Top Economist Admits Trump May Have ‘Outsmarted All of Us’ on Tariffs

[mystery-ak]

Top Economist Admits Trump May Have ‘Outsmarted All of Us’ on Tariffs
Matt Margolis
5–6 minutes

Donald Trump has a knack for making the so-called experts look foolish, and nowhere is that more apparent than in the ongoing debate over tariffs. The political and economic elite have ridiculed Trump’s approach, insisting that his tough stance on trade would backfire, cause a recession and cripple the U.S. economy. Yet despite all the apocalyptic predictions, the economy hasn’t gone south, and predictions of a looming recession have been quietly walked back.

Recently, a prominent anti-Trump economist admitted what many on the right have been saying from the beginning: Trump’s tariff strategy wasn’t the reckless gamble the media made it out to be. Instead, it was a calculated move designed to protect American workers, revive domestic manufacturing, and put America’s interests first.

    A prominent Wall Street economist who had slammed President Trump’s tariffs earlier this year now says that the president may have “outsmarted all of us” with his controversial trade policies.

    Torsten Sløk, chief economist at investment giant Apollo Global Management, said that while the uncertainty surrounding trade policy has already started to weigh on the economy, Trump could lower tariffs on most of the US trading partners while using the levies to boost federal revenue.

    Sløk suggested in a recently posted analysis that the administration’s approach may be more strategic than previously thought.

    The optimistic outlook stands in stark contrast to his earlier position.

    In April, Sløk warned that Trump’s tariffs could trigger a recession by summer, particularly harming American small businesses and potentially halting the flow of goods from China to the US, leading to layoffs and a broader economic slowdown.

Let’s be honest—Trump’s critics never gave him a fair shake. They scoffed at his insistence that America was getting fleeced by China and other trading partners. They dismissed his warnings about the hollowing out of our industrial base. They mocked his promise to bring jobs back to the heartland. But now, even some of the most respected voices in economics are forced to admit that Trump’s tariffs have delivered results that the so-called experts said were impossible.

more
https://pjmedia.com/matt-margolis/2025/06/29/top-economist-admits-trump-may-have-outsmarted-all-of-us-on-tariffs-n4941279

[catfish1957]

"Recently, a prominent anti-Trump economist admitted what many on the right have been saying from the beginning: Trump’s tariff strategy wasn’t the reckless gamble the media made it out to be. Instead, it was a calculated move designed to protect American workers, revive domestic manufacturing, and put America’s interests first."
=======================================================================================================a==

I spent quite a bit of time yesterday in flame event with an unnamed Briefer about this very issue.  What these Anti-Trump economists and in the case of Briefer X, didn't realize that a lot of what Trump is doing in the area of tariffs straight from Calvin Coolidge's playbook.  Again.  Tariffs aren't the main event....   just one tool in the tool kit to deal with nations who want to take advantage of a country that allowed itself to be screwed by trading partners for decades.   This alone levels the playing field. 

Iif you could pull Trump off to the side, I am sure he'd say as the ultimate capitalist, that in the real world there would be no tariffs, no currency manipulation, or other tactics  to "game" the system. 

[Bigun]

@LMAO Please pick up the white courtesy phone.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

"Recently, a prominent anti-Trump economist admitted what many on the right have been saying from the beginning: Trump’s tariff strategy wasn’t the reckless gamble the media made it out to be. Instead, it was a calculated move designed to protect American workers, revive domestic manufacturing, and put America’s interests first."
=======================================================================================================a==

I spent quite a bit of time yesterday in flame event with an unnamed Briefer about this very issue.  What these Anti-Trump economists and in the case of Briefer X, didn't realize that a lot of what Trump is doing in the area of tariffs straight from Calvin Coolidge's playbook.  Again.  Tariffs aren't the main event....   just one tool in the tool kit to deal with nations who want to take advantage of a country that allowed itself to be screwed by trading partners for decades.   This alone levels the playing field. 

Iif you could pull Trump off to the side, I am sure he'd say as the ultimate capitalist, that in the real world there would be no tariffs, no currency manipulation, or other tactics  to "game" the system. 

[DefiantMassRINO]

Trump's lizard-brain instincts VS Paul Krugman's NY Times Noble-prize Winning Economist brain ... my $2.00 is on Trump.

