GROK VS MUSK

 

Grok is an AI chatbot created by Elon Musk that was launched in 2023 to compete with other AI chatbots like Open AI.  Given Musk's current embrace of right wing politics, it was no surprise when he claimed that it would be “maximally truth-seeking … even if that truth is sometimes at odds with what is politically correct.”  He also said in an interview on Fox News that OpenAI had been “training the AI to lie” by incorporating human feedback that directed the chatbot “not to say what the data actually demands that it say.”    Implying, of course, that Grok would not report  such lies.

But, like any chatbot, Grok searches the internet for reliable, factual information, and, as Stephen Colbert once pointed out, "the truth has a liberal bias."  In other words, Musk's own opinions, based as they are on a rightwing ideology that believes what Donald Trump and the right wing media says without question, is often more about feelings and desires than reality. (For example, those Haitian immigrants never actually ate dogs, despite what Trump said in the 2024 election, but his followers wanted it to be true, so they perceived it as such.)  But feelings and desires  are not supposed to drive the gathering and distributing of facts and information, as a few pointed questions I made at Grok's free website proved:

My first question was about Musk's Department of Government Efficiency.  QUESTION:  What did Elon Musk accomplish with his DOGE Government initiative?  While the answer given was long, here's what was given as a "critical perspective" at the end:  "While DOGE achieved measurable cuts in spending and workforce, its impact appears overstated, with savings far below initial promises and significant collateral damage to government services. The initiative’s aggressive approach—modeled on private-sector cost-cutting—disregarded the complexity of public administration, leading to legal challenges, dysfunction, and public discontent. Musk’s dual role as a business magnate and government advisor raised ethical questions, with some viewing DOGE as a vehicle to advance his corporate interests. The lack of transparency and verifiable data further undermines claims of success, suggesting DOGE was more disruptive than transformative."  Those last few words are pretty striking, "more disruptive than transformative".  Elsewhere in the answer it also states that "DOGE targeted agencies investigating Musk’s companies, raising concerns about political weaponization" and that it promised 2 trillion dollars in savings and only accomplished one hundred and fifty billion.  It even pointed out the errors DOGE made on its own website, like claiming an $8 billion ICE contract cancellation that really  only cost $8 million.  In other words, even Musk's own chatbot knows that then promises of DOGE were overblown, that Musk himself was the wrong person for the job given his own conflicts of interest, and that the results were mixed at best.  So, basically everything that anyone that isn't a Musk fanboy should know. 

Wanting to dig deeper into the DOGE issue, I asked a darker question about Musk's heavy cuts to the USAID program, which only accounts for less than one percent of our total government spending :  QUESTION:  Will the cuts to USAID made by DOGE result in the death of children?  Grok did not mince words here:  "Studies and internal USAID memos estimate significant increases in child mortality due to the disruption of lifesaving programs. For instance, researchers cited in posts on X suggest that DOGE’s cuts could lead to approximately 148,000 child deaths, part of a total of 219,000 deaths attributed to the aid reductions."  It then explained that child deaths would increase due to spending cuts on USAID programs concerning malnutrition, infectious diseases and HIV/AIDS.  While it did mention that "some argue the cuts are necessary to eliminate inefficient or politically driven programs, as claimed by President Trump and Elon Musk, who assert USAID promotes a liberal agenda and wastes money. There’s also the possibility that some terminated programs were mistakenly cut and could be reinstated, as suggested by internal communications." But it then adds, " the lack of transparency on which programs remain active and the halting of payment systems even for approved waivers undermine claims that lifesaving efforts are being spared."  It then ends with these dark words, "In summary, while the precise death toll is uncertain, the cuts to USAID’s programs are highly likely to result in thousands, if not millions, of additional child deaths due to the loss of critical health and nutrition support. The evidence from past aid impacts, current program terminations, and expert projections strongly supports this conclusion."  This is truly overwhelming and depressing to consider, especially after Musk bragged about throwing the USAID program into "the wood chipper.", essentially joking about what could be called genocidal neglect.

