TACO Monday, Part I: Iran

Donald Trump did much blathering on his "This platform has gone 1,493 days without a Nobel Peace Prize" social media site this weekend. That included this threat, sent out Saturday afternoon:

If Iran doesn't FULLY OPEN, WITHOUT THREAT, the Strait of Hormuz, within 48 HOURS from this exact point in time, the United States of America will hit and obliterate their various POWER PLANTS, STARTING WITH THE BIGGEST ONE FIRST! Thank you for your attention to this matter. President DONALD J. TRUMP

Readers will undoubtedly be stunned to learn that: (1) the Strait of Hormuz remains closed, and (2) the U.S. has not attacked any power plants, as yet.

There are two obvious reasons that this threat was half-cocked. The first is that the thing that has Trump freaked out is that energy prices are going up, up, up. Destroying any infrastructure related to energy production is certainly not going to help on that front. The second is that if Trump had followed through on his threat, Iran was most certainly going to strike power plants in other Middle Eastern nations. That also would not be helpful when it comes to increased energy prices.

And so, Trump did his TACO act, and backed down on Monday morning. Here is the ALL CAPS message he sent out:

I AM PLEASED TO REPORT THAT THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND THE COUNTRY OF IRAN, HAVE HAD, OVER THE LAST TWO DAYS, VERY GOOD AND PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS REGARDING A COMPLETE AND TOTAL RESOLUTION OF OUR HOSTILITIES IN THE MIDDLE EAST. BASED ON THE TENOR AND TONE OF THESE IN DEPTH, DETAILED, AND CONSTRUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS, WHICH WILL CONTINUE THROUGHOUT THE WEEK, I HAVE INSTRUCTED THE DEPARTMENT OF WAR TO POSTPONE ANY AND ALL MILITARY STRIKES AGAINST IRANIAN POWER PLANTS AND ENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE FOR A FIVE DAY PERIOD, SUBJECT TO THE SUCCESS OF THE ONGOING MEETINGS AND DISCUSSIONS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER! PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP

The immediate effect of this announcement was to goose the stock market a bit, with the Dow increasing by over 600 points. This may have been part of the plan, as the volume in stock and oil futures shot way up (approximately $800 million in investments) 15 minutes before Trump's announcement. It's almost like some investors knew what was coming. Undoubtedly, the Trump-appointed SEC Commissioner, Paul S. Atkins, will make it a priority to look into whether some insider trading took place. If he thinks this is small potatoes and doesn't bother, it is at least possible that NY AG Letitia James might take a look at trades on the NY-based NYMEX and IL AG Kwame Raoul might take a look at trades on the Chicago-based CME, which is where futures contracts are traded. Paul Krugman doesn't think this trading is corruption. He explains why it is treason.

There was one small problem with Trump's announcement, however, at least for a few hours: The Iranian government claimed it was not speaking with Trump, that there were no negotiations, and that he simply chickened out. The White House responded to this, in so many words, by saying, "Nuh, uh!" This caused Gerard Baker, editor-at-large for that noted left-wing publication The Wall Street Journal, to observe:

The unsettling reality is that with this president, Americans in wartime are in the unprecedented position of having to suspect that the enemy's version of events is more likely to be true than our own.

We have become Baghdad Bob.

Baker has a point. Is there any government in the world right now that is less trustworthy than the Trump administration? Maybe North Korea? Maybe?

Eventually, the White House resolved the apparent disagreement by claiming that it's negotiating, but that the people it is talking to are not the current government of Iran. The administration was somewhat fuzzy on exactly what that means; Trump said only: "We're dealing with a man who I believe is the most respected and the leader." That must mean that the new Ayatollah, Mojtaba Khamenei, is not at the bargaining table. Probably not any representatives of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), either. There was much speculation that Trump's negotiators (Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner) are talking to Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, speaker of the Iranian parliament, but Ghalibaf said he's not talking to anyone.

