With Matt Gaetz Out, Pete Hegseth Is Now In The Hot Seat

Posted on by David Kurtz

A lot of things happened. Here are some of the things. This is TPM’s Morning Memo. Sign up for the email version.

The Undisclosed Sex Assault Settlement Wasn’t Enough?

With Matt Gaetz out, Pete Hegseth’s nomination for secretary of defense comes under closer scrutiny. It’s not just the sexual assault allegation he settled in 2017 — and failed to disclose to the Trump transition team — that’s cause for concern.

If we use the Trump II trifecta of retribution, corruption, and destruction as the analytical framework, Hegseth probably best slots in under the destruction theme. He is someone with nowhere near the management experience expected of someone running the Pentagon; he is eager to root out “wokeness” in the military; and he comes to the job with a passel of other right-wing notions and agenda items.

A sampling of the latest reporting on Hegseth:

  • TPM’s Hunter Walker: Hegseth Railed Against ‘Insidious’ Security Measures That Kept Far-Right Extremists Out Of Armed Forces
  • WaPo: Pete Hegseth’s Army unit in Iraq was rocked by a war-crimes case after he left
  • WSJ: How Hegseth Cultivated an Image That Caught Trump’s Eye

I should note that the MAGA impulse towards destruction is closely connected to the corruption threat. Grifters prey on the chaos, the breakdown of normal policies and procedures, and the undermining of watchdogs and other accountability mechanisms. The enormous amount of money coursing through the Pentagon is ripe for even further abuse than we’ve become accustomed to.

Trump’s Second Choice For AG: Pam Bondi

To help you familiarize yourself with former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi:

  • Philip Bump: Pam Bondi has shown how willing she is to use her authority to help Trump
  • WaPo: Pam Bondi, Trump’s AG pick, said ‘prosecutors will be prosecuted’
  • Politico: ‘Is she on our side?’: Jan. 6 defendants and allies puzzle over Bondi nomination
  • Greg Sargent: “Matt Gaetz’s withdrawal from consideration as Donald Trump’s attorney general is unquestionably a big victory for the rule of law. But now that Trump has put forth Pam Bondi—the former Florida attorney general whose loyalty to Trump is almost as slavish as Gaetz’s—it raises a question: Why assume she’ll be any less wedded to his agenda of unleashing the Justice Department on his enemies and otherwise reducing it to a tool of his most corrupt designs and whims?”

Point Of Clarification

Former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) seemingly settled the confusion about whether he only resigned from the current Congress but might return in the new Congress, having already been re-elected before his resignation. “I do not intend to join the 119th Congress,” Trump’s failed presumptive nominee for attorney general said in an interview.

Matt Gaetz Is Now On Cameo

“After announcing he would not return to Congress, Matt Gaetz appears to be trying out a new career option: creating personalized videos for his fans on Cameo.”–NBC News

JD Vance’s Just Reward

(Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

It’s comical watching Vice President-elect J.D. Vance, a first-term senator, being tasked with steering the most controversial Trump nominations — like Gaetz and Hegseth — through the Senate.

The Trump II Clown Show

What Could Possibly Go Wrong?

WaPo: Trump health picks largely untested in fighting disease outbreaks

Project 2025 Is Back, Baby!

Just making sure you didn’t miss Donald Trump’s bait-and-switch of disavowing Project 2025 toward the end of the presidential campaign when it was controversial and then immediately turning back to it for appointees to his new administration:

  • TPM: Project 2025 Would Like Its Cabinet Now
  • NBC News: Trump’s transition team turns to Project 2025 after disavowing it during the campaign
  • NYT: Trump Picks Key Figure in Project 2025 for Powerful Budget Role
  • Joyce Vance: Project 2025: It’s On (Predictably)

Trump Transition Miscellany

  • Politico: Trump team barred from agencies amid legal standoff
  • NYT: Trump Is Running His Transition Team on Secret Money
  • WaPo: Sharp elbows and raised voices: Inside Trump’s bumpy transition

Trump Prosecution Watch

  • Jan. 6 case: Trump plans to fire Jack Smith’s team and “assemble investigative teams within the Justice Department to hunt for evidence in battleground states that fraud tainted the 2020 election,” the WaPo reported.
  • Hush money case: Trial judge cancels Trump’s sentencing for now.

RUDY!