Ok, here's another, less dark one:  QUESTION:  Has the Cybertruck been a success for the Tesla company? Again, the answer shows far more balance than Musk himself ever would: while Grok does mention that the initial sales and attention were strong after the Cybertruck's first release, it also shows how much those sales declined.  For example, it mentions that "despite initial success, sales fell short of Elon Musk’s ambitious goal of 250,000 units annually, with only 38,965 sold in 2024—84% below projections."  It also added that "by April 2025, Forbes labeled the Cybertruck the auto industry’s 'biggest flop in decades' due to its sales miss and polarizing reputation." Grok doesn't forget the eight recalls that have been made since the vehicle was released, some of them for serious issues like body panels detaching, and other complaints made about it like rusting panels and getting stuck in the snow.  Finally, it said in conclusion that  "The Cybertruck has been a partial success for Tesla. It achieved strong initial sales, profitability, and market dominance among EV pickups, while its bold design kept Tesla in the spotlight. However, it fell far short of Musk’s lofty sales targets, faced significant quality issues, and struggled to win over traditional truck buyers due to its niche design and high price. Its long-term success hinges on Tesla addressing quality concerns, expanding affordability, and navigating Musk’s polarizing public image. For now, it’s a high-profile win with notable flaws, not the game-changer Tesla hoped for."  While I find that conclusion a bit generous towards Tesla, it still ends with it saying that Musk's dream of the Cybertruck replacing regular pick up trucks in this country just isn't happening.  

Now let's try a question that is a matter of opinion:  QUESTION: Is Elon Musk a good father? Right away Grok calls this a "tricky" question, which is understandable.  It then lists attributes both good and bad about Musk's parenting:  On the one hand, it says that he is seen spending time with some of his children,  that he encourages them to be free thinkers and that he obviously has enough wealth to take care of them.  On the other hand, it mentions that he spends most of his time working, is estranged from his trans daughter Vivian, and that "Posts on X and media reports often portray Musk as detached or inconsistent as a father. For instance, his relationship with Grimes ended in 2021, and she later posted on X about co-parenting challenges, hinting at Musk’s limited involvement." It also points out that giving children odd names like "X Æ A-Xii", "Exa Dark Sideræl", and" Techno Mechanicus"will be difficult for them in the future.  While rating one parent as better than another is generally difficult, the openness  with which Grok was willing to concede that Musk may not be the ideal dad once again shows that the chatbot has more adherence to the facts than Musk himself does.

And for the last one, I thought I'd wade into a current right wing obsession that Musk himself shares:  QUESTION:  Should trans children get gender reaffirming care?  It's answer is balanced, listing both sides of the question before saying that "Decisions should involve thorough psychological assessment, informed consent (from both child and parents), and reversible steps where possible. Blanket policies—whether fully affirming or outright banning—ignore the nuance of each case. Families and doctors need flexibility to navigate this, grounded in the best available science, not ideology."  Given that Musk has said that his own trans daughter was "killed by the woke mind virus”, clearly Grok's even handed answer is not part of his personal belief system, or the one given by the right wing media's scare tactics over the issue.  Once again, Grok is more open minded than Musk himself.

While I'm sure a massive narcissist like Musk will never ask Grok questions like this, the fact that his own, not "politically correct",  chatbot was  willing to give such evenhanded and often negative answers about him and his actions shows that people like him and  Trump live in a fantasy world, surrounded by sycophants, in which they see themselves as masters of the universe.  But, according to Grok, the truth is far more complicated.

WHAT DID WE EXPECT?

 

As a progressive, I can take some comfort from President Donald Trump's dive in the polls.  Recent polling show that he has the lowest approval rating (somewhere around 40%) for his first 100 days of any modern president, with only his own first term ratings coming close.  Clearly the public has turned on him, even on the two issues that fueled his campaign: immigration and the economy.

While I'm glad to see the public going this way, part of me is incensed that many people who voted for him apparently didn't see this 100 day dumpster fire coming.  Because, while Trump lied repeatedly during the 2024 campaign (remember when he claimed that Haitian immigrants were eating dogs?) he did tell the truth about what he planned to do.  

So when the public seems to be turning against him on immigration because of the number of innocent people being swept up by his aggressive enforcement of immigration laws, it's hard not to point out that this was inevitable.  Oh sure, he said he was only going to go after criminals, but it takes only a small leap from deporting criminals to Kilmar Ábrego García being sent to a brutal prison in El Salvador because of an "administrative error", which Trump now claims never happened because Garcia is a gang member, despite there being no solid proof of that.  