Could the Trump administration really be this colossally stupid? (Don't answer that; it's a rhetorical question.) In Afghanistan, the U.S. tried very hard to prop up a group of non-theocratic officials as the "government" of that nation. And as soon as the U.S. left, after 20 years of propping, the theocrats and their armed thugs retook power within the week. It's not like the Afghanistan War was 100 years ago; it ended in this decade. If the White House really tries the ol' "we'll pick your government for you" routine, it's either setting itself up for a humiliating defeat the moment the U.S. leaves the region, or it's committing itself to another "forever war." Is there really any other plausible outcome? Oh, and by the way, installing a U.S.-backed regime isn't going to re-open the Strait of Hormuz or stabilize petroleum. The Ayatollah and the IRGC still control the weapons that are keeping the Strait unnavigable.

The total non-viability of the road the White House claims it is taking is why the reporting from Axios, based on inside information the site's reporters laid hands on, is very believable. Reportedly, several non-Trump people in the administration are coming around to the idea that a peace deal will look like this:

• The Strait of Hormuz gets reopened, and ships begin to pass through again.
  
  
• The current regime stays in power.
  
  
• Some money passes from the U.S. government to the Iranians, to compensate for damage done to the country. This would be reparations, but the Iranians are open to spinning it into something less politically radioactive, like "unfrozen funds."
  
  
• Some handwaving is done on the subject of Iran's supply of enriched uranium. There may be talk of some sort of moratorium, or guarantee, or something fancy-sounding like that, but nukes are now key to Iran's national security, and they are never again going to trust any deal the U.S. proposes that involves them abandoning their nuclear program. So they WILL be a nuclear power, sooner or later (and probably sooner).

If there is a final deal, and it looks like this, then what you would have is the status quo ante bellum, except... considerably worse. Getting the Strait open would serve only to return oil prices to where they were before the bombing began, and even that might take months or more. Meanwhile, you'd have a younger, angrier Ayatollah in power, backed by a bunch of money received from the U.S., and determined to develop a viable nuclear weapon.

Meanwhile, such a deal would also leave the United States' allies in the region, many of whom have taken a beating, high and dry, and within reach of a soon-to-be-nuclear neighbor. You'd also have 13 American soldiers dead and another 232 wounded... for nothing. And yet, this might now be the best outcome available—militarily, economically and politically. Do you think Trump rues the day he gave the go-ahead to begin bombing? (Z)

TACO Monday, Part II: DHS

The mess with DHS is another story where the stuff coming from Trump over the weekend, and the stuff coming from Trump by the end of the day Monday, was very different stuff.

Let's start with the weekend. In among the blather on Truth Social this weekend was this:

I don't think we should make any deal with the Crazy, Country Destroying, Radical Left Democrats unless, and until, they Vote with Republicans to pass "THE SAVE AMERICA ACT." It is far more important than anything else we are doing in the Senate, and that includes giving these same terrible people, the Dems (who are to blame for this mess!), a Five Billion Dollar cut in ICE funding, a deal which, even when disguised as something else, is unacceptable to me and the American people - UNLESS it includes their approval of Voter I.D., (with picture!), Citizenship to Vote, No Mail-In Voting (with exceptions), All Paper Ballots, No Men In Women's Sports, and No Transgender MUTILIZATION of our precious children. Put it all together, and also, let Leader Thune clearly identify those few "Republicans" that are Voting against AMERICA. They will never be elected again! In other words, lump everything together as one, and VOTE!!! Kill the Filibuster, and stay in D.C. for Easter, if necessary. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! President DJT

In addition to threatening "no DHS bill until the SAVE Act is passed," Trump also pulled strings to kill a compromise that was being hammered out by moderate senators from both parties. You might say he was guilty of the "MUTILIZATION" of the compromise.

