Nobel Economist Discovers the Trump Effect
Economics has been called the “dismal science,” but Robert Shiller, who won the 2013 Nobel Prize in economics, is feeling optimistic. Interviewed in October on CNBC’s “Trading Nation,” Shiller says a new phenomenon he calls the Trump Effect could keep the economy booming.
The Trump Effect has already been observed on many other issues, from a reduction in illegal immigration to record highs in the stock market. It skyrocketed immediately following the election of President Trump, in contrast with the election of most other presidents.
Many large countries, from Japan to Brazil to Poland, have become friendlier to the United States due to President Trump’s leadership. The Trump Effect has also caused rogue foreign leaders such as Kim Jong- un of North Korea to pull back on menacing behavior against us.
Turkey released a Christian pastor, Andrew Brunson, who was imprisoned near the end of Obama’s presidency. It is doubtful Obama could have obtained his release as Trump did, and hardly anyone ever talked about an “Obama Effect.”
The spectacular enthusiasm at Trump’s rallies are like nothing ever seen before. Recently in Dallas the line to attend started forming two days before the event, and the prior event in the blue state of Minnesota attracted a larger crowd of supporters outside the packed arena than inside.
The Nobel Prize-winning Shiller cites the Trump Effect for the ongoing success of our economy. In 2017 he predicted that Trump as president would trigger a recession, but now gives credit to the personal leadership by Trump.
“Aren’t you worried about danger of recession?” CNBC host Mike Santoli asked Shiller in a recent interview. “What about the inverted yield curve, the slowdown in global growth, or the prospect of a tariff war?”
“The inverted yield curve scare looked frightening at first,” Shiller admitted, “but nothing dramatic has happened. We’re still in the Trump era, and I think that
DonaldTrumpbyinspirationhadaneffectonthemarket — not just tax cutting.”
Consumer spending remains strong and Shiller, a Yale University professor, says “it has to do with the inspiration for many people provided by our motivational speaker president who models luxurious living.” Shiller says that Trump “makes people ashamed if they look like a loser — no one wants to look like a loser in this culture.”
Avoiding a recession is dependent, in other words, on Trump remaining in office. The long-predicted recession couldoccurwithoutTrumptokeeptheeconomygoing, and Shiller considers the possibility of impeachment to be the greatest threat to continued economic prosperity.
“The big uncertainty is these impeachment hearings. If he survives that, he might contribute for some time in boosting the market,” Shiller explains.
The economic expansion is already the longest in history, which baffles many experts. Computer models predict that by now we should be in a recession.
Shiller explains, “Consumers are hanging in there. You might wonder why that would be at this time so late into the cycle.”
Obama can no longer take credit, three years after the presidential election won by Trump. The surprisingly long-lasting growth must have more recent causes, and Shiller cites patriotism as one of them.
“People here in America think this is the capitalist country par excellence. We’re proud of that, and we’re doing well right now,” observes Shiller.
Shiller sounds like someone singing the benefits of an America First agenda. This should include leadership by Trump far beyond motivating consumers to spend money, such as bringing troops home.
President Trump’s withdrawal of troops from Syria was widely criticized by politicians in both parties, but it sent an unmistakable message that the United States is not going to be the world’s policeman anymore. Our soldiers should not stand forever in harm’s way to protect people who do not even like us.
After globalists insisted that the Kurds were our friends and that Trump should not have withdrawn troops from their controlled territories in Syria, the very different truth was captured in videos of the pull-out. Ungrateful, grown Kurdish men pelted our American troops with food debris and angry slogans.
These videos confirmed President Trump’s view that American troops should come home where they can be safe and helpful to America, rather than risk their lives for people who do not respect and thank us. American soldiers have long sacrificed their own lives to help others, but the lack of gratitude in this situation confirms it is time to pull out.
Liberals have even called for building a wall to protect the Kurds, despite opposing building a wall to protect our southern border against violence and an influx of drugs. Trump is right to focus most on the people he helps the most: Americans.