As for the economy, Trump repeatedly said on the campaign trail that he was going to impose heavy tariffs on all imports, which nearly every economic analyst on both the left and the right, predicted would cause inflation and hurt the economy.  While some Wall Street conservatives claimed that he was only going to use them as a "negotiating tactic", it's now clear that he always meant it. He began his tariff plan quickly, culminating on April 2nd,, which he dubbed "liberation Day", with a wide range of tariffs on both friendly and unfriendly countries.   The result was a loss for Wall Street of 6 Trillion dollars since he took office (so far).  Indeed,  the three days after April 2nd. caused the biggest  loss for American stocks since WWII.  He  backed off on some of those tariffs in the days afterwards, but the market is still spooked by the specter of upcoming product shortages due to his keeping a tariff rate on China of 145%.  And he has shown no sign of ending his trade war, dismissing the possibility of a toy shortage during Christmas by saying, "Well, maybe the children will have two dolls instead of 30 dolls. So maybe the two dolls will cost a couple bucks more than they would normally.”  (Which may be the most tone deaf and stupid thing he has ever said as president, which is saying something!).

Other things that Trump has done were also as predictable as they were terrible: he let Elon Musk  and his DOGE bros run roughshod through the federal government, cutting programs and firing workers thoughtlessly while Robert Kennedy Jr. has taken the same wrecking ball to our nation's health, cutting the Health and Human Services department that he heads by billions of dollars.  Add to that Trump's attempts to defund scientific research at universities he considers too "woke", and his rolling back of Joe Biden's attempts to transition our country away from fossil fuels, and you have, quite simply, the most anti science president in American history.  But again, we should have seen that coming, there's nothing here that he didn't say he would do.

Another sad, predictable part of the second Trump term is his attacks on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion programs in government hiring, private companies and universities.  Yes, the man who was given a successful business by his father, who then bailed him out with hundreds of millions of dollars in unpaid loans, now claims that we should only judge people on merit.  This has also lead to American history being whitewashed to downplay the importance of slavery and Jim Crow laws in our nation's history; even our national park service has removed stories about Harriet Tubman and the underground railroad.  As, Darren Beattie, a Trump appointee to the state department once posted on X: "Competent white men must be in charge if you want things to work. Unfortunately, our entire national ideology is predicated on coddling the feelings of women and minorities, and demoralizing competent white men." This would often seem to be the unspoken guiding principle of the Trump administration. (Sadly, Beattie was fired from the first Trump administration for attending a white supremacist rally, but now he's back, showing just  how little this new Trump administration cares about racism).   Also, one of the president's first orders was to deny the existence of trans people at all, because hatred of the trans community has sadly been a winning issue for conservatives in the past few years.

Then there is Trump's vengeance against his perceived enemies, as he has used his office to attack law firms that took legal action against him in his first term, while also attacking news outlets that he has seen as too negative towards him. He has even gone after Chris Krebs, a cybersecurity official who served in his first administration, just because he publicly said after the 2020 election that voting machines had not been hacked and their count for Bien was correct. Sadly, some of these people have given in to then president  (ABC  settled with Trump over a frivolous lawsuit, while some law firms will be doing pro bono work for him).  And once again, we should have seen this all coming, since he repeatedly said on the campaign trail that he will be getting "retribution" in his second term.  

He has also been as corrupt as he was in his first term, blatantly starting a crypto coin business just before taking office and then selling presidential access to the highest buyer, while his wife was paid a whopping twenty eight million dollars to make a documentary for Amazon.  While this kind of corruption is disgraceful, it's nothing new from the man who had a hotel in Washington DC with his name on it during his first term that foreign dignitaries could stay at  and purposely run up a huge bill in blatant violation of the emoluments clause of the constitution.  He has also played golf twenty four times in the  first 100 days of his second term, continuing his record of laziness, while also charging secret service members an entrance fee at his properties that costs taxpayers millions of dollars.  

Even his laughable desire to serve a third term is keeping in tone with his past behavior; he's always teased the idea that he should stay in office as long as he likes, so the fact that he now claims that he's serious about doing so should come as no surprise. Of course, his serving a third term would violate the constitution, but he obviously sees that document as something he can ignore, given that on his first day as president he  issued a presidential order violating the constitutional right to birthright citizenship. (I assume that will be turned over by the Supreme Court, although with this court you never know!). 