However, two things happened on Monday that may have changed the equation. The first is that, early in the morning, there was a disaster at LaGuardia Airport where an Air Canada plane collided with a fire truck, killing both pilots. (Z) spoke to a friend who was in the Air Force for 20+ years, and also has some civilian airport experience on his résumé, and he said this was absolutely due to airport staff being spread too thin, and to air traffic controllers being overworked. It is one thing when people have to wait an extra long time to get through screening (which is certainly not GOOD, politically); it's another thing when people are dying due to accidents, and passengers don't feel safe. And there's an excellent chance the finger could be pointed at the GOP and the White House.

The second thing that happened, later in the day, is that the Senate approved Markwayne Mullin as the replacement for Kristi Noem leading DHS. The vote was 54-45, and broke along party lines, except Sen. Rand Paul ("R"-KY) voted against confirmation, Sen. John Fetterman ("D"-PA) crossed the aisle to sit in the engraved seat Republicans have crafted for him so as to vote for Mullin, Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM) joined Fetterman in voting for confirmation because Mullin is "a good friend," and Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) did not vote. We do not know if Gallego's absence was just a coincidence, or if he's deliberately dodging tricky votes in anticipation of a presidential run, but he was in Texas yesterday at a town hall for veterans.

Late yesterday, after these two developments, The Hill reported that Trump was suddenly open to a compromise measure on funding DHS. It would seem that at least part of the sales pitch to him is that the GOP will get TSA open, with Democratic votes, very soon. Then, the Republicans will go back and pass a reconciliation bill that has more money for ICE, plus some of the SAVE Act goodies Trump wants.

We are not too sure about the viability of either half of that; there may not be 50 Senate Republicans (or the necessary number of House Republicans) who want to become sole proprietors of ICE's excesses, while the SAVE Act goodies are not likely to pass muster with Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough, and so aren't likely to be eligible for a reconciliation bill. Still, it doesn't matter whether we believe or not. All that really matters is that Trump believes. And, at the moment—while making allowance for his mercurial nature, and that he might change his mind based on the last person to be in his ear—it looks like he does believe. So, maybe DHS will be open again sometime soon. (Z)

Political Bytes: Maybe Texas Could Use an Exorcist

Let's look at some of the stories that unfolded over the last few days:

Opus Ted: These days, people tend to be familiar with all the bizarro conspiracy theories in which Jews are cast as the bad guys (or, at very least, as the shadowy puppetmasters behind the scenes). But anyone who has studied U.S. 19th century history closely knows that, back then, it was Catholics who tended to be cast in the puppetmaster role, because they were foreign and strange and there were a lot of them in antebellum America as compared to not so many Jews.

Before we read this story, we pretty much assumed that Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), as a Latino of Cuban descent, was Catholic. But he's not; he's an evangelical, and he's doing his part to Make America Great Again by dabbling in bizarro anti-Catholic conspiracy thinking. He tweeted out a link to a lengthy screed about how a secret Catholic cabal is actually running the GOP right now, and is trying to replace America's Protestants with Catholics. In other words, it would seem we now have competing "white replacement" theories: Is it minorities and immigrants who are trying to get rid of the Protestants, or is it the Catholics?

Our Take: We bring this up because Cruz will put himself before voters again, either in 2028 (president) or 2030 (another Senate term). Do you think this over-the-top anti-Catholic bigotry might just come up? Especially if Cruz' opponent is a Latino Roman Catholic?

---

No Suspects: Associate Justice Clarence Thomas sat for an interview with C-SPAN over the weekend, and he lamented what's happened to the Supreme Court, declaring: "I think we are in danger of destroying the institutions that are required for a free society. You can't have a civil society, a free society without a stable legal system...There was such a belief in the rule of law, belief in the Court... look where we are. Now that trust or that belief is gone forever."

Our Take: We actually agree entirely with him. But we wonder who might be responsible for undermining confidence in the Court, over the last, say, 34 years and 152 days. It's a real head-scratcher.