[roamer_1]

"Recently, a prominent anti-Trump economist admitted what many on the right have been saying from the beginning: Trump’s tariff strategy wasn’t the reckless gamble the media made it out to be. Instead, it was a calculated move designed to protect American workers, revive domestic manufacturing, and put America’s interests first."
=======================================================================================================a==

I spent quite a bit of time yesterday in flame event with an unnamed Briefer about this very issue.  What these Anti-Trump economists and in the case of Briefer X, didn't realize that a lot of what Trump is doing in the area of tariffs straight from Calvin Coolidge's playbook.  Again.  Tariffs aren't the main event....   just one tool in the tool kit to deal with nations who want to take advantage of a country that allowed itself to be screwed by trading partners for decades.   This alone levels the playing field. 

Iif you could pull Trump off to the side, I am sure he'd say as the ultimate capitalist, that in the real world there would be no tariffs, no currency manipulation, or other tactics  to "game" the system. 

Ridiculous pap.

[catfish1957]

Ridiculous pap.

Ignoring  our greatest FIN POTUS (Coolidge), and Trump's ability to channel him into fair trade with the same philosphy.

That's monumental pap.   Unless you are calling Coolidge an idiot too.  But I am sure. (lol) you are so are so much knowledgeable around economic matters than I am.   

[roamer_1]

Ignoring  our greatest FIN POTUS (Coolidge), and Trump's ability to channel him into fair trade with the same philosphy.

That's monumental pap.   Unless you are calling Coolidge an idiot too.  But I am sure. (lol) you are so are so much knowledgeable around economic matters than I am.   

No. Tumpy is no Coolidge. Coolidge would be aghast at Tumpy's Big Beautiful Bill. Horrified by it. You sully the name with the comparison.

THAT is the ridiculous pap - Ignoring the elephant in the room for a pocket full of promises.

And that's all this is - A pocket full of promises. Just like the job promises he claims, bringing industry back to the US. Most of those promises will take years to begin to be kept, and likely won't be kept. But he struts it around like a done deal, waiving it around like a trophy. These tariffs are the same damn thing.

Even if they are real, and immediate in being enacted (which I'll bet they're not), They'll all go right back the other way the minute he steps out of office, if they make it that far... Congress changing hands at the midterm may very well gut everything he's done so far, to include the tariff deals. Just like at the end of his last term , when everything he'd done went up in smoke.

It's a big beautiful plastic banana. He knows it, I know it, and so do you.

[catfish1957]

No. Tumpy is no Coolidge. Coolidge would be aghast at Tumpy's Big Beautiful Bill. Horrified by it. You sully the name with the comparison.

THAT is the ridiculous pap - Ignoring the elephant in the room for a pocket full of promises.

And that's all this is - A pocket full of promises. Just like the job promises he claims, bringing industry back to the US. Most of those promises will take years to begin to be kept, and likely won't be kept. But he struts it around like a done deal, waiving it around like a trophy. These tariffs are the same damn thing.

Even if they are real, and immediate in being enacted (which I'll bet they're not), They'll all go right back the other way the minute he steps out of office, if they make it that far... Congress changing hands at the midterm may very well gut everything he's done so far, to include the tariff deals. Just like at the end of his last term , when everything he'd done went up in smoke.

It's a big beautiful plastic banana. He knows it, I know it, and so do you.

If it had or down fail you would have seen massive tax increases, but I guess you are okay with that.  I am not totally happy with this either on the spending side, but it sure beats the alternative.  And there will be time to adjust on the fly as we progress. I am and have proved to be the one of the most  conservative members on this site, and maybe the most conservative when it comes to financial matters.  My life is a testament to that.  Still, I am a realist, who can see the freakin' shit hit the fan, if we give the dims cover by us imploding.  Kill this Bill, and Biden's shit is perpetuated.  Do you understand or accept that?

I used to have a strong dislike of Trump too, but I have noticed that you can't give him any props for anything.  That hasn't gone unnoticed.

I view this as Act 1 of the play, except you are treating it like the finale.   We needed a placeholder, establishing and getting rid of things like the Green shit.  As far as Coolidge, did you even bother to read his Econ manifesto?  I'd bet not.  As great as Coolidge was, he did not inherit such an emergency.

I agree with you on some things, but you/ve gone off the loony rail. 

[Bigun]

Bessent is 100% correct.

https://Twitter.com/Acyn/status/1940029232006275202

[roamer_1]

If it had or down fail you would have seen massive tax increases, but I guess you are okay with that.  I am not totally happy with this either on the spending side, but it sure beats the alternative. 

Oh, bullcrap! All that money 'saved' from USAID and from the decimation of the Dept of Ed - Pushing better than a trillion bucks in 'savings', and it's STILL GONNA COST A COUPLE TRILLION MORE???? Another projected trillion in revenues predicted by his tariff manipulations and still a couple trillion MORE?