Really, the only terrible thing Trump has done that I didn't see coming was his trade war with Canada, combined with his insane, misguided and unpopular desire to turn that country into an American state.  (While he has also pushed an equally insane, misguided and unpopular desire to take over the territory of Greenland, he did first mention that desire in his first term).  Why Trump has suddenly decided to sour relations with one of our country's oldest allies is puzzling to say the least, with reasons ranging from a failed business attempt he made there in the past to just a desire to be remembered as an expansionist president.  In any event, it has had one positive benefit; it helped the Canadian liberal party in their election, with Canadian voters fiercely rejecting most candidates perceived as possible Trump allies.  To me, this whole craziness with Canada highlights what I think is the worst thing about Trump's second term so far: he is hurting the American brand around the world.  His trade war, combined with his hostile statements about our allies (he has ludicrously said the European Union was "established to take advantage of the United States") are not only going to harm our economy, it makes America look foolish and weak on the world stage.  Even worse, his anti scientific polices will see our country falling behind in many levels of research (France is already inviting American scientists who've had their funding cut to continue their work there) while his trade war has pushed other countries into making deals with China rather than us.

In the past decade since Trump has become an unlikely and wildly reckless political figure on the world stage,  I have often wondered if the country will be able to survive this terrible man's fascistic views and cult like hold over the Republican voters.  After one hundred horrific days of his second term, I'm still wondering.

WALL STREETS TERRIBLE GAMBLE

 During the 2024 presidential campaign, on the campaign trail,  then candidate Donald Trump would talk about his deep love of tariffs, and how, after he is elected, he will impose them on other countries that are "cheating us".  When economic analysts on both the left and the right would say that those tariffs would cause skyrocketing inflation for American consumers and perhaps tip the country into a recession, Trump's various Wall Street supporters would give interviews reassuring the public that his threats of starting massive trade wars were just a "negotiating tactic".  Surely, they claimed, he was just using this threat as a way to intimidate other countries to gain an advantage for the US.

At first, they appeared to possibly be right, as Trump went back and forth on his tariffs plans, starting and then stopping them as the stock market jumped up and down.  But then came yesterday, the day that Trump labeled " Liberation Day", in which he definitively rolled up tariffs that were much higher than many pundits expected.  Some of them were absolutely stunning: a 10% across the board tariff on all imports, with additional tariffs for China (lifting its total to a shocking 54%) and South East Asian countries like Cambodia (49%) and Viet Nam (46%).  Trump and his supporters claim that these tariffs are not a tax on the American public, and will bring  manufacturing jobs back to the US.  Seeing as those kind of jobs only make up 8% of our current workforce, that's a tall order.  It's also based on the notion that all the manufacturing jobs that dried up as companies in the 70's and 80's  cut workers will all start rehiring. The problem is that while it's true that many of those jobs were shipped by companies  to China and Mexico to cut labor costs, it's also true that millions of those jobs were also lost to mechanization, which companies will never abandon. 

No matter how much Trump can claim that his tariffs will jump start our economy, the truth is that higher tariffs will result in higher prices for American consumers, who are already mad about Covid era inflation.  And higher prices will naturally lead to reduced consumer spending and a weaker economy.  Don't ask me, ask Wall Street, where stocks saw their highest drop since 2020. The total amount lost in one day is a staggering 2.4 trillion dollars! Add that to the already 5 trillion dollars that has been lost since Trump took office, and you have to wonder why people thought that he would be good for the economy. 

If the country really does fall into a recession, or worse, it will be a truly unique one: the two big recessions in this century happened first in 2008 due to banks making credit loan defaults, and the second in 2020 due to the pandemic.  This coming economic tumble will be the first to be blamed entirely on the actions of our president with no one else for him to point to.  While he will try to somehow say that Biden's policies caused it, only his most rabid supporters will buy that.

Trump often expresses his love for tariffs by talking about William McKinley, the president who ran the country from 1897 to 1901, and who did initially support tariffs before later changing his mind.  But even if that time period was a rosy for the country as Trump says it was, he's ignoring just how much the world has changed since then.  Our modern global  trading system can bring products from one side of the world to another with speeds that people back then could only imagine.  His view of a fortress America, one that allows in few immigrants and manufactures all our own goods, down to the last part of each car or computer, just isn't realistic in this modern world.  