---

The Sporting News, Part I: These days, the Army-Navy Game is played after the college football regular season is over, but before the bowls/playoffs get underway. So, it tends to be the only (college football) game in town. However, other sports and leagues are trying to lay claim to every piece of TV real estate possible, such that Army-Navy is sometimes up against golf, or basketball, or even the NFL. This weekend, Donald Trump tried to "solve" that problem by issuing an executive order ordering that no other sports be televised while the Army-Navy game is being played. His basis for this "authority" is, in effect, "military necessity." Because, as everyone knows, if not enough people watch the game, then the terrorists win. Or is it the communists? We forget.

Our Take: Trump obviously does not have the authority to do this—XOs serve solely to give instructions to the executive agencies, not to tell privately owned broadcasters what they can and cannot do. The question is: Does he not understand how it works, or is he just hoping his followers don't understand? We honestly don't know.

---

The Sporting News, Part II: The reigning NBA champions are the Oklahoma City Thunder. In theory, they would have visited the White House this weekend, as they were in town to play the Washington Wizards. The team did not visit, due to a "timing issue."

Our Take: We are sure there was indeed a "timing issue," namely that the Thunder's championship coincided with Trump's presidency. While Joe Biden was president, three of the four NBA champs made the trip. By contrast, the past five NBA champs to win while Trump was in the White House had "timing issues" and did not visit.

---

Mueller's Time: Former FBI Director and Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who was also a decorated Marine Corps veteran, died this weekend. Donald Trump responded to the news thusly: "Robert Mueller just died. Good, I'm glad he's dead. He can no longer hurt innocent people! President DONALD J. TRUMP"

Our Take: We thought we should at least mention this, but we have no idea what to say. It's hardly a secret that Trump is the least classy man ever to serve as president, and might well be the least classy American living today. Who has a hole in them so big they need to take cheap shots at the dead, especially since the dead can no longer defend themselves? Actually, we know the answer to that question: Donald Trump. Donald Trump has a hole in him that big.

---

Sweet Georgia Jon: Republicans had high hopes that they might flip Sen. Jon Ossoff's (D-GA) seat this cycle, since Georgia is purple, and in his first election he benefited enormously from being on the ballot with Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-GA), who got Black voters to the polls. But the Republicans have a messy primary and not-too-great candidates, while Ossoff has run a disciplined, very skilled campaign focusing on Georgia issues, and distancing himself from the national party. He's also a superstar fundraiser. For all of these reasons, the GOP is now thinking that this battle may be lost.

Our Take: If the Republicans are smart, they will notice they have a three-seat majority and will invest all their resources in trying to maintain it. When you face a wave election for the other party, you should not be throwing money at trying to expand your majority. To do so would be a version of the Hillary Clinton 2016 error, where she spent too much time and money chasing unicorns, and did not give enough time and money to more winnable (and more important) states.

You stay classy, San Diego. (Z)

Mirror, Mirror on the Wall, Who's the Fairest of Them All?

Race to the White House, in addition to collecting other polling information, also takes note when the approval ratings of key political figures are measured. And yesterday, blogger Pablo Manríquez decided to collect all those numbers in one place, to produce a ranking of how some pretty high-profile people rate, relative to other high-profile people.

We are not exactly enamored of Manríquez' approach, however. He ranked politicos solely by their approval rating, which results in someone like Donald Trump being ranked equal to Kamala Harris, since they both have the backing of 40% of respondents. The problem is that Trump is actually a fair bit less popular, since his net is -16 (40% vs. 56%), while hers is -8 (40% vs 48%). On top of that, Manríquez' rankings make someone like Gov. Andy Beshear (D-KY) look downright unpopular, primarily because there are so many people with no opinion (48%) that the percentage who approve of him is only 30%. His negatives are only 22%, which means he actually nets +8, and yet according to Manríquez' ranking, Beshear is far less popular than the -16 Trump.