He's pissin in your pocket and telling you it's raining. And much to your detriment, you believe him.  It's all smoke.

And there will be time to adjust on the fly as we progress.

Yeah, right. 

I am and have proved to be the one of the most  conservative members on this site, and maybe the most conservative when it comes to financial matters.  My life is a testament to that. 

Right. And most times I respect that and consider you a friend from way back.

Still, I am a realist, who can see the freakin' shit hit the fan, if we give the dims cover by us imploding.  Kill this Bill, and Biden's shit is perpetuated.  Do you understand or accept that?

A COUPLE FREAKIN TRILLLLLLLLION MORE. Trillion. Oh, hell no, of course I don't accept that.

I used to have a strong dislike of Trump too, but I have noticed that you can't give him any props for anything.  That hasn't gone unnoticed.

Oh bullcrap. Credit where it's due. I just find damn little worthy of credit. One SCOTUS judge from his first term.... That's about it. The rest was in the red before he left office, and whatever he did got overturned the minute he was gone.

Same damn story, different day wrt his second term. Watch and see. A whole lot of this is smoke and mirrors.

I view this as Act 1 of the play, except you are treating it like the finale.   We needed a placeholder, establishing and getting rid of things like the Green shit. 

He ain't 'got rid' of nothin.

As far as Coolidge, did you even bother to read his Econ manifesto?  I'd bet not.  As great as Coolidge was, he did not inherit such an emergency.

No. I am familiar in a summary sort of way, but long ago. Anything newer than the Venerable Bede is outside of my wheelhouse. I have some familiarity on newer things, but that ain't where I live. My gig is in the distant past.

I agree with you on some things, but you/ve gone off the loony rail.

Not at all. My criterion remains exactly the same as always. 'What do we get to keep'. All else don't count. It's vapor. Flatulence for the sheep to inhale. I wonder if you could tick off the things we get to keep from this administration. The list ain't long.

And then a judgement on if the thing we get to keep is good or bad. Whether it meets a Conservative standard. That's been how I roll all the way along. I am utterly immune to the Brylcreme and the Dentyne schwing. Maybe that is why I am unmoved. I stand on principle and nothing else.

I see all y'all being all too willing to have the wool pulled over your eyes.  It's the same hopey-changey crap that's on the left. And I think far too many of y'all forget that patriotism requires that the government is the enemy, not the Democrats. The Democrats wouldn't be able to do anything if the government was back in it's box, and the proper size.

But it's alright. You'll catch on. Something earth-shaking will happen to knock those rose colored glasses off, and you'll yank the wool from your eyes... Just like last time.

But it'll be you eating crow, not @LMAO . And another four years wasted. And bigger and 'better' government to boot.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

I used to have a strong dislike of Trump too, but I have noticed that you can't give him any props for anything.  That hasn't gone unnoticed.

  That's been going on a long time, just go back and read the old posts he won't say were wrong.

I view this as Act 1 of the play, except you are treating it like the finale.   We needed a placeholder, establishing and getting rid of things like the Green shit.  As far as Coolidge, did you even bother to read his Econ manifesto?  I'd bet not.  As great as Coolidge was, he did not inherit such an emergency.

Great observation

I agree with you on some things, but you/ve gone off the loony rail.

TDS exists on this site as well, and it clouds clear thinking.

[roamer_1]

  That's been going on a long time, just go back and read the old posts he won't say were wrong.

You can try to school me if you like. I admit fault more than most on here, and I am happy to say I was wrong. It doesn't happen often, but it does happen to me, just like everyone else. So I cry bullshit on that.

Great observation TDS exists on this site as well, and it clouds clear thinking.

Not anywhere near as much as girl-crush fanbois. In fact, look at the stats, and look at who don't come around anymore. Y'all are driving off business like it's freerepublic. There's but a handful of actual Conservatives left on what erstwhile has been a Conservative site.

[Bigun]

Just for the record @roamer_1 I only differ with you on expectations. I'm a realist and you expect instant miracles. Same as always, everyone here wants to get to the same place but never agree on who's car to make the ride in.

[roamer_1]

Just for the record @roamer_1 I only differ with you on expectations. I'm a realist and you expect instant miracles. Same as always, everyone here wants to get to the same place but never agree on who's car to make the ride in.

No @Bigun , I do not expect miracles. I do expect 'stuff we get to keep'. And with Republicans in control of all three houses (for how many times now?), it ain't a big ask. But that has been my measuring stick all the way along.

