When the dust settles on this, the executive branch needs to be nerfed to the point that it's mostly a figurehead. Certainly the unchecked tax hike via tariffs power needs to be ripped out immediately, before (any further) permanent damage can be inflicted on the country.
National elections for a few of the most significant ones (e.g. secretary of state, attorney general). Maybe Congress appoints the rest.
When designing a system to be resistant to attack, it helps to split up roles. A "superadmin" type of role is a vulnerability. Similar idea here.
Which is kind of odd. 100% of the House is up for re-election; only 1/3 of the Senate is. I would expect the House to be fracturing more than the Senate.
The senators all have to battle state wide campaigns that are much more competitive than most safe house seats, which tends to have a moderating influence. Their campaigns are also a lot more expensive so they have to answer to a greater number and diversity of donors, while being less afraid of a more extreme primary challenger.
In four years, if inflation and tariffs make the cost of living higher, then I think that Republican candidates will have problems, but in the midterm I think they can spin enough bullshit to keep the easily-distracted still voting for them. They just have to say "woke trigger the libs China beautiful clean coal Biden bad men in women's sports" and it's over.
House is fighting Trump on blowing out the deficit [1].
[1] https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2025/04/08/congress/an...
This drastic of a Tariff so soon, and the inconsistent messaging with pausing tariffs makes it impossible for any business owner to safely setup US manufacturing.
Besides US manufacturing should be more focused on high value, high tech products. We are a rich enough country in where we CAN import more than export. This is why poorer countries rely on exports for income whilst richer countries import more.
Trade deficits should not be a reason for these tariffs and just alienates allies more than anything.
He isn’t. The fact that he’s open to cutting deals undercuts the tariffs’ restoring effect.
Tariffs are a tax. The administration found a revenue toy and a bunch of people are playing it in different directions. There isn’t a coherent plan as much as a bunch of plans, some of which make sense, some of which don’t, but none of which make sense when stacked with the others.
Any info on this?
Most old societies were. It’s easy to tax at a limited number of ports. And we didn’t understand comparative advantgae because we didn’t need to; most societies were—most of the time—Malthusian/zero real growth. (You’d also go to war more often. Industrial warfare and nukes sort of birthed the modern trade war.)
Since when? Free trade has been a conservative staple until the Tea Party and Trump.
Don't believe that once a high consumption tax has been enacted to replace income taxes, and once trade disputes are settled, that conservatives would ever allow the return of a progressive income tax.