How bad is Trump 2.0 so far…

Evaluating President Trump’s performance involves considering various aspects, including economic policies, international relations, and domestic governance. Here’s an overview based on recent developments:

Economic Policies

President Trump’s recent tariff policies, particularly those targeting Canadian fuels, have raised concerns about increasing energy costs. Governor Maura Healey of Massachusetts highlighted that these tariffs could lead to significant hikes in gas and heating oil prices, potentially costing Massachusetts consumers nearly $1 billion. 

Additionally, public sentiment reflects dissatisfaction with the administration’s handling of inflation. Consumers have expressed frustration over persistent high prices of everyday goods, with some feeling that federal relief has been insufficient. This discontent has contributed to a decline in consumer confidence and a drop in consumer spending, affecting various sectors of the economy. 

International Relations

Trump’s approach to foreign policy has been characterized by a departure from traditional diplomatic norms. His actions have led to a more unpredictable global landscape, with longstanding treaties and alliances being challenged. This shift has raised concerns about global stability and the undermining of democratic values. 

Domestic Governance

Domestically, Trump’s administration has been marked by unconventional appointments and a focus on media spectacle over traditional policymaking. This blending of entertainment and politics has led to concerns about the erosion of democratic principles and a turbulent political environment. 

Public Perception

Public opinion on Trump’s presidency is deeply divided. While some supporters remain hopeful about his policies, others express regret over their electoral choices, citing unmet expectations regarding economic relief and policy outcomes. 

In summary, assessments of President Trump’s performance vary widely. Critics point to economic challenges, strained international relations, and unconventional governance as areas of concern, while supporters may view his actions as necessary disruptions to the status quo.

Link

npr:

Soon after its launch in 1986, the satirical magazine Spy picked Donald Trump as the brash embodiment of a crass age. Founded by Graydon Carter and Kurt Andersen, the magazine chronicled New York’s obsessions with wealth and social status, zeroing in on Trump’s questionable business dealings (of which there were many) and his outlandish personal traits (of which there were perhaps even more).

Carter is now editor of Vanity Fair, and Kurt Andersen is a novelist and host of WNYC’s nationally syndicated show Studio 360. (They sold the magazine in the mid-1990s, and it folded several years later.) No journalists have followed Trump more closely. No journalists have angered him more often. But they have not spoken jointly about Trump’s unlikely bid for the presidency — until now.

Decades Later, ‘Spy’ Magazine Founders Continue To Torment Trump