and most importantly, using my critical thinking capacity, literally changed me. I became more open-minded because I learned that the world around us isn't just black and white; that any difficult issue is complex and not easily remedied; that human behaviors are deeply varied and intricate. Perhaps I would've leaned in a conservative direction politically, but I believe, having been educated, I would have been inclined to support a Republican president who was more balanced and intellectually mature than Mr. Trump has proven himself to be. Just some thoughts.
4
@bag piper : Poorly conceived and poorly implemented education of our children, which does not emphasize critical thinking skills. Going back decades at least.
4
The one thing that we do not have to consider is that Trump will somehow stumble into doing something not harmful to We the People. The man is an incompetent and surrounds with people of lesser talents.
10
trump has spent his life sabotaging his own 'winning.'
Of course, he had already thoroughly undermined the ability of his government to pay for any significant infrastructure plan, while doubling the proposed amount of $1 trillion to an impossible $2 trillion. The only way out is backwards.
Another fit of self-sabotage by a man who would rather walk around pantless with his chin held high, than be reduced to putting his pants on one leg at a time. Nobody does it better.
8
The most wily and scheming criminals get away with crime. Trump is one such and has fooled a whole group of American dupes that think he's for them.
7
"They had the key to the food locker. Ehrlichman. Halderman. All of my crew."
4
Donald Trump‘s intelligence is the equivalent of a high school bully, not a grandmaster in chess ....
Chess players think three and four moves ahead, Donald Trump is like a rhinoceros, he only takes notice of what is directly in front of his line of vision .
This is of course with apologies to the rhinoceros population ....
9
Professor Krugman,
Your column makes a lot of sense and your points well-taken.
However, after reading your column last night, I had a bad dream. The next time a bridge collapses on I-95 or a dam fails and someone gets crushed to death or drowns, I will think of you.
1
@Bruce Livingston
Krugman wants a bill. Just not a Republican one that's simply a handoff to private industry.
7
You also have to think of him in 2 years when Joe Biden, or some other Dem, doesn't have us in a shooting war with Iran.
3
@Bruce Livingston which means you are not thinking
This is the problem with politics today - a good bill that is needed and can help the economy being derailed is a “good thing” for Krugman because it may help the opposing party- that is pathetic ...
3
It's pathetic to give give Trump 4 more years because you can't wait a year for your infrastructure bill. It's a good trade.
3
@Jim
The Dems will give us the gift of four more years of Trump.
Guaranteed...
1
Mr. Krugman's cynical interpretation of political paralysis as a win for the political party of his choice feels distastefully unpatriotic, if not traitorous.....
3
Settle down a delayed bill is worth 4 less years under a dangerous president.
3
The solid legislative work being done by the House is being stonewalled by Mitch McConnell and GOP Senate. Dems can and should run on those accomplishments in 2020 and highlight how the GOP has blocked the people’s will at every turn. They cannot do that if nobody knows about it. The MSM is actually betraying America by it’s fascination with “all Trump all the time” just as consequentially as FOX is betraying us by its constant spewing of faux news and pro Trump propaganda. Dems desperately need a Madison Ave publicist.
10
once again Trump snatches defeat from jaws of victory
he also went on strike and self impeached himself.
6
Although Trump continually insults and tarnishes the office of president on a daily basis and to my way of thinking is involved in a coverup concerning his finances ( and perhaps the Russians ), there is only one thing to do. We must wait him out until the election. Impeachment, I feel, would backfire, promoting him rather than condemning him.
The Democratic nominee should not use slurs like “the Dumb Donald” or “Fly Off the Handle Trump”. Instead employ a slogan for him the way he did for Hillary Clinton. Instead of “Lock Her Up”, let’s use the phrase, “Vote Him Out!”
“Vote Him Out! Vote Him Out! If this chant is said enough times perhaps it will drive even more people to use their constitutional right to go to the polls and vote him out.
11
If you want to see something get under the king's skin, insult him about his mental health. Soliciting an "intervention" from Trumps cabinet and family was a bridge too far for the stable genius. Well played, Nancy!
13
Don't worry, Mr. Krugman. It doesn't take much effort to get the fraud in the WH to throw a tantrum.
4
What are you telling me that his magnificence will NOT be doling out contracts to his cronies and minons. Say it ain't so....
4
"only totally deluded people – i.e., around a third of the country"
About sums up the state of things.
4
Another masterstroke by Madam Pelosi is her uttering the words “family intervention.”
She knows that Donald badly needed help as he continues to display his lunacy on a daily basis but:
1—No one is Donald’s orbit cares enough to have his head examined. Not the First Lady/Third Wife Melania, not the First Daughter/First Love Ivanka.
2—Even if someone cares, say Tiffany, Trump would not welcome the help for that would mean that he is doing the bidding of Madame Pelosi.
So he would continue to lose his mind and display this lunacy for everyone to see rather than do the right thing of getting his head examined.
Brilliant. And very beautiful to behold.
7
The release of the Mueller report, vindicating the President's assertion, saw his defenders backing away and left him more exposed and weakened. Now, leftists like Krugman advocate politicizing the IRS (again) and hype delays on critical infrastructure as another "gotcha." No doubt there is blame on both sides, but seeing a Nobel prize winning economist and national leaders engaged in childish behavior is a lesson apart and maybe just enough, to well, 20Trump20!
3
The doctored video of Nancy Pelosi now being circulating indicates a high level of desperation among Trump allies and the extent to which they will go to reelect this lawless and reckless President. This is a dangerous moment for the country.
11
If I was one of Trump’s advisers right now, I’d be doing everything I could to keep him happy and to keep dangerous and disturbing information out of his hands, even if that meant misleading him and lying to him
Are my poll numbers good? Of course they are.
Are the kids in my migrant camps doing well? You bet’cha!
Is Mrs. Pelos beating me down on the Wall? Never in a million years.
Am I gaining too much weight? Your doctor is saying that your steady diet of Big Macs, fish fillets and chocolate shakes is actually doing you a lot of good.
Mental problems are a lot like earthquakes. You never can tell when and where they will erupt and the damage they will do.
6
Trump's tantrums push him over the edge on multiple fronts.
For example, he is pushed to keep bringing up the conspiracy against him, describing it as a coup and treason. Then when pushed to say who committed treason he says Comey, McCabe, and McCain. Oh, and Strok. Having committed treason these 4 should be punished by death one assumes.
Seems like feeding Trump more rope usually works.
3
A note on physiognomy and body language and the tantrum:
Note in the immediate aftermath photo—the posturing of Trump's head, his squinted eyes and clenched jaw.
[And the resemblance to his son, Trump Jr, is uncanny. Same angulation of head, same clench.]
5
Nicely worded, Paul. Someone stole Donald Trump’s strawberries. Perfect.
6
News flash: In Trumpland, Trump wins just by putting on a show where he, the tough-guy hero, tells off the uppity female. No old and unattractive female scold (reminds Trump supporters of former wives and schoolteachers) is going to get away with giving *him* any trouble. Take *that*, Dems! That's telling her, that's how to stick it to the other guys! We win! He's doing the same thing with tariffs on China: No nation of non-white upstarts is going to tell *me* what I can or can't do! I'll show them! His supporters are right there with him, even the farmers whose livelihood is crippled by collapsing markets, because,you guessed it, nobody's going to tell *America* what to do!
6
Mr Krugman suggests a nickname for Trump. Captain Queeg. Spot on.
4
Yes, Trump did the Democrats a BIG favor on infrastructure. But the truth is he was never really serious and knew that Mitch McConnell would never agree to spending another trillion dollars. Instead, he set a trap for Nancy Pelosi with a preplanned attack to goad her to impeach him. Now that Nancy hasn’t taken the bait he’s out with a doctored tape claiming senility in another attempt to push her to impeach him. Why? Because he knows Mitch will “exonerate” him in the Senate and he can campaign as vindicated while attacking Democrats for wasting time on a “witch hunt.” So Nancy has again outwitted Trump by avoiding giving him a major legislative victory and by not taking the impeachment bait. And just who do they think is mentally impaired?
3
I haven't understood, and don’t and never will understand the fact that Donald Trump remains the President of the United States. On one level the resilience of our form of government is shown by there having been no coup attempt, thank God. No, the saner voices are somehow prevailing and/or the Trump people haven’t yet been successful in turning their most diabolical dreams into reality. But let’s not pretend they’re not trying. It’s been over two years. Trump is still there and still, in Mr. Krugman's words, indulging in his “self-evident lunacy”. So America is no tinpot dictatorship that changes leadership seemingly on a whim. That’s a good thing. But how much longer can we, The People, continue to allow the Republicans to allow Trump to get away with these fits of his, while he is apparently trying mightily to hand the keys to the kingdom over to Vladimir Putin? It’s pure sleight of hand stuff. Witness the handing over of declassification authority to the head of what seems to be turning into the American Gestapo. We see it, but we don’t stop the game, reveal the Jack, and jail the dealer. We just shake our heads and toss in another 20.
6
Nancy Pelosi with imperceptible push is nudging the dotard over the edge . Waiting with hope for his final fall and demise.
10
Several observers from both Dems and Repubs claim opposite things. So, we don’t know what happened. Anyone do a smart phone video they want to share? Okay. Next!!!
1
Pelosi in altered video is still more coherent than Sarah Palin. Discuss.
9
He is a human wrecking ball in the DEstruction business.
Everything he touches turns to dust.
4
Trump rapidly is becoming a dangerous clown that even Fox & Friends, Kellyanne Conway, and Sarah Sanders combined can’t paper over. Any Republican Senator who doesn’t see the coming train wreck probably doesn’t believe in climate change either!
4
Trump is the little boy in The Twilight Zone's "It's a good life". And his terrified parents and neighbors are the Republican party. The rest of us are in the cornfield
6
This picture, Jim Lo Scalzo, is worth a thousand words. There it is in a nut shell, our two year old president. Thanks Jim.
5
Seems like the GOP is gaslighting the Democrats and ultimately democracy
2
Once again, Nancy Pelosi took trump's lunch money and pushed him to the ground.
7
Let's not forget trump's earlier infrastructure proposal of federal funding of only 20% and the states picking up the remaining 80%. Money the states don't have, as members of the administration should know, if trump doesn't. But many of trump's proposals have no basis in reality, beginning with his oft repeated: "I am a stable genius" which begs the question, when did stable genius become "unhinged moron?"
7
Trump deserves to win in 2020 because...Americans.
1
Trump's supporters are indeed "cultists" who are prepared to burn at the stake for his gibberish agenda. You can not reason with these people. You can only hope any wavering masses are seeing the light as he continues to throw his tantrums. Otherwise, we are all in danger of burning at the stake as climate change and the ravages of our infrastructure take their toll.
4
Wow! Stop letting the cat out of the bag! You don't want to ruin it by letting Trump know he's been hoodwinked! If anyone on his staff were to read this they might just...oh who am I kidding? They don't READ!
4
Ah, haven’t seen film or a smart phone video of DJT tantrum. Plus, several people in the room at the time dispute Pelosi’s “tantrum” story. Pathetic. And notice how manny lemmings commented on this tantrum as though it actually happened. Sad.
1
Yeah, it was those dang Democrats that wouldn't let him fix those highways! Chuck and Nancy, it's all their fault.
3
the GOP is the problem!
4
Very disappointed in Trump for using a clumsily-edited video clip of Pelosi to sell the absurd claim that “she’s lost it.” That’s a third-grader’s idea of effective retaliation these days, and Trump should have the common sense of a fifth grader by now.
2
Donald gets an infrastructure bill pass while Nancy gets a Immigration bill pass, a quid pro quo
Shortly after Trumps’s ridiculous and, frankly, frightening Rose Garden impromptu press conference, the doctored video of Speaker Nancy Pelosi was dropped. Nothing suspicious about the timing there, eh?
6
An even more recent example of their utter scurrilousness is their approval of the video of Speaker Pelosi, doctored to make her speech seem slurred. (This takes us right down to Trump's sewer-level of politicking: third-grade slurs. Of course, if one wants to descend to that level, it is so easy to point out the undoctored video of his slurring of "oranges" and "origins.") They are attempting to cope with the Speaker's apt note that he needs family intervention. It seems we are in real trouble. It appears Facebook is in cahoots with the slur-mongers; they have not banned the video from their platform.
2
Trump looks like a sulking two-year-old in the lead photograph.
3
'New York Times columnist Ross Douthat wrote a May 2017 column calling for the Cabinet to invoke the 25th Amendment, and put it more bluntly: "The presidency now has kinglike qualities, and we have a child upon the throne.'
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/9/14488980/25th-amendment-trump-pence
3
Is there a place for normalcy in governance? Theatrics, drama queen emotional tantrums are so, well childish.
It’s as if a Mel Brooks comedy has become a situational reality.
4
How's that old song go?
"I beg your pardon /
it's time I throw a fit in the Rose Garden."
3
Republicans had already expressed displeasure that Trump would work with Democrats on infrastructure.
More than likely Trump never was going to make good on this proposal.
The Master Grifter saw an opportunity to score some points by walking out on the Democrats in a snit.
4
I found the article interesting and valid. However, I cringe every time I hear the Democrats referred to as "the Dems." I don't know if this truncated term started with Trump, but it feels trumpish to me. The Republicans aren't "the Reps." Brevity does allow for larger headline typeface, but I'd prefer to hear both parties (and any others) identified by their full names.
5
Infrastructure spending is a mixed blessing. As I type this there is road work being done nearby, it has been on the books since the Obama Administration authorized the spending. The reality is that there are only so many companies that do this work, and with a nation at technical full employment, no additional capacity to move things forward.
The interesting part is that the people I know believe that Trump is responsible for fixing the roads even though Trump hasn't signed any infrastructure bills. So, if Trump signs a bill now, and all of the preliminary work begins, nobody will get credit for a number of years when it is not likely that Trump will get credit - that will go to the President at the time the actual work begins.
2
Have you been following the news the past two years? Trump doesn't need work completed, or even started, to take credit for it. Any kind of proposed deal goes in his "W" column, and he will incessantly brag about it.
Heck, he keeps claiming huge amounts of new wall have been built when it's just 20 miles of refurbished existing wall.
5
When it comes to infrastructure, the US is decades behind other advanced nations.
We live just 6 miles from the seat of world power, the Capitol, in the North Virginia suburb. Despite most houses in our area having been built in the late 1940s, all electric lines are above ground, as well as in many parts of Washington.
Every time when the ground is saturated by rain, or there is a snowstorm with heavy snow, very large old trees are falling on the above ground electricity lines, resulting in power loss sometimes for days.
When I told a friend - who is a Republican - that we indeed have one of the most antiquated infrastructure, he said Europe only had a better infrastructure because theirs was destroyed by bombs in WW II.
That is of course utter bogus. Cities and villages in Europe had their former gas lines to lighten their houses and later electric ones under ground.
That is just one example. And where are the high speed trains, etc. that make travel from point A to B much more comfortable than waiting in long lines at lousy airports?
5
Your friend’s comment is utter bogus indeed.
After the war, the Western European countries didn’t have the resources to build state-of-the-art infrastructure. They had to rebuild fast and cheap to provide to their population as soon as possible. That’s when there was no longer a dire state of emergency that they started to improve their infrastructure.
4
The problem is that the Democrats can be entirely right, can win millions of votes more than Donald and the Republicans, and yet the Democratic nominee may fail to win the Electoral College, and the Democrats may fail to take the Senate. They could even lose the House due to voter intimidation and suppression, partisan gerrymandering, and the GOP's well-established ability to make prevarications sound better than truth. If the electoral game is rigged, we need to find other mechanisms for restoring democratic purpose to our representative government and society. Otherwise, the US will soon be transformed into a so-called "illiberal democracies" like Poland and Hungary. After that, secession, revolution, or simply giving up hope may be the only remaining options.
7
Trump has every advantage but one. He remains Trump. The Democrats have had 3 years to study him and know how to get under his thin skin. The Democratic House has already passed 100 bills that are stalled in the GOP Senate. The Democrats strategy needs to center on running against the Republican Party and just keep out of the mud with Trump. He will want to suck all the oxygen out of each news cycle and preventing that will vex him greatly. He's a media creation and he lives or dies by the news cycles.
375
@R. Zeyen At this time Trump sees zero benefit from working with Dems that would give them any advantage. His greatest opportunity for media dominance is internationally, where Dems have fewer tools to limit his actions.
The possibility of a Trump "Tonkin Bay" triggering an attack on Iran is real, but Trump would want to avoid the consequences. However, he is willing to go to the brink. The extreme risk is that Trump's handler(s) - Bolton and co., are committed to regime change in Iran and the elimination of Iran as a threat to Israel. They may engineer Trump over the brink.
Congress needs to eliminate the greatest threat to U.S. national security which is John Bolton. He is positioned to manipulate Trump to drive for regime change in Iran. Bolton is unfit to serve as National Security Advisor. He got the job because qualified candidates advised against exiting the JCPOA if Iran had not violated the agreement. Bolton provided a plan using emergency powers of the president that did not need the consent of Congress.
Congress needs to make the National Security Advisor a position requiring Senate confirmation.
60
@Vid Beldavs I was with you right up until the call to make the National Security Advisor a position requiring conformation.
An adviser, by definition, has no power to act on anything. Their abilities are capped at merely influencing the president. In a world of extreme partisanship, where the president's party doesn't control the senate, should the president not be allowed to have advisors? Or would the more likely outcome be a less formal team of advisors, hidden behind closed doors, whose identities are kept secret?
John Bolton was selected for name recognition and past experience. Like him or hate him, he's more qualified than most of us. I'd take him as a formal presidential advisor over the comment section at Breitbart (serving in an informal advisory role) any day of the week.
4
@Vid Beldavs John Bolton is not the only dire threat to national security (aside from trump himself, of course)... But Bolton will definitely try to get us into war with Iran and the Middle East.
But now we also have to be concerned with the drive that AG Barr is making, per trump's orders, to declassify CIA and other secrets so that they can ferret out the "treason" done by those who wanted to charge him with obstruction and collusion with Russia.
As per usual, trump has gotten one of his toadies to do his dirty work. He could have done this work himself. But, due to his laziness and his drive for preservation of self (narcissism) he made sure to get his flunky Barr to take the fall, when there is one.
I hope that the CIA refuses to cooperate! HAH!!