Now, I will concede that there ought to be room for 'Well, here we are... Might as well make the best of it'... And I will admit that I refuse to allow for that. But not without reason. Republicans have been taught to settle. Part of that is optimism and looking for a silver lining. But settling for *NOTHING* is entirely too far. And that is where we are.

So you'll have to forgive me for keeping all y'all's nose on the grindstone. That's why. It's too easy to lose your perspective in all this rah-rah bullshit. And you party for four years and wake up with nothing but a hangover from hell. The ball never got moved an inch. Four years.. fine. I get it. But thirty years? forty? Over and over again?

No. Keep your eye on the ball. What matters is what we get to keep.

[catfish1957]

Just for the record @roamer_1 I only differ with you on expectations. I'm a realist and you expect instant miracles. Same as always, everyone here wants to get to the same place but never agree on who's car to make the ride in.

@roamer_1
The is the whole jest of the matter.  Good 'ol Roamer is the king of Bitching and Naysaying. 

So, I ask him.....   rather than bitching, provide us your 10 step plan of how to fix it.  And these 10 steps needs to be plausible and do-able in the political environment we are in.  Will wait for your list.

[roamer_1]

@roamer_1
The is the whole jest of the matter.  Good 'ol Roamer is the king of Bitching and Naysaying. 

So, I ask him.....   rather than bitching, provide us your 10 step plan of how to fix it.  And these 10 steps needs to be plausible and do-able in the political environment we are in.  Will wait for your list.

@catfish1957
No list. Stop falling for head-fakes. Stop looking at shiny shit. Demand Conservatism out of your representatives and settle for nothing less. Kick em out if they fail and put in another with cold, undying precision.

Stop friggin settling. and be ready to do hard work over a long haul. This plastic banana, easy-bake bullshit has got to stop.

The goal is 'stuff we get to keep'.
And the only way to get there is to elect a Conservative Congress, jealous of its powers.

That is the only, ONLY way forward. That is the fix. The TEA Party was right.

[roamer_1]

And don't tell me it can't be done.

Stop defending the most expensive administration in the history of Man.
You're supposed to be fiscal Conservatives, for crying out loud. 

[Bigun]

No @Bigun , I do not expect miracles. I do expect 'stuff we get to keep'. And with Republicans in control of all three houses (for how many times now?), it ain't a big ask. But that has been my measuring stick all the way along.

Now, I will concede that there ought to be room for 'Well, here we are... Might as well make the best of it'... And I will admit that I refuse to allow for that. But not without reason. Republicans have been taught to settle. Part of that is optimism and looking for a silver lining. But settling for *NOTHING* is entirely too far. And that is where we are.

So you'll have to forgive me for keeping all y'all's nose on the grindstone. That's why. It's too easy to lose your perspective in all this rah-rah bullshit. And you party for four years and wake up with nothing but a hangover from hell. The ball never got moved an inch. Four years.. fine. I get it. But thirty years? forty? Over and over again?

No. Keep your eye on the ball. What matters is what we get to keep.

I don't have to forgive you for anything @roamer_1 because there is nothing for me to forgive. The other side wins because they will brook no dissent while WE remain locked in this circular firing squad.

[roamer_1]

I don't have to forgive you for anything @roamer_1 because there is nothing for me to forgive. The other side wins because they will brook no dissent while WE remain locked in this circular firing squad.

That's right @Bigun . But the only way that resolves is for Reagan to drive the bus.

That means no conservative faction left behind. That's why Reagan is the father of modern Conservatism. That is what he gave us.

It is no skin off your nose to defend another faction so long as your faction is likewise defended. That means NOBODY goes under the bus. Defend ALL of Conservatism. Then the conservative juggernaut will rise up and restore what has been taken.

And the bulwark for that is a Reaganite Conservative Congress.

[Bigun]

That's right @Bigun . But the only way that resolves is for Reagan to drive the bus.

That means no conservative faction left behind. That's why Reagan is the father of modern Conservatism. That is what he gave us.

It is no skin off your nose to defend another faction so long as your faction is likewise defended. That means NOBODY goes under the bus. Defend ALL of Conservatism. Then the conservative juggernaut will rise up and restore what has been taken.

And the bulwark for that is a Reaganite Conservative Congress.

One question my friend. Who here do you think has abandoned their conservatism? Name names. @roamer_1

[Right_in_Virginia]

That's right @Bigun . But the only way that resolves is for Reagan to drive the bus.

That means no conservative faction left behind. That's why Reagan is the father of modern Conservatism. That is what he gave us.