Free Trade Means No Free Speech in the NBA
Once upon a time, professional sports were popular entertainment free of political correctness, where fans and players could be themselves and say whatever they liked. Colorful basketball stars like Dennis Rodman spoke their mind on and off the court, and fans loved it.
But then Nike, a liberal corporation based in Oregon, essentially took over the National Basketball Association (NBA). The $8 billion business of the NBA became beholden to the $40 billion business of Nike, as sports journalist Jason Whitlock astutely observes.
Nike makes sports shoes but it is so well connected that it became one of 30 companies invited to join the prestigious Dow Jones average on the stock market. Nike heavily promoted the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), and got Barack Obama and Joe Biden to line up in support.
Then Donald Trump won the presidential election by campaigning against the TPP and phony free trade.
But Nike continues to pander to China anyway, and that is what drives the NBA’s censorship of anyone standing up for democracy in Hong Kong. Even a CNN reporter was muzzled when she merely tried to ask two basketball players how they felt about this lack of free speech in the NBA.
“The NBA has always been a league that prides itself on its players and its coaches being able to speak out openly about political and societal affairs,” CNN journalist Christina Macfarlane began.
She next asked whether this was still true. An NBA official immediately cut her off and insisted on taking her microphone away.
Nike is behind this censorship, yet almost no one will admit it.
Fortunately at least Jason Whitlock, the African American host of Speak for Yourself, is speaking out against Nike’s manipulation of the NBA.
“This is about a President that won’t cooperate with what Nike wants done,” Whitlock explained. “Nike is using the NBA and its leverage over the NBA to go after this guy because they disagree with him about his policies as it relates to trade in China. It’s very simple.”
LeBron James, who has an estimated $1 billion contract with Nike, said a Houston Rockets executive “wasn’t educated” when he tweeted out in support of democracy in Hong Kong. LeBron’s comment was baffling until one realizes it echoes the view of Nike, his lucrative sponsor.
NBA teams are now playing exhibition games in China, but players are prohibited by the NBA from speaking to the press at any time during the tour. Far from sports bringing two nations together, instead it is inflaming the tensions.
Free trade has resulted in censorship and less freedom. The justification of free trade with China was that it would make China more like us, but instead it has infringed on our rights of free speech which have been a cornerstone of our freedom.
Nike is the same company that funded ads featuring Colin Kaepernick and touting the importance of his right to express himself. Yet Nike insists that no one in the NBA express himself by criticizing China as millions of protesters in Hong Kong are doing.
In other words, it is OK in the view of Nike to criticize the American Flag and our President, but intolerable for anyone to criticize China.
Television ratings for NBA games are not even half of what they were in the 1990s, and perhaps executives see China as a market where the league might expand. The Brooklyn Nets were acquired by a Chinese billionaire and suddenly it appears that the entire league has to cater to the Communist state.
The expectation of the British when they agreed to give Hong Kong back to China was that, by now, China would be more like the free world. But the massive crowds of Hong Kong residents who are demonstrating against China show that it has not changed, at least not for the better.
Fifty years ago, “ping-pong diplomacy” was supposed to soften the communist dictators who have run the mainland since their violent revolution. After a half-century of no progress, now we have “basketball diplomacy” pushed with the same false hope.
Diplomacy is merely a charade if one side is not allowed to speak up for its values. With the immense income that the NBA players, owners, and league executives enjoy, one would think they could at least speak their mind a bit.
And yet Nike does not let them. This big promoter of free trade is an even bigger opponent of free speech, thereby siding with China against freedom in Hong Kong and censoring others who are beholden to Nike.
Nike protected its sale of shoes in China, but cannot appease the resultant anger against LeBron James in Hong Kong. His jersey is being burned in response to his, or Nike’s, siding with the Chinese tyrants.
Manly Sports Carry Trump in Battleground States
President Trump’s high-profile support of manly sports is scoring points for him in the battleground states. While Elizabeth Warren and other Democratic contenders are absent from marquee athletic competitions, Trump is being seen by millions of Americans as an ordinary guy cheering alongside the rest of us.