This blame seeking effort to deflect the truth off of him reminds me a lot of the Valerie Plame affair, where her name was leaked in order to punish her and her husband.
trump wants to punish anyone, such as the CIA, who is not 100% loyal to him because he acts as the mafia boss, and wants to be the same kind of authoritarian that Putin and Kim Jong-un are. (Comey's book - A Higher Loyalty)
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/24/us/politics/trump-barr-declassify-intelligence.html?
5
The old puffessor, schooling us on keynesian remedies to a recession that he prays is near. If he keeps describing how government makes the economy go, maybe someday it will come true
This might as well have been a column about how it’s a blessing that Trump and republicans are too inept to engineer an immigration compromise. Krugman cares deeply about rusted bridges and immigrants, but until 2020 he wants those photos of potholes, and of kids in border detention facilities
Basically he’s saying it’s lucky that Trump showed bad faith before Democrats would have
3
OK, we agree: the emperor has no clothes. Now, besides taunting him (fun, but unproductive), how are we going to get him out of there? Follow-up question for extra credit: who will be strong enough, smart enough and most importantly wise enough to pull us out of morass Trump has thrown us into?
Enough talk. Time for action.
8
I certainly hope the Dems come up with an infrastructure bill that will, naturally, pass the House and, also naturally, not be considered by McConnell's Senate. That puts the failure squarely on the Republicans, where it belongs!
9
All Pelosi has to do is criticize him in advance of a meeting, and she can have as many tantrums as she wants.
3
You keep pushing the Democrat Party's propaganda. Pelosi may seem brilliant to you and other progressive fools but she is gaming all of us. For one, you don't accuse the president of criminal behavior just before going to a meeting with him to discuss funding infrastructure. This was a perfect example of undermining every effort by the president to implement his agenda. These efforts, including the move to impeach him, will backfire. Trump will be reelected and hopefully the Republicans will recapture the House from the do-nothing Democrats who are rapidly moving to turn our country into another Socialist failure.
3
Which, as smart people know, is much better than a capitalist, free-market failure (no health care for millions, public schools that would be a joke except that they’re not funny, growing wealth gap).
5
@MCH, well maybe, but why is trump the only president to get his little fee fees hurt like that? Obama managed to get legislation advanced even when you and trump were calling him a Kenyan usurper, accusing him of treason every other day, and investigating him nonstop for 8 years. And Secretary Clinton? "Lock her up"?
It's amusing to see trump cult members proudly stand up for the right of trump to'implement his agenda'. They don't see Putin, they don't see corruption or trump's lies. Boy, they sure were convinced of the TRUTH of uranium something something. I give zero respect to this type of argument, that Democrats are just being so mean that poor donnie, who you believe to be infallible, can't govern at all, waaaah!
The Kremlin smiles at your willing suspension of our Constitution to support trump's kingship fantasy, MCH.
6
@Stephen J. Borowski How many more Billions of tax dollars must be wasted on our public schools run by union idiots?
1
Thanx, Paul. I feel a little better now -- but only a little.
GeorgeK
5
Brilliant, but so unfair to Capt. Queeg to imply that Cadet Bonespurs is his equal.
5
You have to have known, after the meeting where Chuck, Nancy, and Trump all happily agreed to a trillion zillion dollar infrastructure bill, that it was all just a set up. The only questions were: when was it going to fall apart, who would Democrats blame, and who would Republicans blame. There was never, ever, any chance either side was going to appropriate that money and build anything.
4
While I appreciate Krugman, Blow, and Goldberg, I would love to see headlines and story coverage in all our media that clearly informs the voting public what the legislative branch of the government is doing and not doing. Somethig like "Democrats pass 250 bills; Republican Senate refuses to vote." Then a list. And the conservative appointments that the Senate has seen fit to push through. Do this over and over, like the wall to wall coverage of the present occupant of the Oval Office's tweets, so that we can't claim to be uninformed about who is doing our government's business. We're desperately in need of such civics-based reporting.
Thanks to you, Dr. Krugman, for continuing to try.
15
Another certainty is that any infrastructure deal will mean a bonus of riches for the donors to the Republican party.
5
What "law requiring it to provide the President's tax returns"? What law is that?
3
@bigbill
"There is, in fact, a federal tax law that specifically states if the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee makes a written request for an individual’s tax returns — as Rep. Richard Neal has done seeking Trump’s — the Treasury secretary “shall furnish” those returns. The law says those returns would be reviewed confidentially in an executive session."
Unless of course you think the president, who is also an individual and citizen of this country, is above the law.
See https://www.factcheck.org/2019/04/trump-wrong-about-tax-law/
6
@Bigbill
26 US code 6103
3
26 US code 6103
I wish the NYT and the Post and CNN and all the network news outlets would cover at length the legislation the House has passed that McConnell refuses even to bring to the floor of the Senate in detail. Bill by bill, show the American people what the Democratic House that was elected to serve them is trying to do on their behalf. And start with the bills that Trump’s followers would most benefit from. Mention how many Republicans in the House voted against those bills, and name the ones who didn’t. Let them see their beloved president and his Senate enablers are happy to abandon them and ignore their needs. Hearing that the House has passed a hundred bills is insufficient. It needs to be spelled out if the Senate’s failure to do its job is to have any real meaning and any real impact.
29
@DWS
If NYT and other national media fails their responsibility to keep us informed, maybe the speaker should create such a list on her website. Then we readers can bring it up, with links, every time someone writes about the deadlocked congress.
5
Now that the Dems walked out of a trap with flying colors, the can "steal" the infrastructure win.
It is the time to start the impeachment process and also produce an infrastructure Bill to send to the Senate. A clean infrastructure Bill that would give the GOP a hard time not taking to the still President.
Unless. The House cannot handle both at the same time.
6
@Aurace Rengifo errata: must read:
"they can "steal" the infrastructure win. "
They still need to present an infrastructure plan in a "bigly" way to the American people. Including how to pay for it, Raise the gas tax, increase taxes on those who got the biggest breaks in the great rump tax give away.
What the American people want is someone to be honest with them.
Make the GOP lay their cards on the table, they ain't for the middle class or for infrastructure.
Its not just rump who needs to be defeated, the GOP has proven since 2008, (some might argue earlier) that they have no interest in governing.
8
The current state of the GOP would not be recognized by Barry Goldwater or St. Ronald Reagan. Other than providing money to people that are already swimming in it (Trump's Tax Break) I am uncertain what plan or strategy is in place.
Infrastructure programs are similar to tax breaks for the middle class. Both are often talked about by both parties yet never seem to happen!
3
When you fail to keep appropriate lids on the federal deficit, mortgage lending, the availability of credit and MK-47’s, you end up with stock market euphoria, temporary leaps in employment, a lot of wild consumer spending, significant inflation, greater numbers of people at Trump rallies and more dead people in the streets.
It’s not hard to figure out where this country is going.
9
When you fail to keep appropriate lids on the federal deficit, the printing of money, mortgage lending, the availability of credit, IPO's and MK-47’s ....
1
Trump looks like Mussolini in the photo.
10
As usual Professor Krugman's analysis is on point and compelling.
But one observation (fact) is not given the attention that it deserves. Fox "News" is not just unAmerican, it is undermining America. Freedom of the press is to be preserved, but we should be focusing more attention on the definition of the "press." Does Fox "News" fit the definition of press or is it only a malicious propaganda tool of the Russian Republican Party? The answer is provided by Fox itself, which has in its entire history been devoted to destroying truth and reality in service to the RRP.
17
Meanwhile most if not all Republican Congressmen stay quiet and although they're never admit it, not even to each other are secretly gleeful as Trump and Barr dismantle the Rule of Law and turn Democracy into Autocracy. Republicans have always wanted one-party rule. Have no illusions America, that is their end-game.
15
slouching toward a wastelandscape of desolation populated by homeless millions, the elites of media profiteers and manicured (though out-of-touch) politcals revel in the political game... better to deny trump (for better or worse that’s all of us) credit that might accrue from any effort to fix the rot than to fix the rot.
shame on the lot of yuz!
Let me paraphrase this article: the Democrat's narrowly avoided a political loss by avoiding a win for the country. Meanwhile, the hometown I grew up in Iowa is flooded.
I don't care if the player is McConnell or Pelosi (whom I voted for), I find the political game playing at the public's expense to be super annoying!
3
@Iko, well then, what's YOUR plan for de-trumping America? If we want the rule of law in place after getting rid of the menace, how do you you propose to get there other than through the system?
2
Has Pelosi found Trumps 'buttons'? If so, she needs to keep pushing periodically, and he will self-destruct.
8
Right... The Democrats keep losing power and looking foolish by threatening "contempt of Congress" to an administration and a public that could not care less, and this is a function of Trump playing into their hands? If the Democrats keeping winning like this there will not be a Democratic party in 2020.
3
Trump's tantrum was predictable, and Pelosi knows it. It's his narcissistic rage, which he is unable to control and happens every time he feels threatened or diminished. He becomes blinded by anger and loses what little control he has over himself, appearing unhinged. It's a great tool she can utilize and she knows exactly how it works. As Krugman points out correctly, we cannot give him infrastructure, we would never get rid of him, he would run not just for a second, but for third and fourth terms.
10
Speaker Pelosi owns DJT and he knows it, hence his temper tantrum.
2
Trump did throw a tantrum, thereby helping Democrats appear wiser. Satisfying as that is to me politically, we are left with nothing on infrastructure. Roads, trains, waterways, broadband access, power generation -- all stalled. Who scored who on political points is not helping us here. Is it possible to hope that the House and Senate will come up with a bipartisan bill approved by an overwhelming majority? MTI (Make Trump Irrelevant) or we could be trapped between rising seas and crumbling concrete!
9
You show actual concern here, in contrast to Krugman’s fixation on whether or not to “make Trump look normal”
2
Why does Mr Schumer say something that will enrage Trump? Why is he so quiet? If Pelosi and Schumer both show the guts Mr Trump will surely melt because that is the only way to get him out
on his own when he starts melting and explode to a point of no return
1
According to the recent book "If we can keep it", Republican donors have ordered their lackeys in Congress not to vote for any big project that would require raising taxes. Trump apparently found this out belatedly, and had to sabotage the talks without admitting that he was being stymied by Congress and the 1%. Hence the temper tantrum.
5
Can Nancy Pelosi outsmart trump?
Of course. That's not hard to do.
Can she drive him mad?
Same answer.
But there is evidence he planned to storm out. Remember his signs on the podium were printed and posted in preparation for his claim that she was the crazy one.
And there's the fact that the Senate would never approve any infrastructure bill. So he may have been looking to pin the blame on Nancy all along.
So if she knew all that and taunted him to storm out, she was much better prepared than he was. She plays chess, he plays checkers.
The house should pass good bills with no expectation of them passing the house. They will be promissory notes of what to expect in 2020. Infrastructure, immigration, climate change, technology and biomedical research, public school education, college loans, gun control, birth control covered in all insurance, sentencing reform guidelines...and legalized marijuana.
All popular with 60 percent of voters, especially women, people of color, people under 40.
10
The senate would pass an infrastructure bill. Not a blank check but there is (or there was) room to compromise on this topic
1
"So if I were Pelosi and Schumer" ....
I would be cooperating with Trump on nothing, zilch and nada.
The only thing that matters is getting rid of him.
8
... on nada, rien, nichts, zilch and nothing.
1
I have this recurring thought that as entertaining as our national politics is today, and as much enthusiasm as writers and commenters pour into it, somewhere out there are real people's lives being affected by what's going on. And what's going on is rotten to the core, as rotten as The Caine Mutiny. That book is fiction, based on stitched together actual events. Since I read it as a plebe at Kings Point more than a half-century ago I've not forgotten the moral tale it tells. Here's the gist of it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jw6gwGawbXA
If you don't know who the characters are, it's pretty simple. Captain Queeg is Trump. Steve Merrick, the XO, is nowhere to be found. Willy the Ensign and the other wardroom officers stand for the Democratic chorus in Congress. And Trump's critics of greatest note, including Nobel laureate economists, are represented by LT Keefer. I despise Trump to the core of his non-existent soul, but I will play LT Greenwald and call this pack of hyenas for what they are.
When the Presidency becomes an endless typhoon of personal destruction, nobody worth a cup of warm spit will offer to serve.
2
Another reason to be happy there'll be no infrastructure program is that Trump and his Republican cronies would have probably managed to steer 90% of the funding into their own pockets.
11
Trump stormed out of the meeting because he wants to get credit for infrastructure improvements without actually doing anything about our country's infrastructure crisis. Infantile.
3
Democracy is a fragile instrument, that is why monarchy was so popular, even though it required an underclass of people with no vote. The Magna Carta only guaranteed a democratic vote of nobles. The uphill struggle, like our Revolution and the Civil War, rejecting Slavery, were seminal events that peaked and then drifted back. The EU was a real step up for Europe and now Brexit will cause some pain for Britain, to the delight of the Monarchists aka the right. Trump and the Republicans are that right, monarchists, in modern terms Ayn Randists (which answers one of my questions, (Where is John Galt? no!), what did Paul Ryan want?). Democracy works, as Jefferson thought, with an informed (and wise) electorate. The balance of Wisdom with Prejudice and Fear, has to be right. It seems that balance has been shifted the wrong way. In our case, can we right the boat or does China develop a new paradigm, thanks to Koch's, Mercer's, Murdock's, Bannon's monarchical leanings. Where is John Galt? no, where is Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, and Dwight Eisenhower?
2
«They [i e, Republicans in Congress] see any form of public expenditure, no matter how justified in terms of narrow economics, as problematic because it may seem to legitimize a larger role for government in general.» Not «any form of public expenditure», Professor Krugman ; Republicans in Congress, like the putative opposition in that organ, are more than willing to engage in one particular form of very large public expenditure, as the spending of some 1.25 million million (10¹²) USD annually (https://www.pogo.org/analysis/2019/05/making-sense-of-the-1-25-trillion-national-security-state-budget/) suffices to demonstrate. But what can one expect of a legislature dominated by two war parties ?...
Henri
3
By now you know the Tax Cuts were a robbery by the Trump Wall st White House and the Republican Congress members to keep the payola train running. Those tax cuts inflated the deficit and now Trump is using the Tariff Consumption Taxes to offset them. So now that it looks as if the Republicans are robbing the nation, is it any surprise they want to "Privatize" the infrastructure that was built with our tax dollars?
2
Trump tried to claim that his little hissy fit was a reaction to criticism from Pelosi. More likely, he simply had no idea where to start with such a program. Then there was the always present problem that the Republicans never, ever propose any program that would enhance the welfare of the people. It's not in their nature.
6
Public/private partnerships structured properly can work. Since government has not been capable of maintaining roads and bridges and since they have enormous debt on their balance sheets it makes sense to have private capital from pension plans or foundations purchase the right to maintain the roads et al. I think the payment to the states would reduce their balance sheet debt and the yield on investment to the pensions would be higher and safer than currently available. It could mean higher tolls on roads or bridges but that is better than watching them fall apart
@Marty f
Roads often go from one state to another; even coast to coast. What pension plan exists that would maintain such a road? Private capital might build a little road in Point-A-Ville which then would bump up against a wider, higher road next door in Point-B-Ville which was funded by another bunch of investors. Higher tolls, of course, would help raise the prices of our groceries. And what happens to the roads where no one has the money or the interest to be road builder?
4
@Rea Tarr
State roads like the NJ turnpike would work. At their border the next state would be able to seek private investors. Each investor group would make their own decisions re the Return on capital they required the after they considered the cost of management of the project
This venture capital decisions take political hacks and unions and bureaucrats out of the equation
Government subsidized infrastructure is socialism for it allows people to have ownership of roads, rails, and other means by which goods and services are brought to market. That means the big and the small would be equal. The little guys would be able to ship their goods as efficiently as the huge industrialized farmer would. If we needed less air pollution then capitalism, not the government would make trains. Even the Henny Pennys who are scared of Climate Change don't blame the government, so why should the government champion infrastructure? Why punish everybody with taxes when only a few are guilty? Besides, isn't the Internet better than infrastructure? This is a pay-as-you-go society. Need a cop? Buy one. Need a road? Build one. Need a Trump? Get help.
1
One has to wonder if politics and political gain has anything at all to do about that which is good for the country. At best, it seems to be about pandering to a base in order to have power.
2
Not Steve. His wife. What you fail to notice is that most people do not see all of the press conferences or pep rallies Trump holds. We see little bites of him where he may indeed be angry but the stories are built, innocently or not, to suggest another side– his– and the anger legitimate in some conventional way. It was in a Trevor Noah Youtube that I finally saw him polling "Kellyanne," "Sarah" and another staffer to tell all gathered in the rose garden how calm and dignified his 3 minutes with Nancy and Chuck on infrastructure had been, and only another PBS clip that showed him calling himself a genius in the same setting. Seeing and hearing that stuff is when the idea of his outright lunacy and instability become tangible, and that is the way it goes with him. Once you hear an entire campaign rally, you realize the depth of the trouble we're in and want to pray along with Nancy. His insecurity and cunning is palpable, but what of our own "fitness" as voters? What principles are we upholding when we still say yes to him and ignore the reality, and need, in both the society and the world in which we'd like a future?
16
"a major infrastructure push is a very good idea, one that Democrats would find it hard to oppose in good conscience"
This presents it as a problem, that Democrats should and would want to do harm to the country in order to harm Trump's prospects in 2020.
That sort of thinking is likely to help Trump too. If voters pick up on this attitude, it will go badly for Democrats.
2
Republicans have been doing this for decades. Along with Norquist and the falsely named Freedom Caucus their goal is to turn profit on everything. Nothing is beneath them in their relentless pursuit of privatization of the government. Citizens United (another misnomer) started the march toward fascism and the for profit government. How many people are getting rich on Wall St. because they know what the lunatic will say before he storms out of meetings.
1
Maybe Trump likes to keep it simple.
We all know who wins the 'our daughter-in-law is the real villain here' against 'it is my mother-in-law who is always coming between us' debate.
It is the daughter-in-law or mother-in-law who against all logic and reasoning stick on to how she is the injured party and how she is always imposed upon. Never mind how the relationship goes, never mind if anything gets done, or if negotiable positions are irrevocably damaged, or budgets are mismanaged.