It is no skin off your nose to defend another faction so long as your faction is likewise defended. That means NOBODY goes under the bus. Defend ALL of Conservatism. Then the conservative juggernaut will rise up and restore what has been taken.

And the bulwark for that is a Reaganite Conservative Congress.

Tell us were Reagan would drive in this very circumstance, --- with today's exact Congress. 

[catfish1957]

That's right @Bigun . But the only way that resolves is for Reagan to drive the bus.

That means no conservative faction left behind. That's why Reagan is the father of modern Conservatism. That is what he gave us.

LMAO...

Sorry @roamer_1   I love Reagan as much as the next conservative, but here is a fact you might have forgotten.....


Fed deficit...  Jan 1 1981.  Beginning of Reagan's term-  $79B
Fed deficit.... Jan. 1, 1989  End of Reagan's term .-  $153B

Care to rephrase or retract?

https://www.thebalancemoney.com/us-deficit-by-year-3306306

[IsailedawayfromFR]

@roamer_1
The is the whole jest of the matter.  Good 'ol Roamer is the king of Bitching and Naysaying. 

So, I ask him.....   rather than bitching, provide us your 10 step plan of how to fix it.  And these 10 steps needs to be plausible and do-able in the political environment we are in.  Will wait for your list.

And the bulwark for that is a Reaganite Conservative Congress.

Well, gee willikers, that would be dandy to have, same me as having $20 million in my bank account.

But that just don't happen and that is no plan at all, as we have to play the hand dealt us instead of wishful thinking.

[catfish1957]

LMAO...

Sorry @roamer_1   I love Reagan as much as the next conservative, but here is a fact you might have forgotten.....


Fed deficit...  Jan 1 1981.  Beginning of Reagan's term-  $79B
Fed deficit.... Jan. 1, 1989  End of Reagan's term .-  $153B

Care to rephrase or retract?

https://www.thebalancemoney.com/us-deficit-by-year-3306306

<crickets>

[roamer_1]

One question my friend. Who here do you think has abandoned their conservatism? Name names. @roamer_1

Who here is defending the most expensive administration in the history of man (by an order of magnitude)?

As for naming names, you know as well as I do that is against site policy.
But to be fair, I don't think it is abandonment, but something more like a suspension of disbelief allowing a benefit of the doubt... Sooner or later reality is gonna slap all y'all upside the head... Too late to change a damn thing anyway.

[roamer_1]

LMAO...

Sorry @roamer_1   I love Reagan as much as the next conservative, but here is a fact you might have forgotten.....


Fed deficit...  Jan 1 1981.  Beginning of Reagan's term-  $79B
Fed deficit.... Jan. 1, 1989  End of Reagan's term .-  $153B

Care to rephrase or retract?

https://www.thebalancemoney.com/us-deficit-by-year-3306306

Nope. The problem wasn't Reagan's deficit spending. You are mistaken if you think a country can't ever run red ink. That's unreasonable. The problem is that it was never paid back.

Reagan stretched the dollar and jump-started 20 years of prosperity.

Tumpy stretches a way-way-way-over-stretched dollar and gets a year and a half.

That's after forty years of stretching, and nobody paying the damn thing back.
That's the difference. And all y'all know it.

[roamer_1]

Well, gee willikers, that would be dandy to have, same me as having $20 million in my bank account.

But that just don't happen and that is no plan at all, as we have to play the hand dealt us instead of wishful thinking.

Bullshit. The TEA Party wasn't dealt to you. It was hard-ass work for years and years, and damn near worked. Do that again. And stop whining about the hand you're dealt. That's on YOU. If you don't like it, fold some cards and pick some different ones off the deck. That is an action. Requires work to make it so. but that's how you do it.

[roamer_1]

<crickets>

Bullcrap. I wasn't here with the time to reply until now. You know damn well I would not let such a thing go unanswered.

[catfish1957]

Nope. The problem wasn't Reagan's deficit spending. You are mistaken if you think a country can't ever run red ink. That's unreasonable. The problem is that it was never paid back.

Reagan stretched the dollar and jump-started 20 years of prosperity.

Tumpy stretches a way-way-way-over-stretched dollar and gets a year and a half.

That's after forty years of stretching, and nobody paying the damn thing back.
That's the difference. And all y'all know it.