Anyhow, to try to get meaning out of the data that's a little more useful, we've calculated the Q Score for each of the folks on the list. Q Score, for those who are unfamiliar, was developed in 1963, and it ignores any respondent who does not have an opinion. So, if someone has a Q Score of, say, 40%, it means that of the respondents who expressed an opinion on the person, 40% approved. Here's the data, ordered by Q Score:

Person	Approve	Disapprove	No Opinion	Q Score
Barack Obama	55	39	6	58.5
Andy Beshear	30	22	48	57.7
Josh Shapiro	37	28	35	56.9
Michelle Obama	51	42	7	54.8
Bernie Sanders	49	43	8	53.3
Pete Buttigieg	37	34	29	52.1
Zohran Mamdani	28	27	45	50.9
Mike Johnson	31	31	38	50.0
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez	35	41	25	46.1
Marco Rubio	34	40	25	45.9
Gavin Newsom	34	40	27	45.9
Kamala Harris	40	48	12	45.5
Robert Kennedy	40	48	12	45.5
Ron DeSantis	32	40	28	44.4
JD Vance	39	50	12	43.8
Ted Cruz	35	45	20	43.8
Tucker Carlson	27	35	38	43.5
Donald Trump	40	56	4	41.7
Scott Bessent	23	34	43	40.4
Tulsi Gabbard	36	54	10	40.0
Rand Paul	22	34	44	39.3
Pete Hegseth	26	41	33	38.8
Kristi Noem	27	45	27	37.5
Pam Bondi	25	48	27	34.2
Stephen Miller	18	38	43	32.1

And now, taking a look at the data, here are ten thoughts that occur to us:

1. Whether using the original method or our method, Barack Obama remains the most popular political figure in the land. Similarly, whether using the original method or our method, Stephen Miller is the most hated political figure in the land.
   
   
2. It would seem that the Democrats already have a couple of dynamite presidential candidates on their bench. And since more than a third of the voting public has yet to form an opinion on the two moderate governors, there is at least some chance for their Q Score to improve.
   
   
3. On the other hand, the would-be Democratic presidential nominees from California would seem to have some work to do.
   
   
4. Although moderate Democrats dominate the top of the list, progressivism also seems to be playing fairly well with the voting public.
   
   
5. While we see many stories about how the "Democratic brand" is badly damaged, it looks to be the MAGA brand that is actually flailing. Of the bottom 13 here, 12 are MAGA, or are pretending to be MAGA (with Sen. Rand Paul, R-KY, the exception).
   
   
6. Why on Earth is anyone tracking Tucker Carlson? Does anyone believe he'll ever be a viable candidate for president or any other elective office? Democrats loathe him with the white-hot heat of a thousand suns, while many Republicans loathe him with the white-hot heat of 500 suns.
   
   
7. Secretary of State Marco Rubio (R) would seem to be your GOP presidential frontrunner right now. That is, unless you believe Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) is a dark horse, just biding his time until he throws his hat into the ring.
   
   
8. VP J.D. Vance, by contrast, is exactly as popular as Ted Cruz. This is not a good place to be.
   
   
9. Robert Kennedy Jr., as one of the most popular Trumpers on the list, would seem to have some version of a MAGA + MAHA coalition, one that affords him slightly more support than the Trumpers who are just MAGA. We doubt this presages some sort of political future for him, though, because he's still doing pretty poorly, and because he is likely to alienate MAGA, MAHA, or both by the time this is all said and done. Oh, and there's also the fact that he's still bat**it crazy.
   
   
10. We are always mystified: Who are these people who have yet to form an opinion on Barack Obama, or Donald Trump, or Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)? These three men have all been major political figures for at least a decade. Exactly what information is needed for the "No Opinion" folks to make up their minds?

Also noteworthy is that one serious contender, Ruben Gallego, isn't even on the list. There you have it—one quick and dirty taking of the current political temperature. (Z)

---

Previous report         Next report

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend.

---The Votemaster and Zenger