Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts published in “Politics”

Who Among the Dems Will Win the Black Vote? Who Can Win the Black Vote?

African Americans still support Biden; but in lieu of his losses in Iowa and New Hampshire, they’re reconsidering their options.

The American political universe is focused on black voters and whether they will rally to Biden, Sanders, Buttigieg, Bloomberg, or Klobuchar in the Democratic Party’s presidential contest.

Black voters are key because, historically, they have voted overwhelmingly Democratic and will represent an increasing share of the party’s primary electorate in the weeks and months to come.

But there is real doubt and uncertainty about how they will vote and what might sway them. Very few African Americans, after all, have thus far voted, since Iowa and New Hampshire are overwhelmingly caucasian.

So it’s not as if we have real-world results by which to gauge or measure whom black voters will support.

Still, no one doubts that black voters will determine the party’s nominee. For numerical reasons alone if nothing else, they are too important a Democratic Party constituency.

Indeed, as Joe Biden put it on the night he badly lost the New Hampshire primary

The fight to end Donald Trump’s presidency is just beginning… because, up til now, we haven’t heard from the most committed constituency of the Democratic Party: the African-American community…

I want you all to think of a number: 99.9 percent—that’s the percentage of African American voters who have not yet had a chance to vote in America…

You can’t be the Democratic nominee, and you can’t win a general election as a Democrat, unless you have overwhelming support from black and brown voters… It’s just really simple… It’s a natural fact. It’s true. It’s absolutely true…

All those Democrats who won against incumbents, from Jimmy Carter to a guy named Clinton to a guy named Obama, my good friend—guess what? They all had overwhelming African American support. Without it, nobody [in the Democratic Party has] ever won [the presidency]… 

In short, to understand what has happened politically since New Hampshire, and what is to come, you have to understand the challenges and opportunities that exist for each of the candidates re: the black vote. Herewith a status update in a race that is still fluid and uncertain.

In this post, we’ll address Biden’s prospects with African American voters; and, in subsequent posts, we’ll do the same for each of the other Democratic presidential candidates.

Biden. As his aforementioned remarks indicate, and as we’ve explained here at ResCon1, Biden needs to win in South Carolina or his campaign is finished.

The good news for Biden, reports FiveThirtyEight’s Nathaniel Rakich, is that his “firewall in Southern states appears weakened but still standing.” A Feb. 13 East Carolina University poll, for instance, shows him with 28 percent of the vote in South Carolina versus 20 parent for Sanders.

Biden, moreover, “still has a strong lead (16 points over Sanders) among [the state’s] African American voters, a crucial voting bloc that has sided with the eventual nominee in every Democratic primary since 1992,” Rakich notes.

In fact, black voters account for roughly 60 percent of the Democratic Party primary electorate in South Carolina.

The bad news for Biden: he is losing ground in the Palmetto State and his rivals are gaining at his expense. “It wouldn’t take much more of a drop to put Sanders in the lead in our polling average ,” Rakich writes. “There are still two weeks until South Carolina votes, remember.”

“Interviews with two dozen South Carolina lawmakers, consultants and voters here suggests there are deep cracks in Joe Biden’s firewall state,” writes Maya King in Politico.

A February 10 Quinnipiac University national poll  she notes, “shows Biden’s support among African-Americans at 27 percent—a 22-point slip from before the Iowa caucus.”

With bad back-to-back losses in Iowa and New Hampshire, Biden has lost the air of inevitability that one surrounded his campaign; and black voters, consequently, seem to be reconsidering their support and looking at other candidates.

The bottom line: Biden is still afloat politically, but he’s taking on water at an alarming rate, and his ship may yet capsize. All hands are on deck in South Carolina, which is do-or-die politically for him. He needs a very strong showing of support from black voters.

Right now, Biden has sufficient support from African Americans to prevail in South Carolina Feb. 29; but Sanders remains a formidable political foe, and billionaire Tom Steyer is “doing an incredible job” attracting the interest of Palmetto State black voters, says the dean of the state’s Congressional delegation and House Majority Whip, Rep. Jim Clyburn.

Next up, we’ll consider the prospects of former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg.

Feature photo credit: Demetrius Freeman/New York Times via Redux and published by ABC News.

Bernie Wins New Hampshire and it’s Now His Nomination to Lose

Now that New Hampshire Democrats have voted, it looks like it’s gonna be Bernie, Biden or Bust—with the Bust being a contested political convention in which no candidate has a clear majority of the delegates and all bets are off.