(1) What?  Are you kidding?  You were cheering an Reaganesque response, when in fact on a percentage basis the deficit went higher on a percentage basis on his watch?
(2) The $USD as prosperity?  On top of a blugeonly defcit?  Plus you failed to mention that in that 40 year period, the $USD has ebbed and flowed on US Econ, and geopolitical conditions are the moment.  That makes no sense
(3) You still haven't responded to the similarities of Coolidge's approach.  (You admitted you didn't care to read it).  Kind of hard to establish credibility  when you ignore the primary premise in the first place
(4) These three alone are proof you hinge more on TDS than giving any thought of how and why DJT is building a place holder (Again Act 1) on an economic agenda that
has merit and precedence of Coolidge like analogies. 
(5) Fact is, DJT (and I am surprised) has been riding a winning hand on so many fronts, that it is mind-blowing.,  But....  You and others rather derail that trend and risk killing this bill, which would result in one of the biggest tax increases in history, and would prevent Trump from getting the funds to protect the border.  Totally counterproductive.
(6) Again, the long term strategy needs to be deficit reduction, but sadly due to political headwinds we have to take one step back, before stepping 2 steps forwaringd.  As I said earlier....   This is Act 1.
(7) We have a chance to Un-Biden our country,  fighting this hurts that effort.

[catfish1957]

Bullshit. The TEA Party wasn't dealt to you. It was hard-ass work for years and years, and damn near worked. Do that again. And stop whining about the hand you're dealt. That's on YOU. If you don't like it, fold some cards and pick some different ones off the deck. That is an action. Requires work to make it so. but that's how you do it.

I was there Day 1 with Rick Santelli as he created the Tea Party Movement in 2009.  Sadly the left killed our enthusiasm, with slander and biased reporting  Funny you mentioned the "Hand you were dealt". Because in 2009-2010 after MSM smearing, we were lucky to crack 30% support. 

Trying doing anything legislatively with that level of public opinion.  Which again, you are great at nay-saying, but have zero in plausible or do-able solutions.  Till then, I am hearing static.

[Bigun]

Who here is defending the most expensive administration in the history of man (by an order of magnitude)?

As for naming names, you know as well as I do that is against site policy.
But to be fair, I don't think it is abandonment, but something more like a suspension of disbelief allowing a benefit of the doubt... Sooner or later reality is gonna slap all y'all upside the head... Too late to change a damn thing anyway.

I'm DONE arguing with you @roamer_1 Hopefully I'll be around long enough to see which of us is right.

And BTW: The TEA Party movement is FAR from dead! They have just altered their tactics somewhat.

[roamer_1]

(1) What?  Are you kidding?  You were cheering an Reaganesque response, when in fact on a percentage basis the deficit went higher on a percentage basis on his watch?

Don't care about percentages. What matters is the shape of the dollar before the stretch. There was room to stretch. And the proof of that is in the putting - Twenty years of prosperity.

(2) The $USD as prosperity?  On top of a blugeonly defcit?  Plus you failed to mention that in that 40 year period, the $USD has ebbed and flowed on US Econ, and geopolitical conditions are the moment.  That makes no sense

Sure it has... But all the way along, more stretch. That's the danger of a fiat dollar, and you know it.

(3) You still haven't responded to the similarities of Coolidge's approach.  (You admitted you didn't care to read it).  Kind of hard to establish credibility  when you ignore the primary premise in the first place

Sure, I responded. I get it. He's running a smoke show, using the threat of tariffs to lead everyone around by the nose. whoopee. 

Don't care. It's all bullshit. Everybody will drag their feet and feign compliance, waiting for his left foot to cross the Whitehouse threshold for the last time. And then it will go right back the way it was.

(4) These three alone are proof you hinge more on TDS than giving any thought of how and why DJT is building a place holder (Again Act 1) on an economic agenda that
has merit and precedence of Coolidge like analogies. 

A pig in a poke without a Congress to back it up.

(5) Fact is, DJT (and I am surprised) has been riding a winning hand on so many fronts, that it is mind-blowing.,  But....  You and others rather derail that trend and risk killing this bill, which would result in one of the biggest tax increases in history, and would prevent Trump from getting the funds to protect the border.  Totally counterproductive.

I am not surprised at all. He's a showboat. It's what he does. It's the greatest show on earth. Just ask him.

(6) Again, the long term strategy needs to be deficit reduction, but sadly due to political headwinds we have to take one step back, before stepping 2 steps forwaringd.  As I said earlier....   This is Act 1.

Kick that can. Kick it hard. What's a few trillion among friends?   

(7) We have a chance to Un-Biden our country,  fighting this hurts that effort.

After which THEY will un-Tump our country. and so it goes, over and over... at the cost of trillions upon trillions.