The daughter-in-law or mother-in-law who debates about damages will lose to the other one who focuses on her position as an 'injured party'.
Maybe it might turn out to be that simple, in Trump's favour.
1
I love it when a Nobel Laureate seeps into the tongue-in-cheek pique of a Maureen Dowd.
Thank goodness the Donald is largely confined to his playpen and actually isn't doing a lot of damage, beyond the trade war (but let's not be picky)—yet.
I hope that the conservative courts will honor their Originalist fidelity to the Constitution and not let an authoritarian Executive weaponize civil procedure (suit after suit, cha, cha, cha) for building a wall between It and an equal branch of government that is thereby obstructed.
We can enjoy the dull comedy of a real estate salesman trying to turn government into a predatory business playground. But Congress shouldn't let concerns about impressionable voters permit Childe Don to do long-term damage to the conception of American democracy that so many developing nations need to admire.
3
My fear is that the next massive federal jobs program will not be much needed infrastructure, but instead, a monstrously disastrous war with Iran. Between the two, is there any doubt which one the Republicans would prefer doing?
19
Are there actually well developed plans providing a basis for debate about infrastructure? I cannot imagine that the Trump administration has any.
I will soon be leaving for the USA and will be in Providence RI, Albany NY, and Burlington VT long enough to take infrastructure notes and photographs. To that I will add observations on local and intercity bus service, solid and food waste disposal, and natural gas pipeline laying.
Reason: To have a better basis for comparing them with the Swedish cities I live in or regularly pass through on my frequent cross-country trips, Linköping to Göteborg.
At least I will have sample facts if not scientific data.
Meanwhile I wonder what single infrastructure project Trump will name first and now it will be paid for.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Citizen US SE
6
A workable plan to address infrastructure redevelopment does exist. Ask Elizabeth Warren to show it to you.
5
@David - Thanks. I have made clear here that Elizabeth Warren is my choice. I have been contributing to her and once I am clear for departure will start learning more about her carefully formulated proposals.
Larry L.
The Democrats have the House, so they should just go ahead and pass an infrastructure bill, and stop waiting already for the President and the Republicans. Yes, that will be as far as it gets, but Pelosi and the Dems need to look like the party that gets things done legislatively. Other than tax cuts, deregulation, military spending, destroying Obamacare, and entitlement programs the GOP is not interested in legislating.
10
@Sparky There are some 60 bills of precisely that type currently languishing - in the Senate. McConnell is stonewalling all of them.
7
I think there were two possibilities:
a) Trump knew that Republicans had told him they were not willing to fund it, at least not any time soon.
b) Trump thinks that (maybe even knowing (a) ) that he get Democrats to turn down the investigation heat by bribing them with taxpayer dollars spent in their districts. Hence his comment about not being able to do both investigations and infrastructure.
Great minds think alike.
When I saw Trump spurning the one thing which would really make it impossible to beat him--happy workers building roads and bridges--I thought, "Hallelujah."
This piece assumes that an infrastructure deal would actually happen which ignores the vast differences between what Trump wants in an infrastructure bill (think private companies building toll roads--with non-union labor--based on profit potential rather than need) and what Democrats want (Government funded projects that use union labor to fix crumbling bridges and roads). Does anyone really doubt that an infrastructure deal would have fallen apart?
10
Where I live the infrastructure is fine. Roads are paved and maintained, water is clean and well managed, no bridges have failed, trains run without falling off the rails. The airport is very well run, clean and recently upgraded (paid through higher airport fees). Why does the federal government need to spend tons of money on local problems? Let each state fend for itself. This is really what Dems should be saying of they want to capture the political center that they have otherwise ceded on 2016.
1
@JCX-JCX, anonymous x 2. In my comment about 5 or 6 above yours in all, I name the American cities I know well and will observe closely in June.
Not a single one of them fits your implied description. You set the standard so low - trains run without falling off the rails - that you probably would see that Albany, Providence, and Burlington meet your idea of infrastructure-is-fine cities.
None of them is remotely close to my standard.
Just out of curiousity, does your city have frequent city to airport service, that is buses designated as airport buses. All my cities in Sweden have airport buses that run from city central and all intercity buses also stop at my two airports, Landvetter and Arlanda.
I realize from painful annual experience that intercity buses in the northeast are at the lowest level of quality imaginable, as every European visitor to that part of the USA quickly discovers.
Perhaps you could reveal the name of "where I live".
I live in these two Swedish cities, Linköping and Göteborg.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Citizen US SE
6
@Larry Lundgren
Reality USA is not a place so don’t waste your time with JCX.
I will watch out for the updates from your trip. Bon voyage.
2
So proud of the infrastructure where you live, but yet, unwilling to state where you live...Hmmmm.
4
You are kidding if you think this proves his unfitness in any way to his electorate. In fact, it demonstrates to them why he is their dream candidate. He demonstrates everything they want to be and want to prove.
Pelosi is smart to hold back Congress on impeachment. That would result in a complete rout of Democrats in 2020. Honestly, they are no further ahead than they were in 2016.
I despair for our future.
3
With the unemployment rate so low, how are the million or so jobs created by an infrastructure bill gonna get filled? Especially since we are doing our best to prevent people who need jobs and want to work from coming to this country.
I suppose some workers already employed will move to the new infrastructure jobs for better pay especially if they are currently underemployed, but then who’s gonna fill all those vacated jobs.
I Strongly favor doing infrastructure, but it would bring unintended consequences due to our current unemployment rate and immigration policies.
4
Unemployment rates don’t include those who have stopped looking. Also, more jobs would raise wages. Wouldn’t be nice if the boss didn’t make 5000 times more than their lowly workers.
7
@Martini good points. I want an infrastructure bill. My point is that we’re gonna have thousands of vacated jobs with no one to fill them.
Also I thought most of those who have stopped job hunting are in the over 50 crowd who would most likely only be able to perform semi/skilled labor,so most of the physical labor jobs will not get filled, unless we start a gap year program for kids exchanging one year of infrastructure labor for 2 years of post high school tuition?
2
It's no wonder to me that Trump's parents sent him to a military school as a "Trouble Child". His obvious problem is he had no childhood love growing up and now he desperately desires it as demonstrated by his behavior.
So who benefits from all of Trump's sabotage? Russia.
8
Pelosi plays Trump brilliantly. Bravo Madame Speaker!
12
Thats nice. Based on the shape of the U.S. economy barring a major recession or a faulty military action, history and the wave of Populism worldwide suggests the Democrats are going to lose the next election. I think they would be urgently trying to plan unless of course they prefer the incompetence of Trump to actually trying to run this country.
1
Good point. But, the House should publicize its proposal for infrastructure improvement. Schumer mentioned, in an off-hand manner, a 37-page plan. If they have one, let the American people know about it, to show that they are doing the work of legislating.
12
trump has accomplished nothing meaningful.
trump will accomplish nothing to help Americans.
trump is in office to steal money.
There's no point in democrats negotiating with trump.
He will do nothing unless it fills his own pockets with gold.
Democrats should enact legislation in the House.
Then, send it to the Senate -- and let them reject it.
That will show voters which party genuinely wants to help us.
13
@IN
Yes I know what party I want to represent me!
Not Plastic Nancy!
When the next recession comes, it's going to end my hope that I will ever join anything resembling a secure middle class existence. I look around and see many people that I grew up with, now in their 40s and 50s, barely getting by, or getting by but with extreme debt. If they own property, it is certainly not with any sense of security, and it is rarely in the more valuable area of town. In addition, many adults I know now have roommates or live with their parents. They do not have the hope, even when working multiple jobs (often low paying service sector jobs) that they can live on their own, supporting a family, with stability and grace and hope for the future. There is absolutely nothing that any of these individuals in power--no matter what their political party--have done over my lifetime to benefit what was once called the middle class in America. It's just been one corporate tax cut after another, one outsourcing free trade deal after another, one unfulfilled populist campaign promise after another. I'd like to know what country, or planet, these people are living on. It's certainly not the same one as the one I (and many of the people I know) live on.
13
@Chaparral Lover
The live on the planet of Hubris, Avarice and Self Entitlement. They are humans in form only and far removed from anything that speaks of good will, working for the common good and being stewards of the Earth. I agree that members of both parties have been and continue to belong to this group. But at least Democrats have at their core a sense of country before party that the GOP is not only lacking in, but has worked in every way to do the opposite. Personally, I think this country will go the way of Rome and that we're already 5th century. We are now more blatantly than ever being divided and carved up. Which makes us ripe for internal conflict or being sold out to a foreign power. The true "elites", not the ones Fox and Trump rails about, are the uber, uber rich who run the world, and who are laughing all the way to the bank. As the serfs and unwashed masses are knuckled under and bought into total compliance and control. Sounds like science fiction eh? Or maybe a bad dream that many in this country never thought we'd be living through. As for the children and grandchildren. I can't imagine the country and world we're leaving them or what the future holds. It's going to get a lot worse before it gets better. If it ever does.
7
I know lots of people in the same boat. But, thanks to Democrats, they now have health care through the ACA. Which the Republicans are trying to take away.
That alone should be enough to point out the difference to you.
I’m sure you can think of other rather stark policy differences.
8
Sorry, Mr. Krugman, but I'm having a hard time seeing why it would be a "trap" for the Democrats to endorse an infrastructure plan that helps strengthen our nation. Are we so partisan that we would rather see Trump fail, at our own expense, than actually do something good for America?
I dislike Trump as much as anyone. But I don't think Democrats should stand by and allow Trump to destroy our nation just to prove how bad he is.
5
@David
If Trump is re-elected and there's a good chance he will be. Then the destruction he and his corrupt administration will do over an additional 4 years will truly mean the end of our nation as we know it. I'd rather the Dem's deny Trump a win, one that will surely boost his re-election chances, then give him that advantage. We've waited decades for the infrastructure issues to be addressed. One more year won't kill us. But the future under Trump certainly will.
Get over yourselves. Find some gravitas and get to work on behalf of the Americans need their lives and living conditions improved.
1
@Maureen
At whom is your comment directed?
1
It is such a heartbreak that we should even need to consider NOT doing the work of the people so as to achieve the goal of removing a disastrous chief executive.
7
Potholes are my ultimate reality.
1
This strategy of giving Trump enough rope to eventually hang himself by his acts, words and tweets is brilliant.
There's nothing more gratifying and just than watching him slowly self-destruct on his own.
11
Trump never wanted to get an infrastructure plan passed in congress.
He had many opportunities and he made sure it failed.
In addition Trump knew many republicans wouldn't go along with this big spending plan.
He didn't bail out Nancy and Chuck.
He bailed himself out so he could blame Nancy. His tantrum was planned but unfortunately for him he looked like a fool. His press conference said it all.
You didn't have to see what happened in the Oval Office to realize this president does need an "intervention".
We should all be "praying for our nation"!
10
Nancy Pelosi knows how to get under trump’s skin, so much so that trump is showing off a doctored tape of Pelosi to prove that Madame is losing her marbles.
When it is trump who has already lost it, it is only a matter of time trump will lose it completely.
Hopefully sooner for our Country s sake.
9
I believe it was Chairman Nadler who pointed out that over 200 bills have been passed by the House & are now sitting in Senator Mitch McConnell’s “graveyard” — demonstrating Dems can both legislate & conduct oversight.
Trump, as a malignant narcissistic sociopath, is incapable of tolerating even the mildest form of criticism without going ballistic. Speaker Pelosi never accused Trump of “screaming & yelling” like Trump stated while he lined his sychopant staff up before the cameras & called on each one to praise him for his calmness at the meeting. In so doing, Trump’s unfitness was on full display to America & the World while McConnell & the rest of the GOP Congress watch & refuse to put Country over Party.
The American people need to stand with our Democratic Congress as they fight to save our democracy & rule of law. Trump is severely psychologically ill & will do anything to remain in power. He has surrounded himself with sycophants who will help him distort our laws & try to politicize our intelligence communities & law enforcement in order to benefit himself.
I am in support of commencing an Impeachment Inquiry. Doing so will put the spot light on Trump’s crimes — exactly what he is trying to cover up — exactly what he doesn’t want Fox viewers to see for their own eyes and ears.
19
@CherokeeNative we can only hope trump’s base would recognize they’ve been had, however the state news will twist the truth once again or the viewers will be sipping his koolaid and reality will not hit its mark.
3
has krugman ever been correct concerning recent events? the caterwauling and histronics are one for the record books. collapse, destruction, death around every corner. give it a break. please.
2
Krugman has again hit the nail on the head in his analysis of what is going on with infrastructure and temper tantrums. Unfortunately the Republican party leadership cares not one bit for the country---clearly they will let the president* do what he wants to while they dismantle the regulations, rules, and practices that in the past have made this a great country in which to live. Sad. Sad. --- as someone says......
5
Trump's one-third to perhaps 40% support is due, I think, to the relentless brainwashing of tv and radio programming. Over the past few decades, Sinclair Broadcast Group and Murdoch-owned media have pushed lunatic theories, jeered and sneered at their enemies. In sum, their message has been irrational hate rather than news. Add Trump calling critical press coverage "sick" and you have the totality of their message.
5
Dangerously naive. Trump is going off the rails in a calculated, shrewd, last-ditch attempt to provoke the Nancy and crew to impeach him; he knows that he can win that one. If impeached, his base will rise up in righteous anger, and Mitch will make sure that nothing comes of it. Net result for the Dems: a catastrophic strategy blunder, a hardening and stiffening of resistance to removing this madman, and a possible loss for the Dems in 2020.
At all costs, do not take the bait. This is a trap. Nancy knows it, and she is doing her best to avoid it. Dems: wise up. Just keep chipping away at him with investigations, and he will self-destruct.
11
I wonder how long it will be before AG Barr opens an investigation into the Democrats for setting the capital building on fire?
6
Solid column from the Krugman as usual, but it should be noted that it is an article of faith that one-third of our fellow countrymen and women are “totally deluded” or “cultists.” I’m not saying this isn’t the case, but even if we assume so that is a very sad commentary on our polity.
4
No Democrats do not have FOX News with its 3,000,000 plus daily viewers, they just have rest of the media, Mr. Krugman included.
I am starting to enjoy NYT the way I enjoy the Onion.
1
I seem to remember another president that proposed infrastructure spending. Hmmm who was it? Oh that's right the last president. Of course the GOP controlled congress would never consider anything proposed because they spent all 8 years trying to make him a one term president.
Of course infrastructure spending in this country is way overdue. Years ago the American Society of Civil Engineers issues a report that said that if we didn't spend something like $5 trillion in the nearer term it would end up costing our economy.
But I say let the GOP walk into the dead fall of demanding privatization and Donald's ridiculous behavior. They don't deserve anything except to be exposed as the party unable to actually provide effective governance. Let them stew in their own ineptitude.
4
It looks like Nancy Pelosi actually agrees with Dr. Krugman. Why? Because why would anyone, just a few minutes before a meeting to work out infrastructure with the president, talk with jouralists about a coverup? I mean really!!!
While there's no such thing as good faith negotiations with this president, these negotiations were a non-starter even before they got into the room. Nancy is sly like a fox!
2
"they should be grateful to see Trump displaying his unfitness for office, which has long been clear to close observers"
Trump's unfitness for office has long been clear to ANY observer. The man couldn't successfully run any of his businesses - except into bankruptcy. It is likely, from what he showed us on "The Apprentice" that he could not successfully run a lemonade stand except into bankruptcy. And it was his obviously false claim to being the "greatest businessman" (channeling Muhammed Ali, of course) that went unchallenged by the "free press" until he was in office that ignorant voters believed. (Note that the voters of New York City who knew his history of failure, boasting, and lying, voted against him by historic - maybe even the biggest ever! - margin.)
Only people who cover their eyes and ears when he opens his mouth could possibly not see his unfitness for office. Or those who were failed by the US Media.
3
No long do we President Donald Trump a man without country leave questions am not crazy to staffs , its seem that afraid of shadows he never take opinion good bad and ugly .
He insult everybody come connect .
He fire anybody in cabinet that disagree with President Donald Trump his close advisors shake enter Oval Office . Donald remains, Alice in Wonder Land on Bad Trips off with Head Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer .
Every Nancy afraid use ( I ) word.
1
You had a president that pulled you from the brink of economic disaster and brought in a better health care alternative while growing the economy against all odds politically. Now you have this nutcase in office, he is not the problem, the problem is the Republican party, at every level, you still give credence to a mob thinking there must be some good in it, there is none.
8
corrected:
Why doesn't the Democratically controlled House do what the Republican one did: pass a bill whether it will get through the Senate or not?
Of course, passing such a bill would be something of an empty gesture but wouldn't it be better than sitting on their hands? McConnell, the anti-democracy Republican leader in the Senate, would stop the bill coming to a vote, preventing his members from going on the record against a good thing but at least the Democrats could say they tried. Maybe they should "try" the way the Republicans did to wreck Obamacare, try by passing a bill 382 times. (Or was it 428 times? Lost count.)
Is there no way to get this done?
Most likely, Trump will forget about his "calm" "stable genius" temper tantrum in a few weeks and some sort of deal will be advanced. The Republicans in the House would then be stuck in the delicious dilemma of opposing it, but they couldn't stop it. Would Trump then call on McConnell to allow a vote? Most likely, no, because one thing Trump has learned, one of the very few, is to try to stop putting Republicans in an embarrassing, no-win position. He has, indeed, learned to back off when McConnell tells him to. (These things are done quietly behind the scenes and Trump makes up some excuse, a magic trick of misdirection, to confuse his supporters.)
We might even get a slimmed down infrastructure bill this year, just in time to help ward off the recession probable for the December/January period. Maybe.
3
@Doug Terry Look it up: the House has already sent some 60 bills to the Senate. McConell has stonewalled debate on all of them. The Dems need to be trumpeting that on a daily basis.
2
What doesn't the Democratically controlled House do what the Republican one did: pass a bill whether it will get through the Senate or not?
Well, passing such a bill would be something of an empty gesture but wouldn't it be better than sitting on their hands? McConnell, the anti-democracy Republican leader in the Senate, would stop the bill coming to a vote, preventing his members from going on the record against a good thing but at least the Democrats could say they tried. Maybe they should "try" the way the Republicans did on wrecking Obamacare, try by passing a bill 382 times. (Or was it 428 times? Lost count.)