“With a motion for civil contempt already looming over him in Washington, D.C., another judge on Friday warned Rudy Giuliani that “on pain of contempt” he must comply with requests from the Georgia election workers he defamed to surrender his assets squirreled away in an increasingly controversial storage unit on New York’s Long Island.”–HuffPost

Sign Of The Times

“Almost every week, small white supremacist and neo-Nazi groups have been descending on downtowns, gathering in public parks or rallying on the grounds of state houses and courthouses across the country.”–NYT

Fair Winds and Following Seas

PHILADELPHIA, PA- JULY 10, 2014: The SS United States is slowly rusting away in Philadelphia. The ship has been docked at a pier on the Philadelphia waterfront for 17 years and has been the target of numerous “save our ship” schemes, all of which have failed. (Photo by Michael S. Williamson/The Washington Post via Getty Images)

Every time I take I-95 through Philadelphia, I crane for a view of the S.S. United States, the largest U.S.-built ocean liner, rusting away at a pier on the Delaware River since 1996. She still holds the record for fastest transatlantic crossing, in both directions. Built at the tail end of the era of ocean liners, she cruised at 35 mph.

Repeated efforts to rehabilitate the S.S. United States over the decades have all failed and she will soon be towed to waters off the coast of Florida and sunken as a manmade reef. Photographer Stephen Mallon went aboard for NPR recently; and even though she was long ago stripped of her fittings, his photos show she still carries herself with a certain dignity.

Do you like Morning Memo? Let us know!

Project 2025 Would Like Its Cabinet Now

Posted on by Nicole LaFond

Hello it’s the weekend. This is The Weekender ☕️

It’s odd that the hush money case made it as far as it did.

Alvin Bragg always seemed mercurial in his willingness to pursue it; the facts of the case all dealt with conduct around the 2016 election and the ensuing first months of Trump’s presidency. The charges weren’t the most serious, nor were they the most ambitious: the Smith and Georgia January 6 cases went to the heart of Trump’s 2020 coup attempt; Smith’s classified records case focused on a clear-cut instance of criminality.

Continue reading “Project 2025 Would Like Its Cabinet Now” →

Get Off the Floor and Keep It Simple

Posted on by Josh Marshall

Today I read this piece in Vox comparing the 2004 and 2024 elections and discussing what Democrats today can learn about how the Democrats came back from defeat. Author Nicole Narea says Democrats did three things: 1) They pursued a 50-state strategy, 2) They reevaluated their messaging, 3) They sought to become the party of ideas.

There’s some truth to Item #1. A 50-state strategy is absolutely something Democrats should pursue. But none of these three things are actually what happened. And they’re not why Democrats scored two successive wave elections in 2006 and 2008.

The Vox article speaks of a “reckoning” the Democrats had to have then and another “reckoning” they have to have now. I absolutely see red whenever I see people using this word in a political context. In post-election terms, it appears to mean a kind of ash and sackcloth self-criticism session on the part of whoever you have decided is to blame for the Democrats’ loss.

No.

Continue reading “Get Off the Floor and Keep It Simple” →

A Party of Institutions In An Era of Distrust

Posted on by Josh Marshall

We’ve been discussing a lot of plans and ingenious new strategies for a Democratic comeback which are variously half-baked, hyperbolic, histrionic or merely silly. Here’s one that I believe is not. It’s not even a strategy. It’s simply identifying a real challenge, or a knot Democrats need to untangle.

A key reason that many people are Democrats today is that they’re attached to a cluster of ideas like the rule of law, respect for and the employment of science and expertise, a free press and the protection of the range of institutions that guard civic life, quality of life and more. On the other side, say we have adherents of a revanchist, authoritarian politics which seeks break all those things and rule from the wreckage that destruction leaves in its path. So Democrats constantly find themselves defending institutions, or “the establishment,” or simply the status quo. Yet we live in an age of pervasive public distrust — distrust of institutions, leaders, expertise. And not all of this distrust is misplaced. Many institutions, professions, and power centers have failed to live up to their sides of the social contract.

In short, Democrats are by and large institutionalists in an age of mistrust. And that is challenging place to be.

Continue reading “A Party of Institutions In An Era of Distrust” →

Hegseth Railed Against ‘Insidious’ Security Measures That Kept Far-Right Extremists Out Of Armed Forces

Posted on by Hunter Walker

Pete Hegseth is mad.