First, Bernie. After finishing in a virtual tie in the Iowa Caucuses, Bernie won the New Hampshire primary.

Critics carp that he won a bare plurality of the vote—far less than the 60 percent he won in 2016 when facing off against Hillary Clinton for the Democratic Party presidential nomination. But it is obviously more difficult to run up vote tallies in fractured field than it is in a two-person race.

What matters is that Sanders won and is the clear frontrunner now, with all of the momentum and sense of destiny that accompany a political winner. He’s also cemented his hold on the party’s progressive, left-wing base; no other candidate comes close.

Sanders, moreover, has raised a boatload of money and has strong political organizations in key states nationwide. If, as the polls suggest, he wins the Nevada Caucuses Feb. 22, he likely will go into Super Tuesday, Mar. 3, as the prohibitive favorite.

Biden didn’t just lose New Hampshire; he lost badly, finishing fifth, with a measly 8.4 percent of the vote.

Of course, he didn’t do much better in Iowa, finishing fourth there, behind Sanders, Pete Buttigieg, and Elizabeth Warren. Many prominent political analysts say he’s finished. You can’t lose this badly, they say, and remain politically viable.

That’s probably true; but Biden is banking on winning in South Carolina, Feb. 29, to catapult him back into the race. More than 60 percent of Democrats there are African Americans, and polls have shown that they strongly prefer Biden.

But will black voters in South Carolina and elsewhere continue to support Biden even as he decisively loses these early contests? Or will they conclude that he’s a political loser and cast their lot elsewhere?

That really is the critical question for Biden: because if he cannot win in South Carolina, then his presidential campaign is over.

Bust. Unlike the Republicans, who have winner-take-all rules for most of their primaries and caucuses, the Democrats award delegates largely on a proportional basis in accordance with a candidate’s share of the overall vote tally.

In 2016, this meant that Donald Trump could win, and often did win, all of a state’s delegates simply by winning a plurality of the vote in that state.

This is not true for the Democrats. Because they award delegates proportionately, it is much more likely that, at their convention this summer, no candidate will have a clear majority of the delegates, and they’ll have to fight it out to determine who their nominee is.

There hasn’t been a contested major party convention since 1976 if you count the Republican Party battle between Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan. Prior to that, you have to go back to 1952 for the last truly contested convention.

“The chance of there being no pledged delegate majority—which could potentially lead to a contested convention—is high and increasing, reports Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight. “New Hampshire,” he writes, “is

good news if you’re hoping for chaos. Our forecast has the chances that no one wins a majority of pledged delegates up to 33 percent, its highest figure yet, and roughly double what it was before Iowa.

Other Candidates. There are other candidates, of course, and, theoretically, they could win the nomination; but, practically speaking, I don’t see how.

Elizabeth Warren, the Senator from Massachusetts, will soon drop out. She finished fourth in New Hampshire after finishing third in Iowa.

If Warren could not win in either Iowa or New Hampshire, then it is difficult to see where she can win—especially given that she doesn’t poll well with blacks, Hispanics, and other minorities.

This is a real problem for her campaign: because starting with Nevada and South Carolina, minorities will become an increasingly prominent part of the Democratic Party primary electorate.

Klobuchar, Buttigieg, and Bloomberg have a similarly fatal political problem: a lack of support from blacks and other minorities.

Again, it’s possible that could change, but I don’t see how. As mayors of their respective cities, New York and South Bend, Bloomberg and Buttigieg alienated key black Democrats and sometimes had chilly and testy political relations with influential African American progressives.

Klobuchar does not appear to have incited opposition among blacks and other minorities, but she hasn’t exactly inspired their loyalty and commitment either. And her political problems extend well beyond this key voting demographic.

Does she, for instance, have the requisite political organization to compete head-to-head with Sanders nationwide and especially in the big and expensive states such as California, New York, Texas, and Florida? I rather doubt it, but we’ll see.

The bottom line: the media will do their best to make a race of it. Look for Klobuchar especially to be the beneficiary of glowing press coverage, and even Biden will get a second look. But right now, this is Sanders’ nomination to lose, and it is difficult to see how that changes.

Feature photo credit: the New York Times.