Is there no way to get this done?
Most likely, Trump will forget about his "calm" "stable genius" temper tantrum in a few weeks and some sort of deal will be made. The Republicans in the House would then be put in the delicious dilemma of opposing it but they couldn't stop it. Would Trump then call on McConnell to allow a vote? Most likely, no, because one thing Trump has learned, one of the very few, is to try to stop putting Republicans in a hammerlock and squeezing. He has, indeed, learned to back off when McConnell tells him, "Back off." (These things are done quietly behind the scenes and Trump makes up some excuse, a magic trick of misdirection, to confuse his supporters.)
We might even get a slimmed down infrastructure bill this year, just in time to help ward off the recession probable for the December/January period. Maybe.
There may have been a second reason why Trump chose to disrupt the discussion. This discussion was supposed to be about funding the infrastructure project. But to fund something that big, it would be necessary to undo some or all of the Trump tax cut, and Trump couldn't do that. So, not having anything good to bring to the table, perhaps it was just easier to turn the table upside down and so avoid that discussion.
5
Our major problem is the absolute failure of the "Mainstream" Media to continuously highlight the GOP (McConnel) "No, No, Never" strategy towards ANYTHING that might benefit ordinary Americans, or the country as a whole.
Tax cuts for their donor base? "Yes, Sir, Right Away!" Anything else? Nothing.
10
Time to hold federal cabinet to uphold the 25th Amendment: how a president can be declared unfit to serve?
4
I think Pelosi and Schumer had already attempted to avoid a political trap by insisting that Trump come up with a plan for getting the money. They knew Republicans would never agree to a tax increase of any kind.
5
So to put this in context, Obama spent very little on infrastructure. And it needn't take a close observer to see that Trump is unhinged.
BTW, I am speaking from the left. I've noticed that a fair amount of the Obama legislation that Trump is (trying) to undo, was only passed in the last year of Obama's administration, when discussions of legacy were abounding. Obama didn't try for 7 out of 8 years to do much. So, we are basically back in 2015 (heading to 1930). Back in 2015 Dem's weren't complaining about this stuff, so why complain now? Some of these things that Trump is derailing never even got passed during Obama's administration, but were left dangling.
3
@Miriam
Not so true. Between October, 2008, when it looked for a few days as if the ATMs wouldn't work and world economic failure was a possibility, and when Pres. Obama took office, assorted Congressional stimulus/rescue/emergency ideas shrank, from "shovel-ready" infrastructure projects for several million Americans, to the stimulus/bailout that passed.
Hundreds of billions of dollars did go into infrastructure projects--remember the signs? But it wasn't as much as Mr. Obama wanted (or economists such as Dr. Krugman urged.)
10
Nice hat tip to the recently-deceased Herman Wouk, author of The Caine Mutiny from whence the strawberry reference comes.
5
I get so confused out here in the midwest so please bear with me. Krugman makes a very good point when he declares that the GOP doesn't want to legitimate a larger role for government in general. However, it is either their hypocrisy or my ignorance as to why they then want the government to become involved involved in the most private of relationships....that between a woman and her doctor.
11
@Tom Q
They're just that way. Coming from a state which resisted their several-decades-long "War on Public Schools", you may think more logically.
1
@Tom Q
It’s the same thing with
anti-healthcare but pro big pharma,
Anti-safety net for poor but pro wealthy tax cuts
Anti birth control but pro guns
And many more hypocritical policies
1
One aspect of this situation is worth discussion. How do you pay for a $2 trillion infrastructure plan when you have already given away a trillion in tax cuts? Trump raised the ante on the infrastructure spending from 1 to 2 trillion knowing full well he had no plan to pay for it. Hence, the totally fabricated walk-out, which of course he blames on the “witch hunt”.
7
So you write we should invest in infrastructure before the next recession because then it would be too late due to low rates.
The fundamental question we face is whether government is good, or bad like the Republicans say. Of course, even I of average intellect know that a government is a cooperative effort of the citizens of a nation to coordinate and administer necessary services such as the common defense and to promote the general welfare of it's citizens. So why are Republicans opposed to our government? They say it's too big but it has to grow just to keep pace with our population growth. I have to believe that the Newt Gingrich declared "Republican Revolution" is real and ridiculous like one shooting oneself in the foot.
As for infrastructure spending; upkeep is logical but I have trouble reconciling the idea of building roads and also wanting to reduce consumption of fossil fuels. I believe current infrastructure needs to be maintained but utilized more efficiently like promoting the use of many thousands of buses to replace millions of cars. Incremental approaches to road use can be inspired in the private sector instead of handing the roads and bridges to private enterprise that would only cost consumers more like Trump's consumption tax tariffs.
As for Trump wigging out; who's surprised, but the fact is, you can't have a corporate dictator in a deeply political place. He's only known yes men and he can't handle being a real deal maker.
1
@WITNESS OF OUR TIMES
There is a pro-Koch brothers pac that has been going into cities to defeat light rail projects legislation all across the nation and they’ve been very successful. Koch is dedicated to us using oil/gas for transportation to build their wealth regardless of environmental impacts and other consumer costs.
I used to work for the major energy company in MN and when I left 20 years ago it was widely known the energy grid was even then outdated and vulnerable to attack.
We need to upgrade infrastructure beyond maintaining what we have to what will work in the future such as homeowner generated energy being sold back to the distribution grid, harnessing nanotechnology to supply more energy more efficiently, etc..
Maintaining our current infrastructure is important too for safety (bridges) and to buy us time to build that future infrastructure foundation geared toward more innovative and efficient systems.
4
Wow. “It’s good that we didn’t do that good idea because it would have made our political opponent look good”.
Really?
6
In my personal political philosophy, I don't cheer when what is happening is bad for the country. Democrats would be wise not to as well. It's not all about hating the other side; Krugman forgot that long ago.
2
Pelosi and Schumer should continue to tweak Trump into more toddler temper tantrums.
Evidently lots of Americans care more about circus than about bread. It's obvious that Trump's the bad guy wrestler. We should keep showing that.
4
Theresa May has set a good example for the president.
I hope he will follow her lead and resign.
6
I've been sleeping better this year. It began when I remembered the presidential line of succession. Nancy is second in line.
6
@Theodore R
Only after Pence...and how will he help the situation? We’d be living in a ultra-conservative evangelical Christian based federal government where LGBTQ folks will be sent enmasse to deprogramming camps, non- Christians will become second class citizens with reduced freedoms, women will lose their civil rights and married men will be required to address their wives as “Mother”.
1
After Prnce comes Pelosi
Speaker Pelosi has been more than reasonable with the Trump reckless administration. He defines arbitrary and capricious every day.
5
Never do anything good for the country unless there is a political gain to be made. Is that your argument, Dr. Kruger? Don't get me wrong, I'd like to see Trump dragged from the Oval Office in chains along with just about everybody else who works in that building except the cooks and janitors and groundskeepers. His criminal and psychopathic behavior should be sufficient to achieve that end. I'm not quite ready to cheer for the collapse of the economy, too.
6
as typical for writer he neglects to point out there is substantial reason to believe Trump did not walk in a uncontrolled tantrum, the best being he already had a podium and sign prepared for a speech, where he seemed to be reading off notes. it was an act. Trump is now giving pelosi the same nonsense she pushes on him. let's see if she takes the bait. I believe she will. her daughter did by saying pelosi isn't a drunk in response to the slowed down video
2
Paul Krugman's analysis can be encapsulated by what Napoleon once said:
"Never interrupt your enemy when he's making a mistake".
9
Everything that could be said ( or written ) has been taken care of. And now it's time for a straight jacket.
8
Although Paul Krugman is right about Democrats not getting suckered into a abyss with Trump, two trillion dollars is a bottomless pit, but we still need to fix our infrastructure as soon as possible, as many roads and bridges are in bad shape.
I hope Democrats put forward a budget for infrastructure plan regardless Republicans are going to support it or not. A plan will give Congress a road map to debate and the public to see. When the next President and new Congress take office in January 2021, we can quickly move to pass the bill.
I am pretty sure that the way Donald is going, he will be lucky not ending up in the mental hospital.
4
The whole congressional gang is just having a party, living it up, all the while trying to convince the American people they're fighting the good fight...on both sides of the aisle. The fact is, none of this fractured fairy nightmare propagated by a gang of politicians who just want to stay in their seats until it's their turn to lobby is working for the American people. We aren't politicians, we aren't lobbyists, we're the people who pay and pay and pay while congress skates and dances and party down with our dollars. The American people will and must march on Washington, we must revolt against this utterly corrupt, broken government. There must be a new party, a party of and by and especially, for the people.
6
Trump on the world stage is dangerous as Barr gets the names of Russian spies and gives them to Trump who will call Putin right away and make some points with his boss. Barr will arrest Obama ,Hillary and Biden just like they do in dictatorships and the GOP will be fine with that party before country. Infrastructure will not happen this admin as Trump is obsessed about his survival.
3
"[T]hey don’t have Fox News to insist that black is white..."
This is the key.
The billionaire funded conservative media machine feeds and protects its leaders and base, while attacking all perceived enemies for the the smallest of issues.
It's "heads I win...tails you lose" or 2+2=5 everyday in the conservative noise machine.
The deregulation of media ownership
(for example the Sinclair and Murdoch media empires) is a huge reason why so many people in America today are misinformed.
4
the strawberries reference probably went over a lot of heads. but wouldn't it be nice if there could be a Cain Mutiny kind of 25th amendment rebellion?
4
@john kwiatkowski Thanks for the reference, Mr. Krugman. I have long thought that Trump's train-of-"thought" ramblings bore a great resemblance to Captain Queeg's, in both form and content.
But let's do the math. A $2T allocation to infrastructure equals $40B per state. Even adjusted for population differences, it's still far, far below what this country's infrastructure needs.
What could we do with/for this country if we had even a portion of the military budget as an annual stipend for improving the lives of actual taxpaying Americans?
Yes, I know: a pipe dream...
8
"Instead, they have proposed complex public-private partnerships that would in effect subsidize the privatization of public assets."
If some new infrastructure does come into being, The People will pay for it. Republican officeholders want financiers to own it, including the risks (a theory until proven). The bigger the asset that can be aggregated, the greater the revenue stream, and it follows that more capitalization is possible.
Borrowing against assets that the government already owns is our officeholders' last decision. The last act from a long line of those who failed to prioritize what the public needs versus what they say the public wants.
It's fine and dandy with Mitch McConnell and Elaine Chao for private interests to own public ventures, so to get to make 50 to 75 years of all spending decisions on tax-generated dollars.
I reject these capitulations BECAUSE THEY ARE BORN OF DESPERATION of a $22T national debt. DEAL WITH IT. But no, Republicans are not serious about it. Good example? Starting a new give-away of control by creating new "rules" for a new Space Force agency". The Air Force has acquisition regulations in place!
There is nothing more elite than private operators, financiers, and insurance companies OWNING the future that taxpayers fund.
7
Peloton told Trump she wanted him to come up with a plan to pay for infrastructure. Was this a reasonable request? Or was she just playing politics?
1
This feels shallow, though. It's a long way to the elections, and Trump and the Republicans have plenty of time to finally make proposals serious sounding enough to get the political benefits Dr Krugman talks about here. They can include a fair amount of their privatization schemes, and it won't be obvious enough that the Democrats won't have a problem walking away from it. But mostly it's the time element. Public memory is so shot!
1
To call President Trump crafty in his furniture-smashing would be overstatement, but there was method in the madness of his tantrum, and PK hit upon it.
Trump and his people know full well that they would never secure the necessary GOP legislative support actually to enact a bold new infrastructure plan. so he deliberately torpedoed his own initiative in a feeble attempt to shift blame to the Democrats.
This will probably work with the one-third of the fabulists in the country who march to the president's drumbeat no matter what. As for the remaining two-thirds, let us pray.
11
That's great. Democrats are the only ones who are serious about infrastructure (which we need desperately), but they can't do it because it would be a "political trap," giving Trump a "policy win." Is this a failed system of government, or what?
9
Yet the Democrats were in the room ready to deal. It was Trump who walked out.
6
Merrick Garland. Remember him?
3
When Trump announced he was seeking an infrastructure deal with the Democrats, many Republicans, especially the ultraconservative ones protested the move. I think Trump staged his tantrum so he could walk away from the deal and thereby mend fences with Republicans while trying to cast blame on the Democrats. Note how he disallowed cameras where he played his histrionics so he would not create visual evidence of his tantrum as he did during the government shutdown.
Of course Republicans planned to sabotage the plan with cries of it had to be revenue neutral, thereby forcing cuts in social spending, such as for Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security.
The whole idea of making a deal with the Democrats was a ruse from the start.
18
Dems, including me, revel in the public mom-slaps that Nancy Pelosi delivers to Trump when he throws a tantrum.
But we should not fool ourselves: the clock is ticking. Slap-downs don't affect Trump's base at all. And they create a false sense of moral superiority. The evidence of Trump's many crimes needs to be exposed in public testimony before Congress.
This means impeachment is an absolute necessity, regardless of whether or not the Senate will convict. If the House votes impeachment, the Senate is required to hold a trial presided over by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. The evidence of obstruction of justice is already overwhelming.
15
It would be nice for the NYT to list the over 100 pieces of legislation the Democratic controlled House has passed thus far. It is fine to talk (and marvel) at Trump's meltdowns but it is also necessary for Americans to see how much Democrats have done; and how much Republicans in the Senate have reciprocated by blocking the efforts.
42
@Candlewick That is a message the Democrats need to pound home, along with the unfilled campaign boasts made by the grifter.
2
I see it as a different play: one in which Trump claims that infrastructure was his plan, thwarted by the Democrats.
2
People remember what the President does, not what Congress does. History will remember Trump as the guy who promised infrastructure and failed to deliver, just like they remember Bush Sr. as the guy who promised no new taxes and then gave us new taxes.
10
You left something important out — Trump has no interest WHATSOEVER in doing what is best for the country (and our crumbling infrastructure could sure use some work). There is absolutely no point in attempting a good faith negotiation with Trump on ANYTHING — he can’t be trusted in any way, and he will sabotage the best deal in history if he perceived it to be to his advantage. Nothing and no one else matters to him.
35
That’s not a tantrum. It’s one of the final stages of dementia, as any baby boomer with an aged parent suffering similar, will attest. The phase is “anger and frustration” at the realisation of one’s limitations and shrinking intellect. My parent drove the car right at other vehicles in anger and we had to have the licence revoked.
Next phase is ...who are you? Where am I and why?
This is progressive and ultimately, terminal.
Can that also be said of the shining city on a hill?
21
I don't know why Paul Krugman thinks the Democrats would have been in a trap that they couldn't get out of with an Infrastructure bill. All that would be needed is language that assured honest bidding for and oversight of contracts. Any bill that would prevent cronyism and kickbacks would assuredly be vetoed.
14
Thoughtful commentary, and thanks for the Caine Mutiny reference, a sweet acknowledgment of Herman Wouk's recent passing.
9
No, I don't agree with Paul Krugman's take that the Democrats are averse to allowing a win-win package with Trump. They've made it clear since 2016 that they wanted to work with Trump on infrastructure. But for the Democrats to meet with the President is not the right way. McConnell is shirking his own responsibilities, too cowardly to take a position, I think. The House under Democratic leadership has passed a lot of legislation since they convened in January, now it's up to McConnell to continue the process in the Senate. The Republicans always oppose infrastructure spending; that's why it can't be passed.
6
The big nemesis of infrastructure is the republicans view of infrastructure as a lifeline to the unions
14
Good point.
DJT's "tantrum" was a ruse, to avoid having to come up with a plan to "pay for" the $2T in infrastructure spending that he put on the table. Of course the Speaker agreed to it, knowing that if D's insisted on it being paid for, there would have to be revenue generated from somewhere. Perhaps repealing part of that massive tax cut for the wealthy? DJT was in a box, so he lashed out with a staged tantrum. He tries to have it "both ways" rhetorically, but when it comes to making things happen he finds a way to change the subject.
14
Trump does not prove himself trustworthy here not a promise kept. Perhaps the infrastructure plan was another bill to Mexico. Or an invitation for companies paying less taxes to invest freely. The president might have been told by republicans that infrastructure is not a federal responsibility. They missed out on stimulus under Obama. Now cheap loans go by the wayside. No federal reserve plan? What about regulation to prevent a crisis?
3
With respect to all things economic: the GOP is counting on the continued health of the stock market to preserve some semblance of a "roaring economy." As an investor, I am really, _really_ nervous about this proposition:
- The market is trading in a 25-26k range; it has seen rapid pullbacks from the highs, two so far by my count. I think technical analysts might wonder what happens after a third. -
- "Profits" to support the historically high P/E ratio are increasingly due to financial jeggery-pokery, not to the health of the underlying business producing goods and services.
- And a greater activity in the M&A segment suggests managers don't know how to increase productivity or profitability of their core businesses, and so will speculate on other companies' products and operations.
At this point I am happy to enjoy the ride, but I am hedging my bets ...
12
trump's unfitness for office is obvious to even the casual observer.
26
In the end the congressional Republicans would never have agreed to spend any money on this, so the Dems would never really have to worry about a trap.
5
I don't think much infrastructure will happen in the next 19 months. Too bad, but maybe not:
A while back Trump mentioned doing infrastructure by hiring contractors and letting contracts. Under anyone else, that could be possible.
Who would he 'hire' ? He's made it clear that he sees the presidency as another way to accrue wealth and demonstrated that excellence or professionalism is not the most important quality; in fact it ranks 2nd or 3rd. What's 1st ? Loyalty to Trump. Kellyanne Conway should wear a cheerleaders uniform and Sarah Sanders, instead of saying anything, should just record Trump and replay him over and over... Do we want that sort of person building bridges and tunnels ?
10
No money for infrastructure, huh?
In late 2017, as the trillion dollar tax scam giveaway to the rich was taking shape, I pleaded with Democrats to block that insanity by any means possible, including shutting down the government. Stopping it was of supreme importance—more important than DACA for instance.
And that would have left the Republican Congress with essentially nothing accomplished for 2017 and Trump nothing to brag about except the ramrodding of Gorsuch using the “nuclear option”. But the Democrats could not get their act together—continually, as now, worrying about backlash.