The former weekend Fox News host and Army National Guard veteran who President-elect Donald Trump tapped to lead the Department of Defense has made blasting the states of the American educational system and armed forces a cornerstone of his brand. And one of the things that has him most worked up is measures that the military’s leadership have taken in recent years to weed out far-right extremists from their ranks.

In a bestselling book and in a Fox special earlier this year, Hegseth aired his critique of security measures designed to keep “patriot extremism” — a term for militia-linked ideology — out of the military. He has also shared his story of personally being dubbed an “extremist” by the Pentagon due to the ink on his body. 

“I have a Christian tattoo on my chest, which is part of the reason why I was — orders were revoked from my unit and I was pushed out of my unit,” Hegseth said during “The War on Warriors” live show that aired on May 10. “There’s new concepts like ‘patriot extremism,’ which is a part of how they review the profile of people serving. So, there are real insidious aspects of what’s happening inside the Pentagon.” 

Hegseth was referring to steps the Department of Defense has taken to address the threat posed by far-right militia members and white supremacists in the armed forces. He went on to attribute this to supposedly left-wing elements in military leadership.

“A lot of ideological people with too much time … staring down at a meritocracy that they don’t control,” Hegseth said in the Fox live show. “You know the left, they don’t like things they can’t control. And they look at the DoD and they say that ‘this is something we need to bring to heel.’”

The Fox special, “The War on Warriors,” promoted Hegseth’s book of the same name, which was published in June. In his book, Hegseth made even clearer his objection to the Pentagon’s steps to remove “patriot” extremists from the military — and contended that he had been among those caught up in the crackdown. 

Hegseth’s central thesis is that liberal concepts have taken over today’s military. This, he explains, includes the concerns about right-wing extremists in the ranks. 

“The shoehorning of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI), Critical Race Theory (CRT), feminism, genderism, safetyism, climate worship, manufactured ‘violent extremism,’ straight up weirdo shit, and a grab bag of social justice causes that infect today’s fighting force have nothing to do with making our military more capable,” Hegseth wrote in “The War on Warriors.” 

In the book, Hegseth specifically cited a military stand-down to “address extremism in the ranks” that was ordered by Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin in February 2021. A DoD news bulletin announcing that decision noted it came after the revelation that “extremists who stormed the U.S. Capitol on January 6 were active duty service members and others were military veterans.” A substantial number of the people charged in conjunction with that attack had ties to the armed forces. Hegseth also pointed to Pentagon training materials that were leaked in 2021 which outline the “domestic extremist ideologies posing the greatest risk to the DoD.” 

While the documents cited by Hegseth noted other groups, they focused on three different types of radical movements as the most serious threat to the armed forces: “‘patriot/militia’ extremism,” “anarchist extremism,” and “ethnic racial supremacy.” These training materials, which were obtained and published by Politico, included information about “risk factors” and “symbols” to help commanders, who have wide leeway to address these issues within their ranks, to identify members of these groups.

The 17-page briefing that drew Hegseth’s ire described the “anarchist” movement as including left-wing groups like “antifa” and “Occupy.” Under the umbrella of “ethnic racial” extremism it focused on white supremacist and neo-Nazi groups. Right-wing groups like the Proud Boys and Oathkeepers were included in the “patriot extremism” category.

“This ideology holds that the U.S. government has become corrupt, has overstepped its constitutional boundaries, or is no longer capable of protecting the people against foreign threats,” the briefing said of the “patriot” extremist philosophy, adding, “Some elements have openly formed militias and openly advocate for the violent overthrow of the current U.S. government.”

In his book, as he criticized these materials and other elements of the Pentagon’s crackdown, Hegseth specifically complained of the measures to eliminate white supremacists and “patriots.” He accused generals of “hunting for racists in our ranks that they know do not exist.” 

“Not only does this document assert that extremism is rampant in the military, but it suggests a new form of extremism I’ve never heard of in the military called … Patriot Extremism,” Hegseth wrote. “If you want an effective military, your target recruiting constituency is … patriots. They’re not on your enemy list. Unless the purge is coming.”

These writings have made headlines since Trump tapped Hegseth to become secretary of defense on Nov. 12. Trump specifically touted “The War on Warriors” when he announced the pick. Since then, Hegseth has faced considerable controversy and sexual assault allegations.