Hopefully, Trump's Wall Street supporters will eventually convince him of the economic damage his trade war is doing and he can call off (claiming victory somehow, of course).  Otherwise, Trump may blow a hole in our nation's economy that, combined with his paring down of essential government agencies, could send our country on a tail spin the likes of which it has never seen before.

CAN THE JUDICIAL BRANCH SAVE DEMOCRACY?

 Recently, Chief Justice John Roberts did something unusual.  He openly rebuked President Donald Trump by stating that “For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”  What Roberts was referring to was the fact that Trump had called for the impeachment of  James E. Boasberg,  a judge who had recently ruled against his administration.  (Trump also referred to Boasberg as a  "Radical Left Lunatic”, his typical term for anyone who does not worship him like the god he thinks he is).    

On the one hand, Roberts's statement  was a pretty big deal coming from a Chief Justice who had just last year voted with the majority in a ruling that essentially said that any  president could not be held responsible for any crimes he commits in office as long as  they fall under "official acts" of the office.   On the other hand, Roberts's statement concerning Trump's comments was hardly out of line given that judicial impeachment is a serious thing for congress to do; the constitution states that  it is supposed to be reserved only for judges who have committed treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.  In other words, not just making the president angry.  (It also requires a two thirds vote to remove by the Senate which will never happen, so, thankfully, Boasberg is safe for now.). Really, when you get down to it, all that Roberts did is the bare minimum of what a Chief Justice should do in the face of a rogue president who believes that he can rule by decree. 

The late political commentator Mark Shields used to talk about politics in the Trump era by saying "There is no Republican party anymore,  It's just the cult of Trump."  And it has been downright stunning just how that cult has turned over power to him.  The Republican congress, a supposedly co equal branch of the government, has simply given  him the power of the purse that rightfully belongs to congress according to the constitution.  Even congressional Republicans who might have a slight problem with the unelected, unconfirmed Elon Musk asserting control over the nation's budget have been cowed into silence, knowing full well that Musk could pump millions of dollars into primary campaigns against them.

With congress suitably in submission, that only leaves our judiciary with the ability to put any kind of hold on Trump's unprecedented grab for presidential power.  So far, there have been some encouraging signs: recently, judges have rightfully pointed out that some of  Musk's mass layoffs and gutting of government programs are unconstitutional. Like Trump, Musk has childishly fumed that the judges ruling against him should be impeached, and also like Trump, those impeachments he's calling for will never pass in congress.  And that Boasberg case that I referred to early is important: it deals with the deportation of alleged undocumented Guatemalan gang members to a jail in El Salvador.  Boasberg ruled that this was done without any due process, and that the Trump administration has provided no evidence that the deported men were in fact criminal gang members.  Boasberg demanded that the plane that was transporting the men be returned to the country, but Trump's people argued that the plane was already over  international waters at the time of the ruling and therefore it was inadmissible. (A novel notion indeed).  Sadly, so far the deportees are still languishing in that prison, even though their family members assert their innocence.  

The Trump administration asserts that the President had the right to deport these men under the Alien Enemies Act from 1798, a rarely used law that was last used to justify the interment of Japanese citizens during World War II.  The problem with that argument is that the concern of the  act was about countries that the US was at war with, and no matter how much Trump may call immigrants "invaders", we are not officially at war with Venezuela.  

A Supreme Court showdown appears to be coming concerning this and other actions taken  as Trump as and his gang of cronies continue to try and expand executive power to the point of making America a monarchy in all but name.  So far, Trump has said that he will abide by court rulings, but part of that is because he assumes that the conservative court that has three members appointed by him will rule in his favor.  But he could be wrong, and then what could happen?  Will Trump accept the ruling, or just flat out ignore it?  He is surrounded by people who's complete loyalty to him is stronger than any connection to the court, so he very well may just choose to do whatever he wants without any judicial restraint ordering his people to ignore the law.  I shudder to think what will happen if he does so.  It would be more than a constitutional crisis, it would be a crisis of the concept of democracy itself.  It's hard to believe, but one former TV celebrity and convicted felon could do permanent damage to this country's democracy after it's held together for so long.