5
@srwdm: The Democrats could not have shut down the government at the time.
1
Pelosi is between a rock and a hard place, and her only agenda is the gavel. Her hold is tenuous at best, and could easily slip away, again and that is her only concern. She doesn’t care about the American people. And what is infrastructure anyway? Need something built? You’ve got the right guy sitting in the oval, so do it and stop playing games.
2
@hawk No, we have the wrong mentality, the wrong intellect and the wrong person.
Trump is skilled in two things-bankruptcy and con artistry. And the con artistry appears to have taken hold.
Just saying.
4
@hawk: Trump doesn't have a clue about building anything, only about stiffing contractors and going bankrupt.
4
"True, Republicans seem able to get away with blatant economic sabotage when a Democrat is in the White House. But Democrats, in part because they don’t have Fox News to insist that black is white and up is down, are much less able to pull this off."
It's not the lack of a Fox News equivalent. It's very simple: It's because Democrats believe in good government, and Republicans don't.
13
Individual-1 continues to give us a wonderful gift. His vicious nonsense reveals once more the weakness of our protections against tyranny. Imagine where we would be today if, instead of a would-be tyrant who was an incompetent ignoramus, we had elected one who was supremely competent!
In two and a half years we have learned an awful lot about what we will need to do to fix our democracy and prevent it from destruction, but he continues to surprise us.
Thank you, Individual-1, for the warnings you have given us, and those you will undoubtedly continue to give. I only hope we have the courage and stamina to heed those warnings.
10
Good analysis here by Paul Krugman. Infrastructure has not been a priority of the Trump administration. Infrastructure represents the common good - something the 1% and their largest tax break find repulsive. What good is your wealth unless you can deprive others? Like the environment, infrastructure speaks to those who believe humans have a future on this planet - it does not matter so much to the rapture ready crazy base around Trump. Thus, Krugman points to a platform - the future or really - "a future!" This is nothing less than a major shift from a narcissistic leader and his end time cult - to a narrative about a future for those we care about. It is turning from the self absorbed tantrum to dare I say it - the gospel left behind by Trump and his followers - the one that cares for planet and builds people a stable place to live with infrastructure - love your neighbor!
11
House speaker Pelosi brilliantly raised the specter of tRump in need of the other “i-word” — intervention — and even mentioned praying for him and for our country.
Putin helped to put into office our first and openly “Evel Knievel” stunt man president. It is all for the cameras to fixate on the spectacle and not on what is taking place behind the curtain.
It seems like going back to Reagan, Bush 41 & 43, the entire GoP is all about pulling off one stunt or another, from the Tea Party to AG Barr, for power and for profit.
Sure, why not sell Saudis Arabia our most lethal weapons? They would never share our strategic, kinetic, or nuclear secrets with China, Russia, India, or Pakistan and the like, to use against us or our allies. Right...?
14
I saw a political party that has prioritized attacking their political opponent over helping tens of millions of citizens.
The Democratic Party is obsessed with making Trump a one-term President. I found that behavior abhorrent when President Obama was in office. I find it equally abhorrent now.
But at least the Democrats have other priorities- restoring voting rights to felons and allowing anyone with a pulse the ability to sneak into the country as a 'refugee.'
4
@willt26 In making Trump a one term president is in the best interest of the country at this point in time.
He is a loose cannon with little to show in his "governance" and exhibits at best terrible leadership.
Obama had his issues, but, we never exhibited this type of behavior.
2
@willt26
Okay, seriously, give your head a shake. Never mind voting rights for convicted American citizens who have served or are serving their time. Trump is now considering pardons for military personnel convicted of murder for no good reason other than he can, so they don't have to serve their time. Stop pointing fingers at the Democrats and take a good, long, HONEST look at the man in the Oval office.
2
I don’t like the way Trump conducts himself, but in this case I have to side with him. The Democrats seem to think there to,e in politics is to continue to defame and slander a Trump. They do t have to do this there is enough true stuff to go around. Why don’t they spend some effort on legislation to move some of their ideas forward? Maybe they won’t make it through the Senate, but they can firmly stake out positions on healthcare finance, environment, the list goes on. At this rate, I fully expect Mr. Trump will be re-elected in 2020 and the Democrats will most likely loose the House.
4
@Thomas Smith You must have a short memory in the defamation and slander that Trump himself engaged in and fomented within the halls of Fox "News".
There is still much time for Trump to finally show us what his goal is, and, if he can no longer buy votes through socialist programs, you may be somewhat surprised.
2
The House Dems have passed many bills this session. They die in the Senate without ever reaching a vote because McConnell won’t allow them to come to the floor.
1
Well, it also gave Trump an easy out of funding a popular and much needed project that the Republican Senate would never pass. Also helped those same Repubs incumbents avoid explaining why they're against what the majority strongly supports.
6
With the help of his advisors Trump will realize his mistake and send up smoke signals indicating he’s ready to resume infrastructure talks. Here’s my idea of Pelosi’s reply:
"Regarding President Trump’s recent invitation to restart infrastructure talks, the same talks he rudely ended before they even started, after which he stomped out to a preplanned press Trump, Senator Schumer and I will no longer allow ourselves to be used as his political props.
"We decided to overlook the first incredibly rude behavior of Mr. Trump when he turned a meeting to discuss his gov’t shutdown into a TV commercial to announce he was proud of the shutdown and would be happy to “own it”. Of course we all know he folded and reopened the gov’t without precondition. However, stomping out of this last meeting without even sitting down or greeting us confirms the President sees Senator Schumer and I nothing more than stage props to be used at his convenience.
"However, in the interest of moving our country forward and for the sake of the American Senator Schumer and I will be happy to meet you in the House or Senate offices at a time that is mutually convenient."
7
@NYJohn That will set the grifter off of what rail he is still on.
Trump's blowup and walkout were 100% staged stunt. Yet another Trump distraction, a deflection while he unConstitutionally defies lawful Congressional subpoenas.
But Trump isn't at all interested in any actual building of infrastructure, despite proclaiming himself a 'master builder'. Trump's original "infrastructure plan" was to prime the spending with $200 Billion of government-borrowed money, while privatizing the other "Trillion Dollars". This was Trump's "$1 Trillion Dollar Infrastructure Plan" when he started. And of course that $200 Billion was to be borrowed... after Trump cut taxes by $1.5 Trillion for the very wealthy. So, presumably, the rich could re-invest their tax cut windfall in government bonds and get paid interest on the taxes they aren't paying in their first place. Everything Republicans do is designed to funnel money to the rich, to make the already wealthy even more wealthy.
Supposedly, the big meeting Trump threw his hissy-fit at, and then stormed out of into his pre-arranged Rose Garden 'live-rant performance art' event, was to figure out how to pay for the $2 Trillion "infrastructure plan" in it's latest iteration. As if! There was -never- any intention of figuring out how to pay for it - the only thing Republicans will want to agree with on that front is raising taxes that hit working people the hardest. Funny thing is, we could pay for a really nice 'infrastructure plan' - just by canceling Trump's "Tax Reform".
19
@Jim Brokaw, never ever vote republican in any election anywhere in America ever again if You want the country to survive for your children and grandchildren !
1
Trump’s tantrums or not, the infrastructure bill was never going to pass, We have mile high budget deficit which is increasing every day with the tax cut that was passed last year. That bill was never going to get funded.
7
If it's true that Rudi (or Barr) re-tweeted that doctored video of Nancy, I think they can be disbarred (no pun intended), and I'd encourage state bar associations to consider it. There's no way in a million years that would be an innocent mistake, no way. I would be a scandalous attack on the House Leader and a spreading of forgery.
16
Wrong. A third "of the country" are not Trump cultists. Trump got about 63 million votes, less than 20% "of the country." Of those surely many are not close to being cultists. My guess is that 10-15 percent might be ardent supporters. Please, please stop using incorrect numbers when correct numbers are so easily available.
7
@Michael T Perhaps you should send an email or text to the good professor and tell us what his response is...
Professors do not cite fake statistics in my experience. I have found that Trump supporters are more prone to that practice-fake numbers-just like the inauguration crowd.
3
while we declaim the daily crises, the steady destruction of the Judicial, the destruction of the environment, the denigration of science, and now--the attempted destruction of the 3rd estate goes on apace ...major, extremely major damage is being done.
9
Today we found out that Trump already identified an inner circle campaign donor company to build the wall without any proper legal bidding process. Can one imagine the level of corruption he will inject a much larger infra structure bill. That even a better reason for delaying this project until he is out of office.
12
This is all fun and games until we have a real crisis. We don’t have a functioning federal government.
And the Republicans have figured out they can deficit spend when they are in power and force the Dems to clean it up when they are not, depressing the economy, getting them back in power just as the economy is repaired.
I’m ready to see the West Coast extract ourselves from this. North Dakota gets two senators, they would not have two zip codes in California. Three states get all the power in a national election, it’s nonsense, fit it or exit.
11
@Garret Clay
We'll take California.
Agreed Professor.
Were this any other President it would make sense for the American people.
But a two year delay in infrastructure rebuilding is a small price to pay to kick Trump out of office.
When the next recession inevitably hits, this will be the perfect stimulus to increase productivity and rapidly improve sustainability.
Trump’s feeble attempt at self-preservation will help fuel his demise.
3
This may indeed be a win for the Democrats, but it is without a doubt a loss for the American people who need a functional legislature to pass legislation that supports the general well-being of the country without regard to timing in the election cycle.
13
Actually, Pelosi let Trump out of a trap. The only way to pay for an infrastructure program is through some type of tax increase, e.g., fuel tax. That is an anathema to Republicans, and hearkens back to Bush's violation of the no new taxes pledge. Pelosi gave Trump an excuse to walk away.
3
I have a theory that Trump has invented an imaginary magic mirror, which he always sees when he is awake. It always faces him, but the only image it reflects back to him is him. The rest of the mirror is transparent, so that he sees the world but always with himself at its center.
I commend him for not becoming addicted to drugs, except for Diet Coke, but perhaps he, and the rest of the world would benefit from a legitimate prescription. He should be able to afford it, unlike a large percentage of the American public.
4
We should probably be relieved that Trump shot himself in the foot once again, and thereby will not be carrying through with his popular campaign promise to deal with infrastructure. Imagine what a Trump-GOP infrastructure bill would look like--way too costly with most of the federal taxpayer dollars going to Trump and the GOP's big donors on the taxpayer dole for government handouts. Welfare Kings.
Meanwhile, I agree with those who say the Democratic House should show they can do 2 things at once and (1) pursue Trump's corruption and abuse of presidential power, while (2) drawing up the most exciting federal legislation for the middle class since the New Deal. Raise the cap on Social Security, expand Medicare, pass the most glorious infrastructure bill since the Eisenhower years, vote to implement Elizabeth Warren's safety checks for the big banks and financial industry, and expand the Affordable Care Act while curtailing prescription drug gouging.
21
Another reason why The Democrats should not be pushing to give Trump access to $2 or even $1 trillion in funding for infrastructure is that he will use it as his personal political slush fund - steering money to supporters and away from those he views as enemies. How else do you interpret the administration's cancellation of funding for the NY-NJ Gateway Tunnel across Hudson, or the bullet train in California, or trying to cancel disaster aid to Puerto Rico while rushing it to Texas and Florida, and now buying farmers' votes with aid to compensate for his tariff war? He has shown he will divert funding from military housing, defense, TSA, cybersecurity all to achieve his own objective, ie. building a border wall. The only way to allow him an infrastructure fund is to put steel strings on it - though he shows he could care less about following law or Congress' will.
14
The infrastructure is past due for repair and upgrading. We have seen failures that have cost lives, and more will occur. Even if it makes Trump look good, these projects need to be started as soon as possible.
3
I am in concord of mind with Dr. Krugman. Trump's behavior is a gift to the Democrats.
However, one caveat. The Russians, Chinese and other malefactors also observe his behavior.
Thus, Trump is very vulnerable to being snookered on all fronts.
10
While infrastructure is a maintenance issue that must be addressed, whether it is owned by all or just a lucky few is not agreed by Republicans. The old fashioned Lincoln style Republicans support infrastructure that is open to all because it helps promote business and commerce. The new anti-government Republicans want to privatize everything to eliminate any public involvement, at all. But privatizing infrastructure ends up costing the public more money than just using and repaying private financing. The public ends up providing profitable incomes for the private owners of the infrastructure, forever.
9
Isn't the good professor here putting party over country?
To wit, building, repairing, and improving our aging infrastructure is a good idea on many levels. But if we did, it would make Trump look good. We Dems don't want that, so we are glad that he childishly put the kebosh on it. It's a political victory for Democrats, but a defeat for America and Americans.
So are we now to enjoy the political champagne Dr. K offers? It seems a Pyrrhic victory.
4
Good point!
The nation's most pressing need is maintenance, filling potholes and shoring up bridges. Republicans are interested in advancing private/public schemes to build toll roads. What compromise is possible beyond private/public schemes to build toll detours around impassible potholes and collapsed bridges?
Trump is uniquely unqualified at infrastructure. His building projects have typically ended in bankruptcy.
11
Infrastructure is important and if Pelosi agreed, the meeting might have had some success. But what did she do? She waits until minutes before the meeting, knowing there would be a bunch of reporters around, calls them and spouts a bunch of accusations at Trump such as claiming he is covering up something. What does Mr. Krugman think Trump should have done. Maybe Something like, "Hi Nan. It's so nice you dropped by. Would you like some Tea? " She could not care less about infrastructure. The only thing she is interested is political power and keeping Trump off the ballot. She knows they can’t beat him. Maybe if Mr. Krugman thinks infrastructure now is important, he could call up Nan and tell her to go back, mend fences, and get back to the nation's business. They accomplished nothing the first two years except talking about collusion and smiling that Mueller would nail Trump. That smile evaporated when the report came out. Obama put the final nail in that coffin when he said the reason Clinton loss was because she ran a soulless campaign. So now thy try cover up. They want his tax return from before he was even running. They don't need them but to mine for mistakes. Trump sends his tax returns to the same place we do and it is the I.R.S. They are the ones that review everything and they don't carry a political agenda to the table. Pelosi has no interest in legislating for the nation. So, don't expect anything from the democrats except committee meeting.
3
@Ron
A majority of the voters are interested in keeping Trump off the ballot. Or as good, beating him after he's on it. And Pelosi is supposedly one of them. So what else is new?
It seems a bit amnesiac to claim that Democrats accomplished nothing for the first two years, since as everyone with a memory remembers, they had no power.
Mueller's report didn't nail Trump, but its references to possible obstruction of justice opened the door for the Democrats to nail him.
The smugness of Republicans crowing over the Mueller report, from the swamp denizens in the government to the lowest red-state bigot, will disappear when Trump is indicted.
20
@Ron
Trump is covering up and he is obstructing Congress from accomplishing oversight and it is a big deal. In addition, Trump knows well that he is covering up and has been covering up his entire life. That could hardly have caused him enough grief to walk out of that meeting. Something else made him want to avoid that meeting, and it was probably about funding so much infrastructure in a way that Republicans and Democrats would support it.
9
Your conclusions are self-serving and not supported by facts. Trump’s support in PA, WI and MI is steadily decreasing and he only won those states by less than a percentage point in 2016. Plus, I think Bernie’s supporters learned their lessons from last time when choosing to stay home or voting for Stein or Johnson. And, the recent attack on women’s reproductive rights has lit a fire under nearly every woman in America. To say that Trump cannot be defeated, and that Pelosi accepts this as true, is nothing short of ridiculous.
Even more revealing than your thoughts on Trump’s easy slide into victory, is your erroneous belief that the Mueller report failed to adequately provide proof of Trump’s numerous criminal acts to interfere with Mueller’s investigation, also known as “obstructing justice.” If you had read the report as I have, you’d know that even the redacted report is enough to have indicted him. It’s only because of a legal opinion by the Office of Legal Counsel at the DOJ, stating that “a sitting President cannot be indicted...” that Mueller did not indict Trump. But, he will certainly be indicted in 2021 when he is no longer President.
Also, there are currently 29 on-going investigations into Trump, his entities and his family. They are spread out among and between various federal and state prosecutors and Congress. To ignore all of them or pretending they are irrelevant, while believing that Trump will be victorious in all of them is foolhardy...and wrong.
2
Getting things done for the good of the nation shouldn't be viewed as a "political trap." The American people shouldn't be held hostage by either side to score political points. We Democrats all hated it when the GOP did that with Obamacare. I dislike Trump as much as anyone, but it just makes good sense to work with him on a few issues, and infrastructure is one of them.
7
Except that he is unwilling to move forward on infrastructure or any kind of bipartisan legislative policy, as he stated in the Rose Garden on Wednesday. His ultimatum was simple and direct: he won’t work with the Dems on anything until they cease their investigations of him. Which they will never agree to in a million years.
And, if Trump is serious, then we are looking at another government shutdown when the budget for 2020 is not approved later this Fall. The idea that Congress cannot legislate AND investigate is false. A simple review of the legislation passed by Congress when Clinton was impeached verifies that Congress can walk and chew gum simultaneously. And, the House has passed a lot more legislation than many realize because McConnell refuses to let the Senate vote on most of it.
2
But the stable genius is demanding a free pass out of jail (stop all investigations), before he will agree to discuss infrastructure!
If Muller report actually said that there was no collusion and no obstruction of justice, it would have been made public in a jiffy.
So stable genius is doing more obstruction by covering up. Remember, Nixon was charged for obstruction of justice for lot less.
2
@Freonpsandoz
Trump has no intention of following through on an infrastructure plan, and Democrats would be fools to trust him.
I would thin everyone, including you, would have learned that by now.
With this incident, the President continues to learn the hard way that his success depends upon playing well with his peers and sharing his Graham Crackers and milk. When he storms away from the negotiating table in a pout and refuses to do the country's business, he not only hurts Americans who would be well-served by the jobs an infrastructure bill would create, but he hurts the electoral prospects of Republican Senators who are up for re-election and desperately need to accomplish SOMETHING they can take to their constituencies. Perhaps, someone should remind the president that if the Republicans lose control of the Senate in 2020, even if he wins re-election, he will still be out of a job.