On November 4, Trump welcomed the world champion Washington Nationals to the White House, after having attended Game 5 of the World Series. Its catcher, Kurt Suzuki, donned a Make America Great Again hat to the consternation of the liberal media.
First baseman Ryan Zimmerman presented a “TRUMP 45” baseball jersey to the 45th President. The Nationals’ principal owner and 18 of its 25 players attended, despite liberal pressure to boycott the event.
The handful of players who skipped this ceremony mostly did not say why, but potential liberal retaliation against Trump supporters is tainting even our national pastime. Newspaper reporters dole out MVP awards and Hall of Fame inductions, and a player who skipped the Trump event is contending for an MVP award for which votes have been cast.
On November 9, Trump attended a college football game between the top two teams in the nation, LSU and Alabama.Dubbedthe“gameofthecentury,”thisgame was played deep in conservative Alabama where Trump will be running up the score on Election Day next fall.
As at any large public event, Trump receives a smattering of cheers and some organized boos, but millions of voters in the heartland appreciate his willingness to attend what Democratic candidates avoid. Trump’s appearance ringside at the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) at Madison Square Garden on November 2 was a knock-out punch with voters.
All three of these sports – baseball, football, and ultimate fighting – are manly traditions which have become politically incorrect at the liberal universities where Professor Warren comes from. Millions of women are huge fans of the same competitions which Trump attends, but liberal feminists are not.
A bikini-clad woman, known as a “ring girl,” adorns the ring for ultimate fighting. But feminists do not like that, and have succeeded in eliminating the swimsuit portion of the Miss America contest.
UFC founder Dana White welcomed Trump at Madison Square Garden, a short cab ride from his Trump Tower in New York City. During the Republican National Convention which nominated Trump, White predicted correctly that Trump’s “sense of loyalty and commitment will translate into how he will run this country.”
“We need somebody who believes in this country, we need somebody who is proud of this country, and who will fight for this country. Donald Trump is a fighter, and I know he will fight for this country.”
Trump has been doing exactly that, fighting for our country, while congressmen Nancy Pelosi and “Shifty” Adam Schiff do the opposite by concocting a scheme of secret impeachment hearings against Trump. Rather than cower in political fear in the White House as Richard Nixon did, Trump has come out swinging, to a standing ovation by the American public.
His trip to the small town of Tupelo, Mississippi, attracted a full house at the 10,000-seat BancorpSouth Arena, with many thousands more gathered outside. “I love him 100 percent,” gushed Mary Ann Gannon there. “He’s the greatest president we’ve ever had.”
On November 4, amid the backbiting by the swampy Democrats in D.C., Trump held a rally at the 23,500- seat Rupp Arena in Lexington, Kentucky, home of the Wildcats college basketball team. “This is better than the Final Four,” Trump said, to a raucous ovation inside and by thousands outside.
Even those who were not really Trump supporters are getting in on the fun. A racehorse named “Covfefe,” after a famous tweet by Trump, recently won the $1 million Breeders Cup at Santa Anita, California.
Voters are siding with Trump in the key battleground states which will decide the upcoming presidential election: Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Florida, Arizona, and Michigan. Despite all the Democratic maneuvering about impeachment, Trump leads in these states.
National polls for the presidential election have been almost meaningless, as they should be. California has the most voters but has made itself politically irrelevant by turning so far leftward.
It hurts the Democratic contenders to continue to pander to voters in California, which moved its primary earlier in order to impact the nomination. Hillary Clinton racked up millions of extra votes there, but those votes were wasted as Trump won all the battleground states.
“New Poll Shows Democratic Candidates Have Been Living in a Fantasy World,” screams the latest headline from the left-leaning New York magazine.
The Democratic candidates are preaching to their own irrelevant choir, rather than reaching out to inde- pendent-minded Democrats in the battleground states where Trump is heading toward a second victory.