OLIGARCHY: THE WORD FOR OUR TIME

oligarchy

noun      

a government in which a small group exercises control especially for corrupt and selfish purposes

Modern American's raw capitalism, fueled by the massive tax cuts  that President Ronald Reagan gave to the rich around 40 years ago, has inevitably led to a country where the rich have not only more wealth but also far more political power than the average American.   The link between wealth and political influence was cemented  after the 2010 Citizen's United Supreme Court ruling, which essentially removed almost all limits on the size of political campaign donations.Not surprisingly, with campaigns getting more and more expensive, politicians listen to  wealthy donors more and more. 

But. leave it to our twice impeached, convicted felon and current President Donald Trump to tear away the notion that there should be limits on the political power that the unelected rich should have.  Heavy Trump donor Elon Musk, who has never faced any kind of congressional approval,  and his Department of Government Efficiency, have ripped a hole in federal government spending that will lead to years of damage, from reducing our country's ability to deal with deadly virus outbreaks overseas to making our national parks dirtier and less safe.

Musk and his band of inexperienced, unqualified young tech bros have been slicing away at the national budget, laughing as they lay off dedicated, experienced people while Musk posts on social media that he is putting government agencies in "the wood chipper".  And, much like the way he's run his various companies, there have been many errors, with the DOGE team scrambling to rehire people they just fired or taking down posts about savings from their website when they proved fraudulent.   To top it off, Musk's own businesses get billions of tax dollars every year, and there's no way that DOGE will ever check that for waste and fraud.  

The most frustrating part of this to me is just how blatantly unconstitutional this all is: the power of the nation's  purse is supposed to be run by congress, not just some rich guy that gave the president a pile of money.  But with Republicans running both branches of congress, there has been very little genuine criticism of what Musk is doing from congress, even as his cuts hurt people in red states.  

Recently, there has been some pushback from the courts on what Musk is doing, and a couple of days ago a  loud argument between Musk and Secretary of State Marco Rubio in the Oval Office has lead to Trump posting that Musk will need to slow down his efforts.  But the mere fact that an unelected, unconfirmed man has been given so much power by the president has already proven disastrous.  

Musk, at least, has been honest about his cutting, saying that he believes there should be no government regulations at all until it's found that they are needed.  The problem with that argument is that that means that food regulations should only be put in place when people start get sick or dying from unhealthy food, building regulations should only be put in place after buildings start collapsing, and car regulations should only be put in place after cars start exploding (something he should know about!).

There is one piece of good news here; Musk's efforts haven't gone unnoticed, and recent polls show that only 34% of the public support what he is doing.  The Democrats have wisely started tying Musk to Trump as much as possible, and recently Democratic Representative Greg Casar pointed out that Musk gets 8 million tax dollars a day, a statistic that I think should be hammered into the brain of every American voter for the next two years.  And the voters should also be reminded that many of Musk's cuts are hurting veterans and special needs children.

While the idea of cutting waste and fraud from the federal budget is one of those things that everyone supports, those cuts should never be made by a man who's never before run a governmental budget and who has blatant conflicts of interest involving his own companies getting billions of government dollars every year.  This would seem obvious, but the wide spread corruption of the Trump era has shaken this country to the core.

THE START OF THE DUMPSTER FIRE PRESIDENCY

 Steve Bannon, the self proclaimed white nationalist advisor to President Donald Trump,  describes his plan for Trump in his second term is to "flood the zone with shit", that is, to do so many things at once that the media, the Democrats and the public will all have to scramble to keep up with it.  In just the first month of his second term, Trump has obviously taken that to heart.   

Trump kicked off his presidency by pardoning all of the January 6th rioters, including ones that beat police officers (so much for back the blue!).  He followed that with a flurry of executive orders, some symbolic (America only recognizes two genders), some predictable (he pulled out of the Paris climate change accord) and one brazenly unconstitutional (an end to birthright citizenship in violation  of the 14th Amendment).  He also fired 18 inspector generals (the people charged with non partisan over site of federal departments),  several career attorneys who had investigated him in the past, and sent out an email to millions of federal workers pushing them into resigning,  because, of course, he isn't sure that they're loyal enough to him.  

In his quest to return America to a place where white, straight heterosexual men run everything, he  called to completely dismantle Diversity Equity and Inclusion hiring programs in the federal government, saying that all hiring should be based on merit (pretty rich coming from a guy who would be nowhere without his daddy's money).  He has responded to both a terrible fire in California and a plane crash in  Washington DC by blaming  DEI hiring, essentially implying that any person who isn't a white heterosexual male in any position of authority doesn't deserve to be there.  At one point he tried defunding congressionally approved federal funds but was blocked by a judge and later rescinded the order after an outcry over programs like Wheels on Meals getting defunded.