2
like almost everything about President Trump, his snit at the Democrats who came to discuss infrastructure has the acrid reek of phony wafting around it. his performance was designed around two things: to capitalize on his tough, angry, and generally antisocial appeal that mirrors the attitude of his core supporters, and to get Congressional Republicans off the hook in the unlikely event some actual infrastructure spending might be called for. it was all an act, except for the part about being mean and unhinged, which is the Trump baseline. Trump's core supporters want no part of anything involving Democrats, which is synonymous to them with non-white freeloaders, and the base also fully supports the notion that Trump should refuse to do anything with House Democrats because they are trying to undermine him and are mainly tax and spend Communists anyway, and that Trump should be permitted to rule by fiat, always favoring his supporters and punishing everyone else. the whole thing was a play to the cheap seats in the rural and rustbelt Trump districts.
2
The trouble is that, no matter how much we might want Trump out of office—and I yield to no one on that score—investment in infrastructure on a huge scale is not just desirable, but essential for the nation. So it would have been better if the president were willing to make a deal, even if that gave him a political victory.
1
Since Chairman Nadler is unable to stand up under pressure and lacks the courage to impeach Trump, he should resign and allow AOC to lead House Democrats.
6
You may find it easier to achieve those progressive goals we hear so much about if you take the time to find out who does what in the House of Representatives.
11
@Common Ground: Impeaching Trump now, only to be exonerated by the Senate and without having his tax returns and corruption made public, will only get him four more years, probably with a Republican controlled House and Senate again. Such fun!
2
The logic of Paul Krugman’s political analysis, that democrats shouldn’t give Trump the “win” of passing an infrastructure bill, suggests that it is the job of each party to oppose the other, regardless of what is actually in the best interest of their constituents and the country.
To the contrary, I think the job of our elected officials is bipartisan compromise and an ability to move beyond this sort of partisan political calculus.
2
Mark, I'm sure you're a nice guy, but you have no future in the blood sport of American politics.
There may be another upside in Trump's refusal to spend on infrastructure. Most infrastructure is local in nature, occasionally crossing a state line or two. If it becomes apparent that the federal government is not coming to the rescue, might states finally decide to act on their own, raising their own money to do their own projects?
Which will likely be better than any Republican infrastructure plan, which would turn out to be just another way to pour blue state money into red states.
3
I pay my federal taxes every year so the the national government can actually do something. They don't get off the hook that easily!
5
I would leave that partisan attitude expressed by Paul Krugman today to Republicans. That’s what they did to Obama for 8 years and the country suffered and is suffering. And in the end Obama was reelected. Country before party please.
7
Last time I looked Obama passed to the media’s universal acclaim almost trillion dollars worth, shovel ready projects waiting, infrastructure bill. Our infrastructure must still be all gleaming, after all it was only 9 and half years ago.
2
Why isn’t there a website from US DOT that accounts for that trillion $? If all that money appropriated by Congress, there has to be some accounting of it!
When I first came to the US (from Australia) in 1975 I was amazed by the highways. Then again in 1983 I was amazed by United’s terminal at O’Hare. Now I live here and I see the crumbling highways and the United terminal exactly as it was in 1983, and I travel overseas and am amazed by what I see.
While China may be an economic threat, we are are now a bigger threat to ourselves if we cannot modernize.
38
Trump supporters don't watch CNN or MSNBC and they don't read the Times or Post. What the Democrats need is to fund a whole lot of electronic billboards in Trump/Republican areas, showing, in a repeat rotation:
Each bill passed by the House Democrats, with
an explanation of what it would do for everyone;
a tally of Republic support votes; and then the
action taken by the Senate - McConnell's
"dead on arrival," the refusal to bring it up for
a vote; the votes of Republicans against
the bill; or, in the rare circumstance,
if the bill passed both houses, the veto by
Trump.
Right now the rotation would include some 100 bills. Republicans do drive, they would in some circumstances almost be forced to read the billboards. It's one of the few ways to communicate with stalwart Republicans and Trumpistas.
34
Pelosi and Schumer are no fools and they have been in politics for a long time. Therefore I am certain that behind closed doors they are, in fact, giving each other a high five and saying something like "I CAN NOT believe that he did that, that he is that dumb.. unbelievable, completely unbelievable.
7
Here's a thought... What if it was a strategy but a strategy by Pelosi and Schumer? In other words, what if they said, there's no way this lunatic will keep it together long enough to get a bi-partisan deal done so let's go to the White House in an 'act of good faith' and sooner or later he'll burn the thing down? And then, we can shrug our shoulders and say, "see, it's impossible to work with him because he's bonkers." If you ask me, it's Pelosi and Schumer who laid the trap.
3
@Bruce: Too convoluted. Both Democrats and Trump would have looked good in passing a big infrastructure bill, but for Trump “winning” is the other party losing.
3
You're out of your mind if you think this works for the Republicans.
4
so are Dems joining the Party of No in contributing to the destruction of the country for partisan gain?
1
@Linda
In order for the country to even begin to gain anything, the Republican Party has to be driven from power.
7
@Linda: No, Trump stormed out after 3 minutes, remember?
1
We’re he not president, he’d never be granted security clearance.
10
Absolutely right. Thank God for Trump!
@Penchant Yes, I will thank God when Trump is gone.
1
Trump said Congress can’t gp down 2 tracks at the same time: investigate or legislate.
But why should the House even bother trying to legislate something that would not get passed by the Senate, not to mention needing Trump’s signature. There would be nothing worthwhile that can’t be done in the first 100 days of 2021.
So, I agree with Trump — you can’t do both, so just investigate.
And get the whole truth out. All of it — the money-laundering, Jared’s secret payments to Russian oligarchs, Trump’s knowledge about Khashoggi.
The 2020 results have to be overwhelming — Pelosi is correct, Trump may not concede if the vote is close: imagine the Florida 2000 hanging chad debacle in P.A., MI, WI, OH. And there will be voter suppression too.
And the best way to make sure the 2020 results are overwhelming is to investigate everything now, and get the whole truth out.
Mueller is just the beginning. Congress has more investigative power than Mueller. And Mueller proved obstruction — but there was so much obstruction, Trump was able to cover-up his treason.
So now, the House must pick-up where Mueller left off, and break through Tump’s obstruction to get to his treason.
18
Keep the greasy burgers, fries, onion rings and gooey deserts flowing! More, more!
7
@Jim Steinberg I see what you are doing here. Carry on.
Pelosi made her cover up speech right before the meeting with expected results. What happens now? Accusations of cover up that lead nowhere where and we forget about infrastructure improvements indefinitely? Or do we throw in the towel and forget about having an effective government. Both parties don't give a damn about the American people.
Pelosi should just quit. She might be the only person holding this country together right now. Her problem is her own party exemplified by the fools trying to win the Democratic party nomination and the new wave congressman who think impeachment now is going to change anything. Did you see her face when this latest round with Iran started? Quit. Do a tell all book on the Democratic party and why they're doomed to fail.
It's terrible that Krugman characterizes what could be a win for the country as a ''trap.'' Someone has to get this logjam moving - why not something like infrastructure? If every opportunity to work together, even one with the merits Krugman outlined, is viewed as a ''trap,'' where does that leave us?
2
Dr Krugman is a great economist but in our our shared history Joseph told the pharaoh about lean years and fat years. Of course the Israelites were never in Egypt and God never came to the rescue but the wise economists of now are the same wise economists of then and what most call myth and legend is the way we pass down human history.
I really don't know what to say to our brothers who bear their bible as they would a dull sword and have little if any understanding of history.
The Talmud understood and told us a man's wealth is measured by the size of his library and these days who needs a library when you are plugged in 24/7 to the sound and fury signifying nothing.
There are always understandings to be gained and always adaptioning to the reality of the current nanosecond to be done. There is a time for every season under heaven. Except of course if you are the pharaoh and your gut is smarter than Joseph or your tribe is the GOP and the calendar is always 1964.In 1992 Fukuyama told us we got it right and we were at the end of history.
What is it that conservatives understand that blinds them to "The times they are a'changin."
2
THe GOP Infrastructure proposals sound like any of their other programs promoting grifter greed that lets selected individuals enrich themselves by getting their hands on the tax money the rest of us pay.
15
Why aren’t Americans demanding infrastructure spending? Not only would jobs be created, it would showcase a progressive, modern society and country. I would want to see my tax dollars improve transit, roads, bridges etc. Wasn’t that what Trump’s campaign was all about, making America great again?
10
And, of course, the Dems do good in stopping the Republicans in his promotion of privatization of bridges and roads under the guise of "hybrid" investment in infrastructure, otherwise, like in Egypt after the seven starving cows, everything will belong to the companies, like in Egypt to the Pharaoh.
7
All great points. However, when trump reverses himself because he realizes he needs the infrastructure program, Pelosi and Schumer will need to have a ready response. Here's hoping that trump has made such a mess of it that they will be able to take the high ground and actually get a bill that enough Republicans will support to get it passed.
2
In two years I expect to see a resolution to this impasse. Be careful what you wish for.
1
Overlooked has been Nancy Pelosi's reminder to Trump of previous presidents' accomplishments in this field--Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt and Eisenhower. I suppose she did not wish to mention FDR because it would be, to quote Hamlet, as comparing Hyperion to a Satyr.
2
Thanks, Paul Krugman for the great article! Yes, even those of us who are “regular” people have observed that Donald is deranged, incoherent and a chronic liar. Majority of Americans are disgusted.
One day, his Trumpistas, his supporters will realize he has perpetrated the BIGGEST CON ever on America!
11
@Mari
no they won't..they will never get it..they'll blame the democrats or satan (the end times, ya know)
I want people to know that Trump's temper tantrum is a bold and unscrupulous Democratic lie. And there unimpeachable witness to prove it. To wit:
Witness 1. A person who is know for her integrity. Her courage in the face of losing her job. A person who has always told the truth even when hostile journalists have challenged her.
A person who will stand in the history of the White House as the most honorable press secretary: None other than Sarah Hackabee Sanders.
Witness 2. A woman of impeccable adherence to truth. A person who has fought against the plague of alternate facts.
A spokesperson who has never tried to soften the harsh reality of facts and has always presented her employer in truthful and unadorned manner, Kellyanne Conway
The testimony of these respected witnesses could be, if it were remotely necessary, be supported by other indisputably neutral and disinterested individuals like Ben Carson, William Barr, Mike Pence ready to testify to the calm genius of their boss.
This lie will undoubtedly be followed by the diffusion of manipulated videos of one's opponent.
9
I giggled. Good one....Thanks
7
@Frank Casa
Such satire is way too easy, but thanks for posting it.
1
"Mere airhead puppets." would have been more accurate.
We can count on trump to hang himself every time.
2
I thought that was the schema. The Machine Democrats would see this country, and it's people, fail to prevent Trump having any part of its success.
2
Investing in infrastructure is a very good idea. It is an idea that will cost a lot of money. Cooperation between Democrats and Republicans on infrastructure would mean agreeing on where to get the money.
Dead end.
5
Trump's walkout was indeed a stratagem, perhaps not very clever, but a stratagem nonetheless.
250
@Lawrence Zajac
Oh no, his fit of pique was completely unplanned and spontaneous, hence the assembled reporters in front of a lectern with a sign reading 'No collusion, No obstruction' and the prepared notes that Trump read from expressing his outrage at being accused minutes before of a conducting cover up.
74
@Penguin - a very nicely pre-printed sign. One of many, supposedly, that have been around the West Wing for weeks or months and so were handy. Baloney! Props for a stage set, for a piece of... performance art, call it to be printable, by Trump. Staged, phony, and so transparent except on Fox "News", where I'm sure it is used to show just how persecuted Trump is.
60
@Lawrence Zajac
Perhaps the stratagem does not appeal to you, and it does not appeal to me. But it appeals tremendously to tens of millions of Republicans who love Trump's tantrums.
10
The Republican Party and 45 consistently and persistently resort to their typical go to fall back position to deflect and distract from political humiliation through the prearranged 11th hour shift the focus, blame Democrats, and portray the hapless victim. The GOP and 45 have no genuine interest in fostering and promoting infrastructure. The hard cold grime political reality confirms that majority leader McConnell steadfastly refuses to put any measure approved by the Democratically controlled House, with the blessing of Speaker Nancy Pelosi, on the Senate floor. This demonstrable display of immaturity and resentment is shared by Republican stalwarts bitterly resentful of a highly intelligent, compassionate, hard working, shrewd political operative, who happens to be the most powerful female in America. 45 and the Republican Party loath and despise the very thought of Pelosi's far ranging power and influence. Implicit in this underlying misogynistic, paternalistic, and seething resentment is the dog whistle of anti immigrant fear, the paranoiac revulsion exhibited by 45 and his coterie, directed towards a woman of Italian heritage. Hard working and self confident, 45's blood pressure jumps when confronted with this reality. Pelosi's political experience is shared by the late NY governor Mario Cuomo, whose elegant address at the 1984 Democratic touted multiculturalism. 45 and the GOP need to mature and work with racial and ethnic minorities, including Nancy. Race matters.
3
There was never any chance Trump would agree to an infrastructure deal tat raised taxes progressively. Republicans, the party of fiscal irresponsibility, would just put it on the deficit, but not Pelosi.
2
The main problem with Mr. Trump regarding the Democrats' dealings with him is that, although his tantrums appear ridiculous and unhinged, they still require a reaction or response from those who wish to work with him in establishing policy--and that sometimes makes the Democrats appear to be reactionary--Trump can come off as seemingly the one who's in control of the situation.
And, let's not forget too that the supposed impromptu walk-out after only a 3-minute "meeting" with Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Schumer was then followed by a press briefing replete with preprinted stage props that were obviously planned for in advance.
The president apparently used the Democratic leadership as a prop for his reality show as well. The trouble is, in the meantime, our much-needed infrastructure (and many other national priorities) remains unattended to.
5
There are probably a lot of useful infrastructure projects, even if one (quite reasonably) restricted such funds to simply repairing and updating the most frail and highest marginal value of what already exists.
The problem is Trump would likely only agree to spend money that can be handed to his cronies, and he would only choose projects with 2020 (and little else) in mind. The investments would happen only in reddish or swing states that he won, and would be made to cause a minimum of disruption in the short term - they will be to the least used roads and bridges or the ones with the least inconvenient alternate route. The work will thus provide the least value to the public while maximizing the local public spending in the long run -after Trump is gone, someone will have to make the repairs to the most critical infrastructure that Trump avoided fixing.
Trump simply cannot be trusted to let engineers rank the repairs and other investments on a cost-benefit analysis, so there is no reason to, pardon the pun, go down this road with him in the White House.
5
Funny how things work out, eh?
Nancy Pelosi's prayers were working for the nation, I would say. Not so much for Trump.
3
Well, after this morning's display of Trump foaming and whining at the mouth at Ms. Pelosi, you have to wonder at what point will the Trump base see a weak man who can't figure out how to deal with a strong woman. His puerile diatribe showed his frailty. I've seen better put downs from an 8th grader in middle school.
12
Ms Pelosi should have respond to Trump's bullying and bellowing by focusing on the losers in this food fight - the American people, the infrastructure users and builders. The Democrats, en masse, were otherwise dumb. They must build into any proposal the foundation of the radically changed infrastructure systems needed to achieve zero carbon emissions rapidly. If the American people are too ignorant, and too uncaring, to understand this, then we are history, anyway. Politics is the process of governmental decision-making, not a food fight (aka chaotic collective behavior).
1
When I first heard the Democrats were going to do an infrastructure deal with Trump I was dumbfounded at their stupidity. Giving Trump a huge campaign gift like infrastructure would have all but cemented his re-election. But now, the village idiot Trump just handed the Democrats a huge, immeasurable gift. What an absolute loser. Thank you Mr. Trump.
6
Thank you for so clearly explaining the undeniable current state of affairs. Indeed one-third of the country appears to be factually immune, responding more like cult-members than reasoning adults. And there is no solution, other than to out-vote and out-reproduce them.
6
Something else to bear in mind: had Trump gotten a hold of one trillion or two trillion, he would make every effort to dump every penny of it into the states he won in 2016.
3
A “Trump infrastructure plan” would be likely to turn out about as well as every other grandiose scheme that Trump has concocted over the years: a massive, abysmal, mega-money failure - with everyone but Trump paying the price.
No thanks. Don’t even think about it.
8
But where is Krugman"s Economics if Trump's version of what went on in that meeting is more accurate than Nancy's? I know this is an opinion piece, but do we have to go by hoping and praying all the time? The Economics in the situation works for the Administration just as Krugman hopes and prays for the Resistance.
1
@jcricket the chances of Trump’s version of any event being correct, and true, are about one in ten thousand. And it doesn’t take a stable genius to understand where that number came from.
9
Possibly I'm missing the point, yes Trump continues to be himself, no different than before he took the oath of office. But my point is Dems are losing and wasting time to show America how badly our president really is. We talk about now isn't right, it must be later to impeach him, we talk about his financial dealings are suspect, we talk about his defying providing tax returns to Congress, we talk about his stretching the meaning of national security as justification for not allowing Congress to be part of government, and it goes on and it goes on and on. I am sick of it, and am getting more remorse every day with the Dems passing up opportunity after opportunity in preventing Trump from debasing America's government. No longer is writing about it enough, we have done that going on three years now. Haven't we? It is similiar to the British with Brexit....................all talk and no show. And come 2020 it is going to another sad election.
3
Actually,Democrats have passed about a hundred bills that have gone on to the Senate and been trashed by McConnell.
Democrats will hold Donald accountable wait for it.
10
@Mari
sending bills to the Senate is like saying I entered the five mile marathon race and knew I couldn't win since my right leg was amputated, but I was there, I entered the race, I just didn't do anything that resulted in me winning. I want Trump out, and it will not happen if the Dems don't start winning.
@Me Too: So, wise one, pray tell us what the House Democrats should do to make McConnell put up their bills to the vote in the Senate?
4
It seems clear, from the opening paragraphs of his article, that Mr Krugman is a victim of the Trump Derangement Syndrome.
It seems clear from the second part of his article, that Mr Krugman believes Democrats should NEVER do anything Trump wants (or says he wants) to do--perhaps because if they did, it would emasculate the theory that Trump is deranged.
Trump is not deranged; rather, he's found and adopted a strategy that panders to the mob, and brings the mob out to the polls to vote for him and his ilk. The tantrums are mere tactics within that strategy.