Hegseth’s critique of the crackdown on right-wing extremists merits particular attention since, if he is confirmed, he would have the ability to change those policies. And, despite Hegseth’s contention that “patriot extremism” is made up and that there are no “racists” in the ranks there has been, in addition to the Jan. 6 attack, ample recent evidence that white supremacists and other far-right extremists have made inroads in the U.S. military. 

The Trump transition team did not respond to a request for comment about Hegseth’s seeming desire to eliminate efforts to weed out far-right extremists from the ranks. In his book and on-air statements, Hegseth only objected to the crackdown on right-wing groups. He did not describe his views on the Pentagon’s efforts to identify and address anarchists and other far-left extremists. 

Overall, in his books and broadcasts, Hegseth made the case that the extremism crackdown was part of a broader problem of far-left ideology in the military that was turning off its “key constituency,” which he described as “normal dudes” and “straight, white men — who represent both the largest portion of the force and the largest drop in recruitment.” 

“For the past three years, the Pentagon — across all branches — has embraced the social justice messages of gender equity, racial diversity, climate stupidity, vaccine worship, and the LGBTQA + alphabet soup in their recruiting pushes,” Hegseth wrote. “Only one problem: there just aren’t enough trannies from Brooklyn or lesbians from San Francisco who want to join the 82nd Airborne. Not only do the trannies and lesbians not join, but those very same ads turn off the young, patriotic, Christian men who have traditionally filled our ranks.”

The idea that liberal ideology poses a grave threat to the country has been a central part of Hegseth’s work. In the introduction to “The War On Warriors,” Hegseth noted the book was “closely tied” to his prior tome, “Battle For The American Mind,” which focused on the dangers of what he dubbed “progressive education.” These writings are an extension of the worldview Hegseth developed during his own college years, when he became drawn to hardline conservative politics and, specifically, concerns about the LGBT community and efforts to promote diversity. 

Hegseth also wears his political and religious views on his skin. He is tattooed and, as he noted in “The War on Warriors” book and Fox special, that ink caused him to run afoul of his commanders. Ultimately, Hegseth said this incident inspired him to leave the Army. In the book and on air, Hegseth claimed the tattoo that caused the problem was a Jerusalem cross, a Crusader symbol, which, he said, got him flagged as “a white nationalist and an extremist.” However, earlier this month, the Associated Press uncovered an email from his National Guard units, which showed his fellow soldiers actually expressed concerns about another one of his tattoos. Specifically, they pointed to the phrase “Deus Vult,” which is a Latin phrase that is also associated with the medieval Crusaders and the concept of “God’s Will.” The email, which was written by the security manager of Hegseth’s unit, said the motto is linked to “members of the alt right,” has seen “White Supremacist use,” and appeared on “far-right internet pages.” Hegseth used the phrase as the closing sentence to one of his books. 

“Deus Vult” isn’t Hegseth’s only tattoo that has associations with far-right extremism. He also has the roman numerals for the year “1775” on his bicep. As the moment Americans took up arms against the British, the date has had significance for a variety of far-right, modern militia groups. It is a particular fixation for “Three Percenters,” a loose coalition of militia groups who take their name from the historically dubious assertion that only three percent of colonists fought against the British. The late Mike Vanderboegh, a militia leader who was one of the founders of the Three Percenters, repeatedly referred to “1775” in his writings and described the first battle of the Revolution, Lexington and Concord, as the formation of the American militia. In “Absolved,” a book that was serialized on his blog, Vanderboegh referred to the date when he described a potential anti-government revolution. 

“Both real sides in my imaginary civil war must be able to recognize the real threat to avoid the conflict,” Vanderbroegh wrote. “You may ask, which sides and what kind of conflict? On one side, just as in 1775, will be the Three Percent.”

In “The War on Warriors,” Hegseth referred to the same date as he railed against the supposed dangers of the “radical Left.”

“If our military, and our Republic, ever truly usurped my constitutional oath and bowed fully to the tyranny of the Left, then — to use a historical example — I would leave the British Army of 1775. I would stand and fight, and advise my kids to find a bridge in Lexington and Concord to stand their ground with me,” Hegseth wrote. 

There have been multiple explanations for Hegseth’s “1775” tattoo. A New York Post article on his ink that was published earlier this month described it as “the year that Georgia joined the other twelve British colonies at the Second Continental Congress.” 