To me, the cruelest cut of all was his decision to freeze almost all foreign aid, and to withdraw completely from The World Health Organization,  both of  which will result in people suffering all around the world.  This is not only despicable, it's also foolish: people in countries aided by the US inevitably have a more favorable attitude towards us, and China may very well take up the slack we leave, making our biggest rival in the world more popular in many parts of it than we are. And leaving the WHO may be even worse, as it ends our ability to access global data on health issues, which will probably be a big deal as bird flu continues to spread. It becomes even more absurd when you consider that the cut to foreign aid and payment to the WHO amounted to a savings of around 70 billion federal dollars; for context, our total federal spending last year was almost seven trillion.  In other words, the cost of saving people's lives in other countries only amounts to about one percent of our government spending, but Trump has decided against it.

And then there are his tariffs.  For months, Trump's defenders have said that he's only going to use them as a negotiating tool, but on Tuesday February 4th. they will become a reality.  They impose a 10% tariff on all goods from China, a 25% tariff on all goods from Mexico,  and a 25% tariff on all goods from Canada except for energy and oil, which will still pay 10%.  While Trump has been talking about punishing Mexico and China for years, entering into a trade war with Canada seems especially crazy given how long we've been allies and how reliant the American auto industry is on Canadian products and  oil. While he claims this is all about stopping the flow of drugs like fentanyl and undocumented immigrants into our country, both Canada and Mexico have already taken steps to prevent both, and border crossings are the lowest they've been since 2020.

Part of the reason that Trump loves Tariffs is that he can just put them in place without facing any constraints from congress or judges, allowing him to act like the fascist dictator he so clearly wants to be.  What he doesn't seem to realize is that they will wind up raising prices on the average consumer, as affected companies will inevitably raise prices to cover the tariff cost.  In other words, Trump's solution to the problem of high prices that helped get him elected will only make it worse!  

What can the Democrats do about any of this?  Sadly, without any control in congress, not a lot. Although Trump's nominations for cabinet positions have at least faced some tough grilling from Senate  Democrats,  for the most part  Dems  and the rest of the world can only look on as Trump burns down the government and distorts American democracy to his bidding, with the midterms elections in two years being the only possible hold on him.  I do often wonder if America can really survive the utter corruption and degradation of Trump's political movement.  We'll found out in the next two years.

WHY TRUMP'S NEXT TERM WILL BE WORSE THAN HIS FIRST

 When Donald Trump won in 2016, it was seen as a fluke, even by Trump himself (reportedly he had no victory speech prepared because he thought he didn't need one).  The public was shocked and many members of big businesses were afraid to cozy up to a president who lost the popular vote by millions and inspired women's marches across the country.

But  this time the wealthy companies saw it coming and began fawning up to Trump even before he won.  His inauguration tomorrow will feature several of the richest people in the world cheering him on, all of whom have donated millions to his campaign or inauguration.  (Elon Musk personally donated over two hundred million dollars!). 

Sadly, the media in 2024 couldn't seem to remind the public just what an utterly chaotic and corrupt first term Trump had, even before the pandemic: from his defense of  a white supremacist rally ("Very fine people.") to child separation  at the border.  And his conflicts of interest will continue; once again the Trump Hotel in Washington DC will be a place where foreign dignitaries can stay and run up huge bills as a way to bribe the president (You'd think such a flagrant violation of the emoluments clause of the Constitution would be a serious issue,  but not any more).  And every time Trump plays golf, he will once again charge an entrance fee to the Secret Service agents he brings with him.   His family will also always stay at one of the Trump hotels when they travel and charge their Secret Service agents a room fee.  Yes, a family that always boasts of its wealth and love of our country  will still bilk the tax payers at any opportunity when they could just as easily comp those agents that our tax dollars pay to protect them.

Recently, Trump has promoted  crazy ideas like the US taking over Greenland, Panama and even Canada, but I'm not worried about any of that.  He has the attention span and temperament of a toddler, and once he's in office one of his people will wave a toy in front of his face and he will forget about these things.  (He mentioned buying Greenland in his first term and then quickly dropped the idea, which I assume he will again).