1
This is a great line:
"And I don’t just mean that they should be grateful to see Trump displaying his unfitness for office, which has long been clear to close observers, in such a dramatically unhinged way that only cultists can fail to see it."
And this one:
"And the attempt to portray Pelosi as out of control is so ludicrous that only totally deluded people – i.e., around a third of the country – could possibly believe it"
It seems to me that Krugman is communicating that he believes about a third of the country are Trump Cultists. I agree.
468
@Arthur Minas
" About a third of the country are Trump Cultists." You, me, and the Good Professor agree on this.
Professor Krugman says " …..Trump displays his unfitness for office, which has long been clear to close observers." Actually you don't need to be a close observer. It is clear to anyone who is not willfully bind or a trump cultist.
Best wishes.
90
@Arthur Minas,
My only disagreement is that I think the number of Trump cultists is closer to 40% than one-third.
24
@Nicholas Rush Ouch!
1
I wouldn't say that this was necessarily a "trap" since it would be for the good of the country as a whole and there's more than enough to fry Trump to death on regardless of any infrastructure deal. But Trump, as we well know, if his own worst enemy. He always manages to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory. The pundits who in 2015 and 2016 wrote that "Character is destiny" aptly applies to Trump were 100% spot on. What we're seeing in slo-mo now unfolding on the international stage before the eyes of the entire world is a man self-destructing himself, bit by bit.
6
Absolutely!
2
The Republicans should have spent the money fixing stuff in 2009, 2010, etc. when it would have put people to work.
2
Yes, Republicans should have, but remember they want to do anything that would have helped Obama. McConnell was dead set on derailing anything Obama wanted.
1
TRUMP IS ACTING AS HE USUALLY DOES! Pouts, Screams, probably throws things. FOX produced the video that he put on the internet correctly, but wrong headed. At least! Rudy his mouth piece could not get it right, not too surprising. Said before NY BAR, Should DIS BAR, and pack him back to NYC, Sorry folks maybe not NYC!
1
So it's better to have gridlock and failure than for Trump to get credit for anything positive? Got it.
4
Obviously Pelosi doesn’t think so or she would not have tried to-pass an infrastructure bill to begin with. Krugman is pointing out that it’s an ill wind that blows nobody any good.
Who’s this Trump guy everyone is referencing.? Sounds like he has some pretty serious mental problems. If he really is the President of the US it sounds as if he should be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors.
4
"...his unfitness for office, which has long been clear to close observers,...."
Even a casual observer should find that quite clear after listening to Trump speak for five minutes on any topic.
4
Maybe Pelosi finally found out a strategy for Trump. Keep needling him until at a news conference he starts tearing off his clothes and holding his breath. That might be the only thing that would turn Trumps adoring fans against him. "I knew he was crazy but not that crazy".
3
Trump didn't storm out. His people had prearranged the "performance piece" Trump acted out. He had no intention of staying, meeting, discussing, or deciding anything.
He's a pathetic showman that is embarrassing us all.
7
Paul, if you would ONLY run for President - I know you'd hate the job but the country could sure use you.
I wonder what percentage of viewers/readers noticed the notes and pre-made sign Trump had on hand.
This wasn't a 'tantrum', but the most blatant piece of Rat-Segretti'ing seen in a long time.(those for whom Nixon is history, not something lived through, can search Donald Segretti and what he called his little dirty tricks, or guess the 4-letter word).
I just wonder, considering the impact of visual media, how many will notice the careful preparation Trump made to call a meeting, while his chief flack called a simultaneous press availability in the garden just outside where the meeting was taking place.
Trump stormed in, made his announcement to Pelosi and Schumer, then left to do his Irate Number.
Now the Time's has just shown the Segrettiwork taken to the next level - the editing of Pelosi's response to make it seem she was drunk or a stroke victim.
Dirty tricks galore. Unbelievable dirty tricks galore.
Run for president, PLEASE - I bet almost every declared Democrat will clear a path for a Nobel Prize-winning economist with a heart.
3
As much as Trump's handlers try to stop Trump from being Trump, sometimes they just can't stop the volcano. They can spin all they want, but they can't physically keep him in a room. Most of the GOP doesn't care about the childishness, though. As false videos of Pelosi circle the net today, we are reminded of the spin cycle of the Right. Forty-five percent of America lives in a world of zero facts.
4
Trump's tantrum is the political equivalent of cutting off your nose to spite your face.
3
I was under the impression Republicans had the first 2 years of Trump to write a budget that repaired our crumbling infrastructure and they sat on their hands. Why is Trump blaming dems? He should blame Mitch McConnell because we all know Mitch crushed this idea before anyone speak it out loud. Mitch McConnell is the real leader of our so called democracy and he relishes his role as the true string puller who takes no blame. The buck stops at Mitch and anyone who is not gulping the Fox coolaid knows this. Worst part - Mitch has no term limit to his rule. I loath Mitch with every cell in my body.
7
I'm sorry, but this far in, all exasperation with Trump's behavior, from the left, means less and less and less. With each new display of crass, juvenal behavior by Trump, his angry, juvenal base cheers ever harder. The right doesn't care because he is over delivering with unparalleled, conservative judge appointments that have begun to tip the R v W scales (among other things), he has delivered insane tax breaks to the uber-wealthy and the corporate hegemony, he has re-invigorated the shameful idea that the United States is a white, heterosexual, Christian nation that simply "tolerates" others. He bullies our "soft" allies and bros-down with dictators, making all macho, gun-toting dudes flex with pleasure... need I go on?
Our only hope of not having 5 1/2 more years of Trump is to somehow get the massive amounts of diverse, under-paid, under-educated people in this country to believe in the power of their vote. And the left's answer is "Joe Biden?" We are in serious trouble.
1
You have somehow mixed up a First Century Roman poet/ satirist Juvenal with the juvenile behavior of Trump. Or did you do that on purpose to get a laugh?
2
@Mark F I wish I was that clever (I have a Juvenal book on my library shelf... never cracked it). Just a typo.
1
As I have always said, one man’s calm, stable genius is another man’s frothing, orange-tinted lunatic.
8
Republicans ignore infrastructure spending because the added debt would decrease the likelihood of getting the big numbers they plan for TaxGiveAway 2.0.
As for Trump, he's like a greased pig, impossible to grab - but he sure do squeal when cornered.
6
The author states that Infrastructure Weeks have been frequent. They have been numerous, but they are not frequent. This is why we look forward to them so much. They are rare and delicate, and always quickly implode. Much fun was had by all, during Infrastructure Weeks. They were the highlights of the Trump Administration.
3
Alas, It's likely the Pelosi/Dem strategy will ensure another Trump win.
The polls were way off in 2016 and they are way off again.
Despite all the flack thrown by the main stream press, Trump's rallies are still huge. ;)
Conservatives do not talk to pollsters. They are very private people.
1
1. The polls weren’t really off in 2016. Might wanna learn what “margin of error,” means.
2. Gosh, you somehow forgot 2018. When the polls were as dead on as could be.
3. Are you guys STILL obsessing over the crowd size at trump’s inaugural? Let it go, okay?
8
In the comments section to every one of Paul Krugman's columns over the past year or more (including today's), at least one Trump supporter says something along the following lines:
"Since Krugmen [sic] has been so spectacularly wrong in his predictions about the Trump recession, why should we believe anything he says?"
I asked several of these commenters to provide evidence of his errors, and so far, nobody has.
I've searched for his recession predictions back to 2016, and have not found anything more specific than "it will happen some time during Trump's presidency."
If my search is correct, that means Krugmen [sic] has not been proven wrong yet.
Trump supporters, do you have any evidence to the contrary?
8
@don salmon
While you're working on that one, here's two more:
1. Provide direct cause and effect evidence, derived from valid (ie not Faux-News or Hate-Radio) sources that Trump's economic initiatives have led to an improved economy or jobs picture (the tax cut and deregulation don't count since any Republican president with both houses of Congress). Be sure to include graphic evidence of the dramatic uptick in the numbers following the end of the Obama administration.
2. Given that you believe that Mueller's report concluded "TOTAL EXONERATION" what do you specifically refute from the statement of the 900+ prosecutors who asserted that Mueller's report demonstrated irrefutable proof of illegal activity (obstruction of justice)?
6
I’m not, but I do. Right after 2016, Krugman predicted that the economy would come crashing. When it didn’t, and completely unlike any Trumpist, he said so, apologized for letting his politics get in the way of his analysis, and moved on.
Every time some Trumpist gets on the horn, they always yack about it. I figure Hannity told them to—and anyway, they think it hides the fact that they didn’t read the article or didn’t remotely understand it, as well as their complete lack of anything intelligent to say or countering facts to put on the table.
If you look, it’s all about maybe five or six things. Every. Single. Time. You can write their posts for them.
They’re not arguing or explaining: they’re chanting a religious creed.
3
@Robert
I saw that prediction. was there a time frame for it? I didn't see one. If you're correct, I'll definitely add that to my question.
Usually the Trump supporters say "all" of Krugman's predictions have been wrong. It's hard to know what they're referring to. If anybody has any specific examples, I'd be happy to add them to my list.
1
Professor Krugman, sir, your observations may give the Republicans an idea. And then they would pass a public financed infrastructure bill. The Democrats would be unhorsed so to speak.
@Gordon Silverman
The Republicans will never pass anything that requires that tax money be used to help the American people.
The only infrastructure bill they would ever pass would be one that privatizes everything about it and puts taxpayer money in the hands of the corporatocracy.
I think @gordon knows that. We need a snark alert I am afraid.
I'm 62.5 years old, a lifelong Democrat, and now a non-practicing attorney who was intricately involved in "Big Dig" litigation/arbitration/mediation for a number of years. I have such mixed emotions concerning infrastructure "spending", "bidding", etc. while understanding the "need" to fix/repair/replace our antiquated and failing infrastructure. My misgivings arise from the state of public construction throughout our nation. For example, the "Big Dig" took four times longer to complete at a cost eight times greater than the original, so-called, extensive plans and specs. called for. And as the late, lamented Robert Moses so aptly knew decades ago, every new road, parkway, highway invites more and more vehicles resulting in increased traffic jams and gridlock, as now witnessed by the all-day tie-ups entering and leaving Boston. Another example is the recent "reconstruction" of the Longfellow Bridge linking Cambridge to Boston. The original bridge was built in less than 18 months many decades ago. The reconstruction took close to 5.5 years. Simply put, these projects take so much longer and at such greater cost to complete than they did in decades past. Some would use the term "boondoggle" to describe the state of public construction. Others simply shrug and hope it ends sometime in the near to less distant future. As written, I'm a lifelong Democrat....I wake up every morning in disbelief as to the utter cowardice and complicity of the Republicans as to Trump. Just saying..
3
Right now, Trump is winning.
He can tie this up in the Courts interminably.
The House relies on the Justice Department for enforcement, except for Inherent Contempt, and Trump has succeeded in getting a crooked AG.
He's solidified his base to the point where they are unaffected by smoking-gun level evidence of illegal behavior.
Trump is a criminal with no capacity for shame, so he can't be controlled, except by force -- and there is precious little hope of applying it.
Pelosi's strategy is frustrating, but there is no workable alternative. It makes no sense to impeach and have him exonerated in the Senate. The only hope is to peel away enough Republican support to make impeachment inevitable.
I would like to hear stronger language, focusing on Trump's fundamental lack of knowledge of government. His vulnerability is that he can't concentrate well enough to master detail -- and not enough has been made of it.
Sadly, there's little reason to think that Trump's base will abandon him, which is why I began this post by saying he's winning.
6
This is the most Democrat thing ever - allowing Trump to fall on his face, because Democrats are simply incapable of taking any action. On par with hoping Mueller would save them; on par with Pelosi's inane "self-impeachment" remarks. Anything that prevents them from actually leading is always their preferred course of action.
Except pelosi has been kicking Trump’s tail all around the Beltway, the House has been passing legislation and running investigations like crazy, there’s a ton of legal cases against Trump out there, and voters just finished thouroughly adjusting Trump’s ears-to-tail distance.
Hearing footsteps, are you? You should be.
November 2020, you guys are gonna wake up with a crowd around ya.
4
Trump said, I'd be good at infrastructure. It's what I do," further cementing his place as loonier than Daffy Duck.
He actually thinks that renting his name to a hotel, running his father's racist apartment buildings into the ground, or driving a casino into bankruptcy is "building infrastructure."
This is probably all for the best, as he'd probably appoint a dim bulb like Ben Carson, or a thief like Jared to run the program. Carson would spend a rear redecorating his office, and Jared would find a way to wash our tax dollars through captive contractors and into his bank account.
7
Did anyone do a video of Trumps tantrum
Did anyone see Nancy ‘s behavior
A picture says it all
Maybe all meetings from now on be televised so we the people can see for ourselves
Can’t imagine Madam Speaker a “mess” or “ out of control”
Just a thought
D J
3
Writing off a third of the country — Trump supporters — as deluded is elitist, condescending, and politically stupid.
1
@Fred Davis there is no political stupidity in recognizing that there is not a single thing you could do or say to change someone’s mind. Or are you forgetting that Trump himself once said that he could shoot someone in the middle of 5th Avenue and his supporters wouldn’t care. And it was Trump himself who said he loved the uneducated. Stop beating up people who recognize the same thing that the very stable genius himself has; his supporters are, by and large, undereducated and irredeemable followers.
4
@Fred Davis: Sometimes the truth hurts...
1
@Fred Davis: Sometimes the truth hurts...
The Republicans, all Dixiecrat Right now, have been attacking Nancy Pelosi forever. She's a Democrat, comes from a Gay city, and worst of all, she's been right on just about everything, where they have always been wrong.
7
@loveman0 She is also a woman and they cannot tolerate strong women.
1
False reporting, unless you want (have) to believe the Dem narrative.
You know that it was a poorly staged bone spurs in chief moment when he storms out of the meeting, goes to the rose garden with previously prepared posters on the failure of congress to kow tow to him and delivers a moronic rant to the press. What a stupid, idiotic loser we have for president.
8
One thing that 45 ran on was infrastructure. I said to myself that I could get behind that.
Then 45 said some things about getting the private sector involved and that made me nervous. If anybody could screw this up it would be Him. Nothing happened.
Now that the Dems have put down his idea of big private sector involvement and we are moving forward I am more at ease.
Public control of public works is the way to go. Lots of private companies getting good government contracts hopefully will spread the wealth around without big corporations running away with most of the Money.
At least that is the way it should work in my view.
1
Sadly, Nancy and Chuck were always safe from ever actually having to implement an infrastructure deal.
Even if Trump were willing to go along, Mitch never would have been. Then Republican oligarchs would have started rattling the cages at Fox News State Television, and Trump would have run away again.
Until the next Infrastructure Week.
1
This is exactly why I despise Republican and the Oval Office Russian's policies:
"...they have proposed complex public-private partnerships that would in effect subsidize the privatization of public assets."
This is just more corporate welfare and government handouts to the rich!
2
While the column makes a lot of sense its final goodness - given that the country does need infrastructure rebuilding - presupposes the Democrats will capture the WH, the House and the Senate in 2020. Not an easy feat.
So, as the liar-in-chief who sleeps in the WH often says, we will see what happens.
Wow. Easy pickings.
That being said, while our infrastructure is dangerously antiquated and vulnerable to attacks from our enemies, we are also seeing our Constitutional infrastructure under vigorous attack from within.
This "win" is a lose lose for the people of this country and a very low bar for what the American people and our Democracy deserve from our leadership.
Impeach this man now.
Please read:
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/5/24/1860005/-The-best-argument-I-ve-heard-for-impeachment-so-far?utm_campaign=trending
1
"...which has long been clear to close observers, in such a dramatically unhinged way that only cultists can fail to see it. "
Two points:
1) One need not have been a "close" observer of Trump since he first announced for the presidency in 2015 that he is unhinged. There is nothing about his mental illness that requires close examination.
2) Trump cultists know he is unhinged -- they may be cultists, but most are not that stupid. An unhinged president is precisely what his supporters want, for a multitude of reasons depending on what they seek to gain from his presidency. In addition, a large percentage of his supporters are unhinged themselves (i.e., they suffer from some degree of mental illness) and see in Trump someone with whom they are sympatico.
2
This president hasn't got the brains that God gave grass. He can't even lie convincingly. His coverups have more holes than my granny's stockings. But enough of my praise I shouldn't embarrass a man who is so loath to praise himself. .
On the negative side are his self dealings using the nation's money, his many obstructions of Mueller's group and the congress, his secret dealings with Putin, his praise for despots, his wishes to try his opponents for treason and his attempt to provoke Iran (at Putin's suggestion ).
I know, I know any of us could go on and on but what's the point. I'm so frustrated I could rust.
4
Stop calling Trump incompetent, crazy and corrupt without pointing out exactly how you came to that conclusion. It is easy to besmirch anybody without concrete evidence. You seem to start every editorial like that even when it’s out of context.
Was Obama stupid for making bad economic and diplomatic blunders ? Was he dishonest for going back on his word regarding Israel? Is it ok to call him stupid and dishonest every time an article is written about him?
As far as the infrastructure is concerned, it got much worst during the Obama years. There was little money left for it after it was spent on social welfare and the extra food stamps given out by him. Let’s hope Trump can fix it
1
@Marika
If one tried to enumerate every lie and cruel decision by Trump every time one criticized him it would fill a library.
During Obama's administration the majority Republican Congress blocked everything the Democrats tried to do.
It's laughable to blame Obama spending on welfare and food stamps as the reason nothing was allocated for the infrastructure. The Trump-GOP tax bill has plunged the United States into its worst deficit in history by shoveling a trillion dollars to the very wealthy.
1
@Marika: No, Trump cannot fix it, because he is incompetent (ran 6 businesses into the ground), crazy (over 10k lies during his presidency, and counting), and corrupt (violating the emoluments clause, using his charitable foundation as his piggybank). To add, he’s a fraud (tax fraud, Trump university fraud).
Nancy Pelosi is brilliant!
5
Now we have a nickname for Trump: Donald "hissy-fit" Trump.
3
How is that a good thing that Trump failed to exhibit presidential behavior and to recognize the advantage of taking the initiative on infrastructure? We should not look at the parties as playing a game of chess (or rather backgammon), we should cheer for the advancement of progress and the common good, infrastructure being an important part of good politics. Are we so far down the rabbit hole of distrust, that we can only see traps and "smart" escapes instead of promoting what's good for the people, no matter how it's achieved?