Trump’s Quest for Revenge Threatens to Destroy His Chances for Reelection

Case in point: this week’s National Prayer Breakfast, White House political rally, and ‘Friday Night Massacre’

Has there ever been an American president—or any elected official for that matter—with a greater propensity to shoot himself in the foot than Donald J. Trump? He seems as eager to squander his political fortune as he did his father’s big-money inheritance.

The president this week survived impeachment and gave a masterfully written State of the Union Address. His most formidable potential general election opponent, former Vice President Joe Biden, is imploding after finishing a distant fourth in the Iowa Caucuses and trailing badly in the New Hampshire primary, which takes place Tues., Feb. 11.

Any semi-functioning adult with half a brain would recognize that lady luck is shining down upon him, thank his lucky stars, and look forward, not backward.

But of course, Trump, as we all know, is not normal. He is dim-witted and seemingly hellbent on snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Thus he spent the latter part of the week venting his spleen and trying to exact revenge on his enemies, real and imagined.

And if Trump loses reelection, it won’t be because of the growing economy, booming stock market, historically low unemployment rate, and relative peace and prosperity that we Americans now enjoy.

Instead, it will be because of days like Thursday and Friday, when the electorate saw an angry and vindictive man who seems to care more about creating drama and settling personal scores than he does about exercising calm and steady leadership that will benefit us all.

First, there was the National Prayer Breakfast, which Trump bastardized. Then there was his rank display of anger, self-pity and resentment on display for all the world to see at a pathetic and melancholy White House rally with Republican lawmakers.

And finally, Trump had nonpartisan public servants and military officers whom he deemed responsible for his impeachment publicly fired, dismissed, and humiliated. It was, to say the least, a shameful and disgraceful exhibition of selfishness, self-absorption, and small-mindedness.

The National Prayer Breakfast, of course, is a 68-year-old national tradition in the nation’s capital. It is, obviously, supposed to be an apolitical, nonpartisan event that brings lawmakers and the country together. The intent is to call a ceasefire in our nation’s political wars and temporarily suspend partisan hostilities.

For most normal politicians, this is an easy-lift and something they look forward to doing. It gives them the chance to rise above the political fray and appear judicious and broad-minded, while appealing to apolitical, independent voters turned off by constant political warfare.

Amazingly, though, Trump managed to fumble this opportunity and turn it into an easy score for his enemies.

How? By stupidly politicizing the event and completely disregarding its purpose and intent. As Cal Thomas explains, Trump arrived late and held up two newspapers that included “acquitted” in their headline. This was an obvious reference to his impeachment acquittal by the Senate.

He conspicuously avoided shaking hands with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-California); and, after Arthur Brooks, the former head of the American Enterprise Institute, gave a wonderful speech expounding upon the theme of his 2019 book, Love Your Enemies, Trump responded: “Arthur, I don’t know if I agree with you… I don’t know if Arthur’s going to like what I’m going to say.”

Well, Trump is surely right about that, because, as Michael Gerson observes in the Washington Post:

The purpose of Trump’s sermon at the Hilton was, in fact, to put his enemies on notice. Those who pursued impeachment were “very dishonest and corrupt people.” “They know what they are doing is wrong,” he continued, “but they put themselves far ahead of our great country.”

Congressional Republicans, in contrast, had the wisdom and strength “to do what everyone knows was right.”

Trump proceeded to make a thinly veiled attack against Mitt Romney of Utah, the only Republican senator to vote for the president’s removal: “I don’t like people who use their faith as justification for doing what they know is wrong.”

And then a shot at House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.): “Nor do I like people who say, ‘I’ll pray for you,’ when I know that is not so.”

The rest of the speech alternated between pedestrian civil religion and Trump campaign riffs. The stock market is up. Do I hear an “amen”? Gallup personal satisfaction numbers are rising. Preach it, brother!

What makes Trump’s remarks all the more stunning is that, as Gerson points out, Brooks’ argument for political forgiveness and reconciliation isn’t based on some odd or esoteric ideal.

Instead, it is based on Biblical commands and the words of Jesus Christ himself: “Love your enemies; bless those that curse you; do good to them that hate you.” It’s all there in the Sermon on the Mount.

It is understandable, of course, that, in the immediate aftermath of impeachment, Trump would be angry and disinclined to forgive and forget, let alone love his political enemies. We all understand that and Brooks understands that. Which is why, as Cal Thomas notes:

In his remarks, Brooks said that if people can’t sincerely practice forgiveness and reconciliation, they should “fake it.” His point was that reconciliation has a power all its own, even if one initially is not sincere about it. Trump clearly missed a grand opportunity. It would have cost him nothing to shake Pelosi’s hand.