No More Sanctuary Cities
“The most dangerous and shameful attacks on the rule of law come from and in the form of sanctuary cities,” President Trump declared on October 28 to the International Association of Chiefs of Police in Chicago. Applause then erupted when he said that criminal aliens should be turned over to federal immigration authorities and sent home.
Sanctuary cities interfere with that process by ordering local law enforcement not to comply with federal laws against illegal immigration. Illegal aliens are protected in sanctuary cities against being asked about their lack of citizenship, and if arrested for a crime they are not handed to federal officials for deportation.
On the ballot in November in Tucson was Proposition 205, which would have made this large metropolis near the Mexican border the first sanctuary city in Arizona. It would bar local police from checking the immigration status of people they stop or arrest.
California has many sanctuary cities, but also has a wall along its border between San Diego and Mexico. Arizona, which does not have a wall and is victim to a substantial percentage of the illegal immigration flowing into our country, does not yet have any sanctuary cities.
Even some progressives opposed the ACLU- endorsed Prop. 205 to make Tucson a sanctuary city. The costs would be staggering, and already state lawmakers are planning to assess those expenses against the city if it approves this bad idea.
Tucson Councilwoman Regina Romero, a Democrat who was elected mayor in that same election, was against making it a sanctuary city by Prop. 205. She pointed out how it would interfere with Tucson police in working with federal officials on drug crimes, human trafficking, and missing children cases.
Arizona state lawmakers threatened to withhold $130 million annually from Tucson if its voters approved this bill to harbor illegal aliens, who cost far more than that in crimes, social services, and other entitlements. It would make sense for Tucson to foot that bill rather than burdening the rest of the state with those increased costs from illegal immigration.
Prop. 205 conflicted with a key part of an Arizona law that the Supreme Court left in place after a legal challenge. Its Senate Bill 1070 continues to require local police to make a reasonable attempt to determine the immigration status of a suspect when there is reasonable suspicion about it.
Meanwhile, President Trump’s splendid Solicitor General filed a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn California Senate Bill 54, which requires officials there to obstruct deportations. The Ninth Circuit upheld the California pro-sanctuary city law despite admitting that it “makes the jobs of federal immigration authorities more difficult,” and even discriminates against federal officials performing their duties.
The often-reversed Ninth Circuit upheld SB 54 on the theory that California “retains the right” to obstruct federal law and hinder federal law enforcement. The Ninth Circuit invoked the Tenth Amendment, which can be helpful in other contexts, as having an “anticommandeering” rule against federal interference with state laws.
But this peculiar interpretation of the Tenth Amendment has already wreaked havoc beyond the issue of illegal immigration. In 2018 the Supreme Court misused this “anticommandeering” theory to open the door to sports gambling in all 50 states, despite the immense harm it causes.
It is a distortion of the salutary principle of states’ power to use the Tenth Amendment to uphold state laws which flout federal law enforcement against illegal immigration. These state laws, and in particular California SB 54, impose expenses on other states by attracting more illegal border crossings.
“Aliens are present and may remain in the United States only as provided for under the auspices of federal immigration law,” Solicitor General Noel Francisco explains to the Supreme Court in his petition for cert. “It therefore is the United States, not California, that ‘retains the right’ to set the conditions under which aliens in this country may be detained, released, and removed.”
Only Congress and the President can define who is here lawfully. The federal government, without interference by states, must be able to remove those who are here illegally.
Democrats in California, however, see many future voters for their party among the swarms of illegal immigrants flowing over our southern border. That state has lurched leftward as it attracts more illegal aliens with its sanctuary cities.
But as Trump’s Solicitor General elaborates, “When officers are unable to arrest aliens – often criminal aliens – who are in removal proceedings or have been ordered removed from the United States, those aliens … are disproportionately likely to commit crimes.”
The result, the Trump Administration’s top attorney observes, is that this “undermines public safety, immigration enforcement, and the rule of law.” Both voters and the Supreme Court should reject sanctuary city laws. Voters rejected Prop. 205 by 70-30%.