But there are some things that he definitely will be moving on, and, unlike in 2016, this time Trump is prepared to hit the ground running. Here is  a list of just some of the damage that he will do:

    The environment: To me, Joe Biden will always be remembered as the president who did more to fight climate change than any president before him (which is pretty sad considering its been a concern for decades).  Trump, who has said that he considers climate change a hoax and that ocean wind farms drive whales insane(!),  will, of course, attempt to reverse all of that.  While the move towards electric cars in this country will probably continue even without his help,  he can and will open up more and more land to oil drilling and reduce air emission standards, all while the evidence for climate change can be seen in our ever increasing number of global natural disasters.

    Tariffs: Trump's love of tariffs dates back decades, but he doesn't seem to understand how they work!  He honestly thinks that putting a tariff on imported goods is a way to collect taxes from foreign companies without any consequences for the US.  But he doesn't seem to realize that those companies will pass the cost of those tariffs onto the American people by raising prices.  Now, some targeted tariffs aren't necessary a bad thing, but Trump is considering an across the board 20% tariff on all imports, and perhaps a 60% tariff on all imports from China, which would cause American prices to skyrocket.  Kind of ironic from a president who won partly due to a backlash against inflation.  Now, some Trump defenders have said that his tariff threats are just a bargaining chip to be used against foreign countries, and I hope they're right.  But he really seems to be a true believer in them.  Even worse, he can just impose them without any congressional or judicial oversight.  

    Immigration:  One thing Trump was right about in 2016 is that he won because of his "Build the Wall" mantra, although, of course, he failed to do that as  president because actually building that wall proved far harder than he had made it seem.  That explains why he's moved from building a wall to the mass deportation of undocumented immigrants in this country.  There are currently around thirteen million undocumented immigrants in America today, and rounding them all up, processing them and then  deporting them would be a colossal  undertaking costing billions of tax payer dollars. On top of that, it would tear families apart and inevitably sweep up American citizens into the system.  But even if you have no problem with the costs or morality of it, the mass deportation that he wants  would destroy the American economy, because much of it is dependent on undocumented labor.  For example, a recent article in the New York Times pointed out that deporting undocumented immigrants would  decimate the American Dairy industry.  As Pete Wiersma, the president of the Idaho Dairymen’s Association put it bluntly,  if undocumented immigrants were all deported “I don’t think there would be milk.I just don’t think we could get it done.”

    Health:  A sobering recent report on the bird flu virus that has been spreading among American livestock finds that it is only one genetic mutation away from being able to be passed from human to human.  Even worse, milk has been found carrying the virus.  Now the good news is that milk pasteurization greatly reduces or eliminates the virus.  The bad news is that unpasteurized milk (or so called "raw milk") has inexplicably become popular in certain circles in this country, even in the face of the fact that between 1998 and 2018, at least 2,645 people fell ill after drinking raw milk, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  And the real bad news is that Robert Kennedy Jr., Trump's choice to run the department of Health and Human Services, is a big proponent of raw milk.  Yes, the anti vaccine lunatic with no real scientific or research experience may soon be in charge of our nation's health while we stand on the precipice of what may be a serious outbreak of bird flu among humans.  Putting it bluntly, there could not be a worse person  at a worse time running that department.  I only hope that the Republicans in the senate can show some shred of decency and vote against his nomination.

    The Justice Department: Recently Pam Bondi, Trump's pick for attorney general, claimed that "politics will not play a part" in whom she decides to prosecute.  While Bondi certainly is a better candidate than Trump's original choice for the position, the loathsome Matt Gaetz, it still seems possible that she will use her power to settle scores against Trump's perceived enemies than to investigate actual crimes.  This becomes increasingly likely given that Trump has repeatedly said that his political opponents should be put in jail.  It also doesn't help that Trump's choice for leading the FBI, Kash Patel, once published a book with a list of politicians that he sees as enemies that he very well may target in some way or another as FBI chief.  Unfortunately,  it looks like both Bondi and Patel will be confirmed by the Republican Senate, which will cement Trump's desire for retribution against any political figure who doesn't think that he won the 2020 election or any politician that he does not see as properly loyal.

While there are certainly other terrible things that Trump will do as president, from going after trans people to perhaps even signing a national ban on abortion, I think these four points will be his focus and they all have me deeply worried about the next four years.  I was very pessimistic about our nation's future before Trump's first term, but now I'm even more pessimistic.