Trump’s Angry Rant. But Trump rarely misses an opportunity to fumble the ball politically; and he did so again later that day in what the Washington Post’s David Nakamura describes as an “angry, raw and vindictive 62-minute White House rant:

He spoke without a teleprompter. He cursed in the East Room. He called the House speaker a “horrible person.” He lorded his power over a room full of deferential Republicans. He mocked a former GOP presidential nominee and his 2016 Democratic rival. He played the victim again and again.

Two days after President Trump delivered what aides called an “optimistic” State of the Union address that made no mention of his historic impeachment, he ranted for more than an hour at the White House on Thursday in a “celebration” of his Senate acquittal a day earlier. But the mood—at least his mood—was not particularly celebratory.

Trump was angry, raw, vindictive, aggrieved—reflecting the id of a president who has seethed for months with rage against his enemies. This was the State of Trump.

In short, it was not an attractive or winning performance. It was, as I say, an exercise in selfishness, self-absorption, and small-mindedness—and it will not win Trump any votes beyond his hardcore base in November.

‘Friday Night Massacre.’ The president concluded the week by removing Army Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman from the National Security Council (NSC) and firing Gordon Sondland, the U.S. Ambassador to the European Union.

Their crime: they testified truthfully before Congress about Trump’s phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and the pressure campaign mounted by Trump adviser Rudy Giuliani and others to force Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden and Burisma.

LTC Yevgeny Vindman also was removed from the NSC, apparently because he is the twin brother of LTC Alexander Vindman. Politico, moreover, reports that others who testified truthfully before Congress—former U.S. envoy to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch and former top U.S. envoy to Ukraine William Taylor—left their posts in recent days.

National Security staff, ambassadors and envoys, of course, serve at the pleasure of the president. Trump has every right to dismiss those he deems untrustworthy, unsupportive, and unhelpful. But these dismissals were clearly rooted in Trump’s desire to exact revenge and retribution on mostly apolitical and nonpartisan public servants whose only crime was to tell the truth to Congress and the American people.

Indeed, as Sen. Jack Reed (D-Rhode Island) explains, “by firing Lieutenant Colonel Vindman and Ambassador Sondland like this, the Trump administration signaled it won’t tolerate people who tell tell the truth.” Max Boot notes that federal law (18 U.S. Code § 1513) protects witnesses from retaliation—“not that the president will ever be prosecuted,” he writes.

But while Trump may be technically within his rights, he is clearly violating the spirit of the law, and, as a political matter, is hurting himself and the country. No American—and certainly, no independent-minded swing voter—wants as president a man with a disdain for the truth and an intolerance for staff who tell Congress and the American people the truth.

The smart move, politically, would have been to demonstrate some magnanimity and high-mindedness, leave these officials and staff in place, and move on to matters of greater political and public policy consequence. 

Trump also viciously defamed LTC Vindman in two tweets filled with lies and falsehoods about Vindman’s service on the National Security Council.

We’ll have more to say about that in a subsequent piece; but what matters here is Trump’s stupid and boneheaded political judgment. How does viciously attacking a decorated Army officer and Iraq War veteran help Trump’s political prospects and chances for reelection?

It obviously doesn’t.

Political Self-Immolation. If (when?) trump loses reelection, political analysts and historians may see the days after his acquittal as critical harbingers of his defeat. This was when Trump decided to forego any attempt to rise above the fray and try and unite the country.

Instead, he opted to indulge himself by trying to exact revenge and retribution against anyone he thinks did him wrong. Trump should learn from another president, Richard Nixon, who, although nearly impeached, actually won reelection in a landslide (albeit before he was impeached).

“Always remember,” Nixon said, “others may hate you, but those who hate you don’t win unless you hate them, and then you destroy yourself.”

Unfortunately, at a time when everything politically is working in Trump’s favor, he has embarked upon a path that likely will destroy himself and the Republican Party, and it may be too late to stop him.

Feature Photo Credit: Market Watch.

Trump’s Outreach to Black Voters Is Real, and Prominent Media Voices Are Beginning to Take Note

In the immediate aftermath of President Trump’s State of the Union Address, we were struck by the fact that it was written in large part to appeal to black voters.