TPM reached out to Hegseth on Wednesday to ask about the tattoo and his position on the Pentagon’s measures to address “patriot extremism” in the armed forces. He did not respond, however, on Wednesday evening, we received a text message from a person who would not tell us their name and asked to be quoted only as “an adviser to Pete Hegseth.” After we agreed to those conditions, they sent a terse text.

“1775 is the Army Birthday you ignorant jackass,” the “adviser” wrote.

We attempted to follow up to note that was not what the Post reported and to ask about Hegseth’s views on screening for extremist ideologies. 

“All I have to say. Thank you,” the person wrote. “Have a good evening.”

Hegseth and his team apparently insist his tattoo has nothing to do with the far-right militia movement. However, in his book, the man who could go on to lead the Pentagon indicated he believes he is unquestionably someone who fits the armed forces’ current definition of an extremist “patriot.” 

“Pushing for gender equality, today’s generals weaken unit readiness,” Hegseth wrote, adding, “Rooting out ‘extremism,’ today’s generals push rank-and-file patriots out of their formations (I’m one of them).”

The Three Horsemen Of The Trump II Apocalypse

Posted on by David Kurtz

A lot of things happened. Here are some of the things. This is TPM’s Morning Memo. Sign up for the email version.

Finding Some Method To The Madness

Since the election, Morning Memo has deviated a bit from its core mission of making sense of the day’s news for you simply because it’s too soon and too fluid to offer cogent analysis that ties it all together. Or at least it’s beyond my abilities to do so.

We’ve been at similar points of flux in past presidential transitions and during other big upheavals in the news environment. When things get too fast and furious to make sense of, I revert to basic principles of inquiry: Who? What? When? Where? How? Why? Recent Morning Memos have focused more on those raw facts as a way to begin to make sense of things and less on weaving them together into a coherent whole.

While that helps to narrow the focus some, it’s still quite a bit broader than usual and less focused than I prefer. Some days have brought such a torrent of new facts that it’s been hard to differentiate things for you in a meaningful way. This isn’t an excuse or an apology. It’s an acknowledgement of the current news environment and the challenges it poses to our cognition and comprehension.

As I told my colleagues when we were all together in NYC last week, this intensely unsettled transition period will come to a close in two to three months and things will settle down some. But it’s still a Trump presidency, and it has the hallmarks of being at least as chaotic, confused, and unsettling as his first term.

I suspect Morning Memo will gradually return to a more differentiated slice of the news with each passing week, but I hope you don’t feel the need for me to rush or force it. There’s value in observing before assessing. Things will play out as they play out. Pretending to understand more than we do or forcing explanations on events won’t change that.

With all that said, I think we had a pretty good handle going into the election on what the major themes of the Trump II presidency would be and nothing so far has suggested those expectations were amiss.

The Three Horseman Of The Trump II Apocalypse

The three central themes of Trump II for Morning Memo, and for TPM more broadly, are shaping up to be: retribution, corruption, and destruction.

Those play off of and reinforce each other in fascinating and alarming ways, but they each represent a different slice of what Trump has promised, has begun to deliver, and seems likely to continue to be animated by throughout his term.

If you look back over the last two weeks of post-election Morning Memos, you’ll see that they are largely organized around these three themes. We’ll continue to use them as a prism through which to understand what is happening, how to think about it, and why the old constructs of political journalism in particular are not entirely up to the challenge of covering Trump II.

Gaetz Combined Retribution, Corruption, And Destruction

What stood out most about the now-withdrawn nomination of Matt Gaetz for attorney general was that it combined all three of the elements that most drive Trump’s animus.

Taking over the Justice Department and installing as attorney general an ostentatiously unqualified loyalist who himself had been the subject until last year of federal criminal investigation was itself destructive of the rule of law, the traditions and customs of the Justice Department as an institution, and the ethical precepts of the legal profession more broadly.

Using Gaetz to weaponize the Justice Department against Trump’s political foes, perceived enemies, and anyone else who got in his way was the promised retribution against the “Deep State,” including the investigators, prosecutors, Biden administration officials, and others.