1
Why is it that when the Republicans obstruct the legislative process, as happened during Obams's presidency, they are able to blame the Democrats for little being done by Congress and to win the 2016 election. Now when the Republicans under Trump continue to obstruct legislation, as with the infrastructure program, they are still able to blame Democrats? Now they control the government, especially the first two years when all of Congress was in their hands, still they seem to be able to blame their opposition for all their failings? Is Trump's showmanship so effective that the fantasy world he has created is so believable that he is not at all doubted?
2
What tantrum? The purpose of the meeting was to set up the spectacle of leaving it. It was an orchestrated play. Trump doesn't care about infrastructure. Like anything else of substance, he uses it as a pretext for his one man plays.
5
It's pretty sad to call a good infrastructure program a 'potential potential trap' for the Democrats because it would help Trump's image as a president who, with their help, has accomplished something.
Is this extremly cynical or am I missing something?
I'd love to get rid of Trump, but this seems like a feud at the expense of the population.
@Luciana
A Trump-sponsored infrastructure program would be a massive boondoggle, enriching private corporations at the expense of the population.
Trump is now en route to Japan where inexplicably he is revered almost as much as the French loved Jerry Lewis. What is behind this insane outcry to bestow the Nobel Peace Prize on our very stable genius? Who knows? But if Trump really wants to be the guest of honor and feted as the heroic asset he is, I would suggest a stopover in Moscow on his way back home.
1
Paul hits it squarely on the head. Do not get in the way of Individual 1 when he is emphasizing his incompetency, tendency to having temper tantrums and telling whoppers on television showing everyone the fraud that he is. The Democrats could not air or buy ads like this.
3
A deluded 33% of the population, a ubiquitous right-wing propaganda machine and a party of bad faith actors vs the USA I grew up in.
Looks like bad weather ahead...
3
The Dems escaped the trap of trump including his cockamamie wall in the infrastructure package. But, our country still needs over $2 trillion worth of infrastructure repairs.
It is insane for trump's Cabinet heads to claim he was calm at the blow-up meeting. But we need video proof do document their lying deception.
1
She’s played him several times and he’s now gotten to the name calling stage. It’s a function of how well she’s done, surprisingly actually, to show his shrill tempestuousness on the national stage. Trump, looking for a legislative win, has nothing to show for his efforts but doctored videos in some teen boy’s oneupmanship of his political nemesis. Pelosi is his new Hillary, but she’s not hobbled by a politically tawdry history. I expect more childish efforts to undermine her, but it seems that only the truly lost will fall for this. I wonder what those white women voters who supported him think these days....
2
"...Republicans in Congress have no interest in infrastructure spending." More to the point, PUTIN has no interest in seeing America becoming more modern and stronger still. It should be clear by now that Putin has Trump by the short hairs and has threatened to expose his treasonous behavior if Mafia Don does anything to improve America's standing in the world.
And because Trump has no intention of leaving the White House whether he wins or loses in 2020 (this is the real "coup" he's been talking about), Benedict Donald has no problem forgoing what would otherwise be a boon to his re-election campaign.
We saw a Captain Queeg type of meltdown on national TV . The only problem is that this is not the first time . Queeg lost his command of the Caine . I wonder what will it take for the Commander In Chief to lose his .
1
And, then, hopefully, Elizabeth or Bernie can take over?
2
"President of the United States" and "tantrum" should not ever appear in the same sentence. Our country has lost its sanity.
3
"Republicans in Congress have no interest in infrastructure spending. They see any form of public expenditure, no matter how justified in terms of narrow economics, as problematic because it may seem to legitimize a larger role for government in general."
The exception must be military spending. No expense spared there.
3
I love Krugman's work as he is one of the most insightful and accessible economists I have come across. The more I read about the Koch brothers, the more the Republican actions make sense--including Trump. The Koch brothers effectively high jacked the Republican party around 2011, and intend to change the constitution to meet their "financial freedom" needs. They are libertarians but have no problem utilizing cultural wars through government force to mobilize the right. I am guessing Kavanaugh was primed to overturn Roe vs. Wade and to continue to deregulate corporations due to their influence. Shouldn't we be discussing the Koch brothers influence in politics more in this political moment? There is so much emphasis on Trump, and less about the real power behind his presidency.
5
It is difficult to take economic advice from and economist who is always wrong. Remember Paul's dire predictions of an economic collapse if Trump won the election?
1
@Dan M
Please document all the occasions when Krugman was "always wrong."
Your one example Krugman admitted to and explained.
I appreciate Paul Krugman's description of how much a large infrastructure plan will benefit America. I wish he would throw in an Interstate energy transmission system, similar to the Interstate Freeways. But, I will disagree with the key sentiment, at the center of his piece. Democratic politicians should concentrate on working for the good of the American people and not be thankful that Donald Trump has bumbled his way out of one very positive plan he seemed prepared to endorse.
1
@Michael: Nothing worthwhile will happen as long as the drip from Kentucky is Senate Majority Leader.
2
"But, you may argue, the U.S. economy isn’t depressed right now. Indeed it isn’t; but it’s more fragile than many realize."
Maybe where you sit, Dr. K.
But here in rural America, replete with dying small towns, boarded up store fronts, closed factories and mines, and a median annual income of $33,500 for a family of four, the depression (both economic and personal) is here for anyone interested to see.
Whether this is politically good or bad for Democrats is beside the point. It's horrific in its human costs, a nutritious breeding ground for religious and political extremism. People here need jobs. They need a secure income provided by either the private or the public sector. The private sector has pretty much abandoned here. The public sector thrives, as long as you're willing to be a prison guard.
Do you have any other ideas, beyond political gamespersonship, for how to redress this?
10
@Dochoch, as a very liberal Democrat I completely agree with you. Both parties have forgotten middle America but at least the Democrats are trying. Trump isn't even trying, just talking about it.
6
@Dochoch I completely agree here, which it is why there is no reason for Democrats to cheer the failure of Donald Trump to put aside his personal feelings and endorse a grand infrastructure plan.
1
@Dochoch
And yet, with the exception of St. Clair and Jackson counties, all of southern Illinois went for tRUMP in 2016.
I have NO sympathy for your plight.
Mr Krugman, you're wonderful. You just gave me a better Friday morning.
I will add that recently I visited my cousins in Pennsylvania, some voted for Trump. They were expecting bridges repaired, school classroom additions, hiring local carpenters. They are now for, get ready, they like Elizabeth Warren. They want a tax on the Trump barons.
They want civility in the executive branch. They want a dignified adult.
I'll take whomever can get him out of there.
19
@Bill Evans populism (what an unpleasant term for someone who is willing to govern in the interests of the non-moneyed population) plays well in the heartland...I hate that term too. Let's say, populism plays well in the eastern interior of the country, areas that have been neglected, spat upon, preyed upon by con men and private equity firms. Bernie Sanders won Michigan in the primaries in 2016. Elizabeth Warren (or Bernie) could take Trump country away from Don the Con in a heartbeat, if only their message could come across without adulteration, or come across at all...Fox news, numerous wealthy republican political donors and the RNC stand in the way of that.
3
@Bill Evans Wow, that's encouraging. I figured all the Trump voters were out of reach, too much ego to admit they made a mistake.
1
The problem with the "Wall" or infrastructure or anything that requires building something is that Trump or the Trump Organization always gets a cut of the action--either through the front door, the back door or both. Everything is about making money for Trump.
8
And thus Dr. Krugman steps too far over the political-vs.-policy line. He is, in effect, cheering for gridlock until 2020. He should be cheering for getting a start on infrastructure.
The Democrats are in a decent position to negotiation for pure, publicly funded deal. Trump needs a win. The Democrats need a win. More important, the country needs to get to work at a decade's worth of investment.
I'm normally a fan of Dr. Krugman, but not in this case. I'll take progress over gridlock.
1
@Ken L
Tell us, how does one negotiate when one party storms out before the issue is even brought up?
3
@Max Deitenbeck, Trump's tantrum was way out of line, for sure. The point is that it was good the for the Democrats to try. Krugman is saying they should not have.
@Ken LYes, and Krugman gave two fantastic reasons why:
Don't ever give Trump political capital.
Don't let Republicans privatize infrastructure which Teump wants to do.
1
This whole thing is like the "Goof Gas" episode on Rocky and Bullwinkle. Trump is like Fearless Leader, who really a caricature of Stalin, when he asked his staff to praise his competence. They could only answer one way.
It was like a show trial. I was embarrassed for our country.
7
"And the attempt to portray Pelosi as out of control is so ludicrous that only totally deluded people – i.e., around a third of the country – could possibly believe it."
The fact that a third of the country continues to be deluded and willingly duped is a sad but true fact that explains where we are today.
14
Pity the poor people that come to the White House under the assumption they are there about matters of importance to them or groups they represent. They will sit or stand there after getting a short compulsory statement from the President about their agenda. Then they will fall into the role of props as the President launches into unscripted, unrelated riffs about what's on his mind. Silently they serve as backdrops. Some with tense smiles, others with mouths slightly agape. Their eyes glaze over waiting for the end.
3
Too bad we no longer have Bogey around to play Capt. Trump in the movie version, ladling out sand at a table in the White House and descending still further into lunacy. I just hope we'll all be around long enough for the movie to be made.
2
Paul,
Please write about all the legislation that Congress has passed and the Senate has refused to vote on one way or other.
That is a scandal. McConnell is evil and disloyal.
25
I once read something by a British writer visiting the US for the first time that America is like the set of a western movie-a lot of nicely painted sets with nothing behind them but empty lots. And It seems truer and truer to me-rotting out-of-date infrastructure, a virulent, right wing propaganda machine, a slew of elected leaders whose loyalty is to gold coming, mostly, from Russia and China. An unjust justice system dominated by a patriarchal, hard right, conservative Catholic cult and evangelical political opportunists. I am inclined to think it’s over and if I were younger and didn’t have hostages to fortune in the form of adult children, I would probably move to Ireland before it gets much worse.
8
"Let’s not try to pretend that there was any clever political strategy in Trump’s walkout; it was just his immaturity and insecurity, but even more obvious than usual.'' Okay, so Trump had no clever politcal strategy in mind. But what about his Replublican handlers/manipulators? After all, the outcome is that there won't be any significant infrustructure investment. As Krugman explains, that's a desirable outcome from a Republican point of view. And what's the cost? That the President makes a fool of himself? No problem. That's a sunk cost that was incurred long ago.
2
1. A publicity effort, just like his 2016 campaign.
2. Too bad he didn't walk out of the meetings with Putin, with Un and with Ping after three minutes as he did with Chuck and Nancy.
3. Further evidence of an unstable, insouciant president.
4. Further proof that the GOP has no guts, no gumption and no courage to call out this kind of conduct.
5. Sadly, the institution of the presidency and our government will never be as good as it could be due to the poor behavior of our cartoon president.
2
I disagree with Krugman on this. As much as I loathe Trump and all he stands for, American infrastructure is in terrible shape. Bridges and roads are in terrible disrepair; our power grid is antiquated; water delivery systems (like Flint's) need to be upgraded. The list goes on and on. But saying that Trump's lunatic outburst is a godsend ...
1
@Paul
I think Dr. Krugman meant it was a godsend politically. He states that the country badly needs infrastructure repair, and I think he is implying that Trump would have been wise to go for it. If he(Trump) had, it would have made him look good for the next election.
1
As long as the Republicans have the electoral college, continue to placate the plutocracy who owns them, and gerrymander, it's going to be a long uphill battle. All the GOP needs to do is continue to feed their constituency mythology via Fox and AM radio, and pump the internet conspiracies and propaganda, and they know that 40% of the population will continue to cut their nose to spite their face. And Mexicans.
The Democrats are going to need to build a brand and "sell" the truth a whole lot better. They need to own the "woke" crowd because the reality of what the GOP is doing to this country: the environment, school shootings, privatization, Social Security, Medicare, women's rights, "where are your papers?" civil rights, democracy, and so forth is a lot scarier than political correctness, HRC's emails, and the war on Christmas.
4
Now the Dems can introduce their own infrastructure plan and make trump either swallow it or refuse it.
4
@Ron I agree.
Here's how to do it.
Trump doesn't really care about infrastructure. He doesn't really care about the republican party. And the republican party doesn't really care about spending any money on anything that will help America or the middle class-- direct beneficiaries of infrastructure projects.
The Democrats should develop a plan and name it "Trump's path to the future." Or, "Trump's bridges for America." Or, "Trump's putting America back to work."
Or, "Trump's New Civilian Conservation Corp." Or, "Trump's Work Progress Administration." Or, Trump's Real New Deal."
Get my point.
Trump likes to put his name on things. The Dems should present it in this way. Trump will be all over it. (gold leaf is optional on signage)
The republican lap dogs will never dare to vote against something Trump loves. And, just think about all the local 'pork'. They won't be able to resist it!
The Don will forget all about 'the wall' once digging begins on the new Trump Tunnel under the Hudson River from NYC to NJ.
Balderdash! One does not need to be a "close up" observer to see Trump for who,and what he is. Artifacts and deeds such as Trump university,the wall, his lying,and his blatant attempts to obstruct justice are enough for me living in California to see this guy as the grifter he is. Ms. Pelosi,having raised five children knows how to deal with petulance,and foot stomping. She has put the Dems in a position to send a proper infrastructure bill to the senate. If I could borrow money as cheaply as the government;then it would be pedal to the metal,and shovel in the dirt.
3
That storming-out-of-the-meeting thing was an orchestrated, premeditated campaign stunt. Microphones and cameras were ready for his latest show, another hissy-fit to fire up the MAGA-heads. But I loved it when Speaker Nancy says 'let us pray'--for DJT and our country. Then she suggested a 'family intervention'. Great stuff!
5
Agreed with this analysis, except the conclusion that Trump's tantrum extricated Pelosi/Schumer "from a potential political trap." Does anyone believe that Trump is disciplined or experienced enough to set a political trap? Stop attributing political talent to a man is obviously and shamelessly winging it.
Stop overthinking this, Dems. The emperor has no clothes.
3
Pelosi and Schumer were fools to go for an infrastructure bill with Trump. It would have goosed his economy all the way through re-election, especially since he would not only take all the credit, but also laugh at the Dems he hooked into the deal. Bill Maher's scorn for how truly bad the Dems are at power politics is always well justified, never more than now when the supposedly "strong, brilliant" Pelosi almost blew it big time, just as she's blowing the impeachment fight. Lots of Trump's voters went for him because they were disgusted with years of Dem wimps.
1
@Fred White
It made no sense for the Democrats to offer an infrastructure bill. Makes them look weak and stupid and justifies the laughter of the Trumpsters. Bet they lost a lot of votes with that foolishness.
Sometimes I'm tempted to watch Fox News, just to find out how it's possible a third of the country is falling for this act. That must be one super-hypnotizing, alternative fact generating infotainment show!
So it's a good idea to avoid a good thing, because it might help Trump? That's kinda weird.
Does Trump's refusal to consider infrastructure also include his border wall?
3
IF the Trump-Republican idea of infrastructure plan is "The Wall", where 1.7 miles of wall cost 1.4 billion dollars, then the United States is in trouble. Private contractors selected by the Republican administration are robbing the American tax payer. Between the cost of Trump's golf weekends ($300 million) and his campaign travel ($$$$????), we could provide much of the low-income housing needed by this country. Of course, with the head of HUD not knowing anything about his job, that might be a problem. STOP THE REPUBLICAN WASTE OF OUR TAX DOLLARS.
6
The merits of your argument aside, I point to a dangerous misobservation of yours, that Trump's fitness is known to " close observers." This is nonsense and implies that if we could only get more people to observe Trump more closely everything would be fine. I remind you that the "closest observers" of Jim Jones were the nearly 1,000 persons who joined in killing themselves with him in Guyana.
4
Let's be completely honest about this. This attempt to make Pelosi seem like the person whose marbles are rolling around in her head is not being made just by the White House or Fox. The Russian bots are fully engaged right now. They have nearly as much to lose in these investigations as the current occupant has. They want to shape our opinion very badly. So when you see that the doctored video of the Speaker has been watched and shared a lot just be aware that 75% of those aren't actual people. They want us to believe that America has suddenly lost it's mind and recognized that Nancy not Donald is the problem here.
Yeah, no. I have eyes and ears. I also know that Don has been engaging in that kind of bot buying for years. This time it's free of charge.
3
The last time Congress led as a catalyst for change was when Lyndon Johnson was the leader of the Senate.
They ain’t making any more Lyndon’s.
1
I always enjoy Krugman’s work, but this piece just makes me sad. If the shoe were on the other foot, we would be saying that this kind of Mitch McConnell "our most important job is to make sure Obama is a one term president" attitude stokes division and demeans our democratic system. But, alas, this is where Trump has taken us.
Sad, but true.
Apart from raw, antediluvian politics, the privatization of public highways and byways makes no economic, public safety, or strategic sense.
3
This of course assumes Trump does not change his mind, as he has in the past.
That assumes he is not out of his mind. Which he seems to be.
The Trump Corollary as expressed by Krugman:
If it's GOOD for the country but it makes Trump look he's winning from a political standpoint then it's BAD for the country.
Short term yes.
But since roads, bridges, etc. last hundreds of years I'm not sure we should be mixing long term investments with short term political concerns.
We've waited this long, we can afford to wait one more year to fix things, especially if it helps get a Democrat into the White House!
Plus, as Krugman pointed out several months ago, Trump's idea of infrastructure (and the Republicans’) is using the government to enrich private corporations — i.e., taking a trillion of our public taxpayer dollars as seed money for private ownership of highways, bridges, toll roads, etc. That is, the government does all the heavy lifting and expenditure, while turning over the infrastructure to private interests who then have a regular profit stream!
In other words, as Martin Luther King so aptly put it, “socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor” We should add, socialism for the corporations and wealthy, anti-union conservatives and unjust capitalism for the rest of us!
3
@Marsha Pembroke
Two things.
First. You are exaggerating the time frame. The next inauguration date is Jan. 20th, 2021. Closer to two years off than one.
Second. What if Trump wins? What would you say then? "Well we've waited this long what's another 4 years?"
Enough already.
1