Trump touted the strong U.S. economy and explained how it is benefiting the poor and disadvantaged, who are disproportionately black, brown, and members of racial and ethnic minorities.

He heralded his tax cuts and enterprise zones as the engine of opportunity and upward mobility for “forgotten Americans” in the dilapidated inner cities. And he pledge to build “the world’s most prosperous and inclusive society—one where every citizen can join in America’s unparalleled success, and every community can take part in America’s extraordinary rise.”

In short, we will leave no American behind, Trump essentially said.

However, a close reading of the speech shows that it has even more explicit appeals to African Americans, and prominent media voices are beginning to take note.

The Wall Street Journal, for instance, published an editorial called “Trump’s Bid for the Black Vote. African-Americans,” the Journal notes, “were front-and-center at the State of the Union.”

Beyond the inclusive tone, Mr. Trump emphasized policies that address real inequities in American life.

Perhaps the most compelling was Mr. Trump’s extended brief for school choice. The quality of many urban government schools is a national disgrace, and African-American children suffer most.

Mr. Trump highlighted a black youngster whose “future was put further out of reach when Pennsylvania’s Governor vetoed legislation to expand school choice,” and he called for Congress to expand opportunities for scholarships to attend alternative schools.

This has become a sharp dividing line between the two parties, as Democrats have abandoned choice under pressure from unions.

In 2018 Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis won a close race thanks to the votes of African-American women who supported him out of proportion to other GOP candidates. One likely cause was his school-choice platform.

Mr. Trump should campaign around the country highlighting charter, private and parochial schools that help children of all races escape rotten union schools.

CNN analyst Van Jones, meanwhile, warned his fellow Democrats that Trump’s State of the Union Address was

a warning to us, a warning shot across the bow of Democrats that he’s going after enough black folks to cause us problems.

It’s not just the white suburban voters. He’s going after black voters, too… And what he was saying to African Americans can be effective.

In addition to the strong economy, enterprise zones, and school choice, Trump specifically mentioned his administration’s support of historically black colleges and universities, as well as criminal justice reform.

“Our black colleges have been struggling for a long time,” said Van Jones. “A bunch of them have gone under. He [Trump] threw a lifeline to them… in his budget.”

Indeed, according to the Associated Press, the Future Act, which Trump signed into law Dec. 19, 2019,

authorizes $85 million a year for historically black colleges and universities, along with $100 million for Hispanic-serving institutions, $30 million for tribal schools and $40 million for a variety of other minority-serving institutions.

“The money,” reports the AP, “is primarily meant to expand programs in science, technology, engineering and math.”

“To expand equal opportunity,” said Trump in his State of the Union Address, “I am also proud that we achieved record and permanent funding for our nation’s historically black colleges and universities.”

Criminal Justice Reform. Trump is equally proud that he achieved criminal justice reform, which, he said, is giving many former prisoners the ability to work and make a fresh start in life.

“Everybody said that criminal justice reform couldn’t be done, but I got it done, and the people in this room got it done,” he bragged.

“Mr. Trump’s willingness to buck political convention on this issue is making a difference for young black men especially,” says the Journal.

In fact Trump clearly wishes to communicate to African Americans and other minorities that he is fully committed to broad-based opportunity, inclusion, and second chances. His campaign thus spent “half of its $10 million Super Bowl ad-buy highlighting [his] commutation of a black woman’s life sentence for a drug offense.”

African-American Contributions. Moreover, the president made clear that African Americans have contributed mightily to our achievements and greatness as a nation. Thus he recognized one of the last surviving Tuskegee Airmen, Charles McGee, whom he promoted to Brigadier General.

The Tuskegee Airmen, of course, are a storied U.S. military unit of predominantly black fighter pilots and support personnel who served during World War II, when the U.S. Armed Forces were still segregated by race.

Trump noted that Brigadier General McGee flew more than 130 combat missions in the Second World War before serving in both the Korean and Vietnam Wars as well.

McGee is now 100 years old; and his great grandson, 13-year-old Iain Lanphier, aspires to follow in his footsteps through service in the United States Space Force

Finally, Trump rounded out his paean to American greatness by acknowledging that Frederick Douglass, Harriet Tubman, and Martin Luther King, Jr. rank high in the pantheon of heroes and heroines who are responsible for “our glorious and magnificent inheritance” as a nation.

Leadership. Trump’s outreach to black voters is a demonstration of moral and political leadership, and it is the right thing to do irrespective of any potential political gains for him and the Republican Party in November. But sometimes, doing what is right is also good politics, and this may be one of those times.