It cannot be justified. They are taking your money in stacks and stacks of Benjamins, and you like it.

Suckers.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Bullshit. The TEA Party wasn't dealt to you. It was hard-ass work for years and years, and damn near worked. Do that again. And stop whining about the hand you're dealt. That's on YOU. If you don't like it, fold some cards and pick some different ones off the deck. That is an action. Requires work to make it so. but that's how you do it.

Once again, just wishful thinking without a plan.

How do you get those wishes, with a constructive plan to do so.

[catfish1957]

Once again, just wishful thinking without a plan.

How do you get those wishes, with a constructive plan to do so.

@roamer_1 is a good friend here.  We align 90% of the time.  And I agree with his deficit anger.  Same for me.  But I do know if we were purely the version of  Tea Party right now in the 2009 form......   we would be lucky to muster 40 Senators and 125 reps for a budget vote. 

It's the context of delusion vs. realism

[roamer_1]

I was there Day 1 with Rick Santelli as he created the Tea Party Movement in 2009.  Sadly the left killed our enthusiasm, with slander and biased reporting  Funny you mentioned the "Hand you were dealt". Because in 2009-2010 after MSM smearing, we were lucky to crack 30% support. 

Trying doing anything legislatively with that level of public opinion.  Which again, you are great at nay-saying, but have zero in plausible or do-able solutions.  Till then, I am hearing static.

Sorry. The TEA party started way before Rick Santelli caught onto the wave and claimed it.

The TEA party started in Ron Paul's camp, and was pushed by Ron Paul's soldiers from the ground up. They were the ones on the ground in local events. They brought the change. Libertarians.

[catfish1957]

Sorry. The TEA party started way before Rick Santelli caught onto the wave and claimed it.

The TEA party started in Ron Paul's camp, and was pushed by Ron Paul's soldiers from the ground up. They were the ones on the ground in local events. They brought the change. Libertarians.

No one heard about it or got interested in it, until Santelli lit the fire.   Why?  75% of folks on the right wanted nothing to do  of that kooky Libertarian.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_movement

[roamer_1]

Once again, just wishful thinking without a plan.

How do you get those wishes, with a constructive plan to do so.

Simple enough. Stop focusing on the whitehouse and worry about congress and governors. That's the TEA party framework that was derailed by the showboat in the Whitehouse.

Worry about the Congress. This buffoon is nothing but distraction. in four years it will all go POOF! and you'll have no eyebrows, and way less money.

Big government is the problem. Stop making more. The only way that happens is red states and a red congress passing laws. all the rest is bullshit, and y'all ought to know it... Especially you.

[Bigun]

No one heard about it or got interested in it, until Santelli lit the fire.   Why?  75% of folks on the right wanted nothing to do  of that kooky Libertarian.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_movement

Ron Paul has been a friend of mine since LONG before he ever entered the political arena and I can tell you for sure that he is a God-fearing American patriot in every sense of the word. He is also a financial genius but, being human, he has some blind spots. Foreign policy being one of them.

[roamer_1]

No one heard about it or got interested in it, until Santelli lit the fire.   Why?  75% of folks on the right wanted nothing to do  of that kooky Libertarian.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_movement

That kooky libertarian had a massive ground game. Utterly massive. It would do y'all well to study that. It was Ron Paul's soldiers on the ground, Certainly everywhere in the PacNW, and everywhere I know of.

[roamer_1]

Ron Paul has been a friend of mine since LONG before he ever entered the political arena and I can tell you for sure that he is a God-fearing American patriot in every sense of the word. He is also a financial genius but, being human, he has some blind spots. Foreign policy being one of them.

Thank him for me. He was damnwell right with the TEA. Everybody else is taking the credit, but I know better.

I dunno. Being from the more libertarian West, maybe I can see him better than others. Never was a Paulite, mainly because of his foreign policy... But I can sure see him from where I stand. And all with a libertarian mind, in spite of difference.

[catfish1957]

Ron Paul has been a friend of mine since LONG before he ever entered the political arena and I can tell you for sure that he is a God-fearing American patriot in every sense of the word. He is also a financial genius but, being human, he has some blind spots. Foreign policy being one of them.

Agree, and he fair or unfairly  has been deemed that as perception.

[roamer_1]

@roamer_1 is a good friend here.  We align 90% of the time.  And I agree with his deficit anger.  Same for me.  But I do know if we were purely the version of  Tea Party right now in the 2009 form......   we would be lucky to muster 40 Senators and 125 reps for a budget vote. 