The entire endeavor was undertaken with corrupt intent, and that was mirrored in its execution and in the anticipated rewards that succeeding in it might offer. Instead of the usual background checks for nominees like Gaetz, Trump bypassed the FBI, in whose own files lay the details of its investigation of Gaetz for allegedly paying for sex, using illicit drugs, and sexually abusing a minor. Installing Gaetz at DOJ would have served to protect Trump (though the Roberts Supreme Court has already effectively immunized him) and his entire power base from legal consequence. It would have deeply corrupted the rule of law and its fair and even application across the entire range of legal issues DOJ has a hand in, which is vast.

But this isn’t about Matt Gaetz. This is about Donald Trump. Every single thing I just outlined remains true whether it’s Gaetz or Pam Bondi, his replacement as attorney general nominee, or whoever else runs DOJ for Trump.

The Old Coverage Tropes Don’t Apply Here

Analyzing the Gaetz withdrawal in terms of what it means for Trump politically, what it says about the power of Senate Republicans (welcome to the resistance, Mitch McConnell), or what it portends for Bondi’s confirmation prospects misses the point on so many levels it all collapses into a heap of outdated presumptions and myopia.

Even the very anti-Trump analysis that I have seen most often the past few days – he’s nominating a clown like Gaetz in order to sacrifice him and sneak through a still-deeply-unqualified candidate for AG, like a Bondi – falls short of the mark.

Trump wants to use the Justice Department as a centerpiece of his retribution, corruption, and destruction jihad. It doesn’t much matter who is the figurehead for that effort. The fact that it will no longer be Gaetz doesn’t dramatically change the analysis. Trump is the problem. The president-elect is the source, instigator, and prime mover of the malfeasance.

For all of these reasons, the old confirmation dance for cabinet nominees – and the news coverage it drives – has no real salience with Trump in office. Is it better that Gaetz was blocked? Sure, okay. Can we celebrate that as a win? Have at it. Does it change the nature or the seriousness of the threat that Trump poses to the Justice Department, the rule of law, and the constitutional order? Not even a little bit.

Grading On A Steep Curve

Former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi has her own issues:

PHILADELPHIA, PA – NOVEMBER 5: Corey Lewandowski, left, and Pam Bondi speak to protestors, announcing that vote counting had halted and a judges order to allow observers within six feet of counting, outside the Pennsylvania Convention Center where election votes are being counted in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on November 5, 2020. People from both sides were gathered. Trump supporters questioning validity of some ballots and Biden supporters pushing for the count to continue. (Photo by Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post via Getty Images)

Now It’s Hegseth’s Turn In The Barrel

  • WSJ: Trump Team Blindsided by Details of Sexual-Assault Allegation Against Hegseth
  • Politico: ‘Profound fear and anxiety among women in uniform’: Pentagon reacts to allegations against Hegseth
  • WaPo: Senate Republicans are more receptive to Hegseth despite Gaetz’s exit
  • Idaho Capital Sun: Trump’s Defense secretary nominee has close ties to Idaho Christian nationalists

A First In U.S. History?

TPM’s Khaya Himmelman, digging in on the GOP power grab in North Carolina:

David Becker, the executive director and founder of the nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation and Research, emphasized to TPM that he is not aware of “any state in American History that has given this important authority to a state auditor’s office.”

How Bad Was Salt Typhoon?

“The Chinese government espionage campaign that has deeply penetrated more than a dozen U.S. telecommunications companies is the ‘worst telecom hack in our nation’s history — by far,’ said Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-Virginia), chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee.” –WaPo

Iceland Erupts, Part X

The latest in an ongoing series of eruptions is underway on Iceland’s Reykjanes Peninsula:

Enjoy Your Weekend!

Do you like Morning Memo? Let us know!

My Kingdom for Some Scorecards

Posted on by Josh Marshall

I’ve been thinking about this since the day after the election and been going back and forth on whether to say someone else should do it or just do it myself. Still not sure which, but here goes. It would be very beneficial for Democrats to create scorecards right now charting where inflation, unemployment and GDP were at the end of Biden’s term and regularly updating it with Trump’s latest numbers. One of the smaller benefits of this is these three numbers are currently pretty hard to beat. You can only get them slightly lower or higher, depending on which statistic you’re referring to, and you can get them much further into bad territory. I’d also add percentage of people with health insurance, even though that’s not normally considered an economic marker.

Continue reading “My Kingdom for Some Scorecards” →