Trump won about eight percent of the black vote in 2016; however, a conspicuous number of recent polls suggest that he is poised to significantly increase that tally on election day.

A new Zogby poll, for instance, finds that Trump’s approval rating has reached 50 percent among all voters; and that 26 percent of African Americans and 47% of Hispanics at least somewhat approve of the job he’s doing as president.

Even if just half of that 26 percent end up voting for Trump, that would represent a 62 percent increase in the president’s share of the black vote vis-a-vis his 2016 tally; and, with that, Trump would most likely easily win reelection.

It’s still too early to tell what will happen; but it’s never too early to do the right thing. And Trump, to his credit, is trying to do the right thing for African Americans and other minorities. Good on him.

Feature photo credit: Getty Images via MegaNewsEn.

In the 2020 Election, It’s Not the Economy, Stupid, But Maybe It Should Be

James Carville, the colorful Democratic political strategist who helped mastermind Bill Clinton’s 1992 win, famously said, “It’s the economy, stupid!”

The notion that American presidents are reelected or thrown out of office based on the nation’s economic performance has since become conventional wisdom. Yet, that maxim doesn’t seem to apply this year because of all the political drama, Sturm und Drang, that surrounds President Trump.

Impeachment is the latest drama, but there have been many others—Charlottesville, the Mueller investigation, the crisis at the border, the Kavanaugh Supreme Court nomination, the government shutdown, Khashoggi, Syria, Ukrainian aid, et al.

Some of these crises, like the Kavanaugh Supreme Court nomination, are beyond Trump’s control and must be laid squarely at the feet of his political opponents, who are determined to stop the GOP’s policy agenda, either by hook or by crook.

To the diehard partisans of the left, it doesn’t matter who is president. They would fight to the political death against any Republican President, be he Trump, Bush, Romney, or Mother Theresa.

But it’s also true that Trump has been his own worst enemy; and that his utterly undisciplined, shoot-from-the-hip nature has seriously exacerbated his political problems and created crises that need not have occurred.

Charlottesville, for instance, was a completely self-inflicted wound that could have been avoided entirely had Trump simply chosen his words more carefully and been more disciplined when responding to reporters’ questions.

This is why, despite relative peace and prosperity, Trump has been unable to achieve a 50-percent job-approval rating.

So it was good to see the president use his State of the Union Address to deliver a clear, coherent, and compelling message of American renewal led by a strong and resilient U.S. economy that is very much the envy of the world.

Trump called it “the great American comeback… The years of economic decay,” he declared, are over.

From the instant I took office, I moved rapidly to revive the U.S. economy—slashing a record number of job-killing regulations, enacting historic and record-setting tax cuts, and fighting for fair and reciprocal trade agreements.

Our agenda is relentlessly pro-worker, pro-family, pro-growth, and, most of all, pro-American…

Since my election, we have created seven million new jobs—five million more than government experts projected during the previous administration. The unemployment rate is the lowest in over half a century…

The unemployment rate for African-Americans, Hispanic Americans and Asian-Americans has reached the lowest levels in history… The unemployment rate for women reached the lowest level in almost 70 years…

Real median household income is now at the highest level ever recorded…

U.S. stock markets have soared 70 percent, adding more than $12 trillion to our nation’s wealth, transcending anything anyone believed was possible. This is a record. It is something that every country in the world looks up to and admires.

Consumer confidence has reached new highs. Millions of Americans with 401(k)s and pensions are doing far better than they have ever done before, with increases of 60, 70, 80, 90 and 100 percent…

Critics will carp that Trump inherited a growing economy, and this is in part true. But it’s also true that wages were stagnant and the economy was slowing. Trump has reversed that, and the U.S. economy has performed far better than the critics predicted when Trump took office.

Indeed, three years ago we were warned that the sky would fall. Today, by contrast, it seems as if the sky’s the limit. 

“In just three short years,” Trump boasted, “we have shattered the mentality of American decline. We have rejected the downsizing of America’s destiny… and we are never, ever going back.”

The 2020 election doesn’t seem to be about the economy, but maybe it should be. America could be doing a lot worse than it is now, and the choice in policy direction—more or less government, higher or lower taxes, a bigger or smaller private sector—could not be more stark, and certainly not more economically consequential.

Feature photo credit: Getty Images via the New York Post.