Doesn't matter how many you have if the senators and representatives won't do your bidding.

It's the context of delusion vs. realism

Realism is that they're cheering the biggest spending bill ever made on the other thread... A bill made by Republicans, spending more than Democrats - To Republican cheers. *SMH* if that don't show you you're going the wrong way, nothing ever will.

[Bigun]

Thank him for me. He was damnwell right with the TEA. Everybody else is taking the credit, but I know better.

I dunno. Being from the more libertarian West, maybe I can see him better than others. Never was a Paulite, mainly because of his foreign policy... But I can sure see him from where I stand. And all with a libertarian mind, in spite of difference.

Will do! 

[catfish1957]

Doesn't matter how many you have if the senators and representatives won't do your bidding.

Realism is that they're cheering the biggest spending bill ever made on the other thread... A bill made by Republicans, spending more than Democrats - To Republican cheers. *SMH* if that don't show you you're going the wrong way, nothing ever will.

Still waiting to hear your specific plan.....   till then you have been nothing but in the mode of "nay-say:  I'll take  what was voted on, versus the biggest tax increase in history, and not providing funds for security at the border.    You position supports the dim direction,.

[roamer_1]

Still waiting to hear your specific plan..... 

I gave you a specific plan. Fire up the TEA. Start now and maybe we can effect real change on the midterm. All that ground game is still out there. Though not me anymore... I'm on the porch now. 

But even so, I'll bet I can still run a phone and pull some money. Maybe not like before, but I would get back in the saddle for the right people.

till then you have been nothing but in the mode of "nay-say:  I'll take  what was voted on, versus the biggest tax increase in history, and not providing funds for security at the border.    You position supports the dim direction,.

Bullcrap. My position is always smaller government and no spending. That is the opposite of dims, and y'all. If you want this Big Beautiful Government, then you ought to want the taxes that go with it. Jussayin.

I want a little bitty government that fits nicely in a Constitutional box. That ain't what this is.

[DefiantMassRINO]

Maybe 'economists' are $h!t all stupid because they are really political activist hacks.

Economics is a science that uses the scientific method and impirical measurements to understand supply and demand, and how they influence human behavior.

Economics is not about talking out your @$$ in support of a political viewpoint.

Trump's immigration policies and tariff policies are meant to be disruptive to prompt a change in macro-economic and political behavior that are wanted by his supporters.

If 'economists' can't understand why the unwashed masses don't want to be screwed over by elites, maybe they should learn to code, dig ditches, or bartend.

[Bigun]

Maybe 'economists' are $h!t all stupid because they are really political activist hacks.

Economics is a science that uses the scientific method and impirical measurements to understand supply and demand, and how they influence human behavior.

Economics is not about talking out your @$$ in support of a political viewpoint.

Trump's immigration policies and tariff policies are meant to be disruptive to prompt a change in macro-economic and political behavior that are wanted by his supporters.

That may well be the most profoundly true statement you have ever made on these pages! Congratulations!

[catfish1957]

I gave you a specific plan. Fire up the TEA. Start now and maybe we can effect real change on the midterm. All that ground game is still out there. Though not me anymore... I'm on the porch now. 

But even so, I'll bet I can still run a phone and pull some money. Maybe not like before, but I would get back in the saddle for the right people.

Bullcrap. My position is always smaller government and no spending. That is the opposite of dims, and y'all. If you want this Big Beautiful Government, then you ought to want the taxes that go with it. Jussayin.

I want a little bitty government that fits nicely in a Constitutional box. That ain't what this is.

I asked for a plan that was plausible.  I know enough about the makeup and ideology of our congress that if we had gone in guns blazing with the Tea Party plank, we might have gotten 35-40 senate votes, and at most 125-150 in the House.  How would that have ever passed, and the end result would have been a continuum of the Biden agenda.

I want a dismantled government too, and in fact, I have been quoted endorsing may plan which would eliminate 90% of it.  But that's a pipe dream,  In any case.....  Act 1 is over, and I will now be returning to my obsession for cutting every dollar where possible.  A Biden continuation has been averted, and I think we should be thankful for that.  And to...  Trump, Thune, and Johnson......    They need to understand that the guiding prinicpals of their base is fiscal restraint.    We will be watching.

[roamer_1]

I asked for a plan that was plausible.

It is plausible. Done before can be done again.

A Biden continuation has been averted, and I think we should be thankful for that.  And to...  Trump, Thune, and Johnson......    They need to understand that the guiding prinicpals of their base is fiscal restraint.    We will be watching.

Jussayin