FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Trump Administration Halts Research Spending in the Health Field

As a recent article in the New York Times1 points out, by some measures, the U.S. produces more influential health-sciences research than the next 10 leading countries combined.  At risk are not only the tens of thousands of grants the National Institutes of Health (N.I.H) awards each year, but also American dominance of biomedical research.  The world’s leading medical labs can be found in the United States, and they rely heavily on grants from the N.I.H.  Billions of dollars are spent on research for diseases and health conditions such as cancer, Alzheimer’s, heart disease, brain injuries, child health, diabetes, H.I.V. infections and numerous other ailments.  The N.I.H notes that every dollar the agency spends on research generates more than two dollars in economic activity.  Why?  The results of medical research in the past have often led to the pharmaceutical industry developing drugs and vaccines for the treatment and prevention of diseases and health conditions, thereby fueling pharmaceutical advancements.  The result is also the fact that American companies will export many of the resulting drugs and vaccines to other countries, helping to grow the U.S. economy and positively lead to an American trade surplus.

Canadians and Americans have benefited from the medical research leading to pharmaceutical advancements.  Often, Canadian researchers will contribute to health-sciences research as was the case in the discovery of insulin years ago.  Today, there is on-going biomedical research at a number of Canada’s top universities.  Hopefully, researchers in both countries will continue to share in their findings.  The current U.S. administration’s handcuffing of its own scientists and holding back their important research will no doubt lead to serious consequences for advancements in the health field. 

The above mentioned New York Times article goes on to stipulate: “In response to all the uncertainty, universities are retrenching. The University of Pittsburgh froze Ph.D. admissions. Columbia University’s medical school paused hiring and spending. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology froze the hiring of non-faculty employees.”  In addition, some lab leaders indicated that they were making contingency plans to fire scientists, and that graduate students are being forced to search for new sources of funding.  I personally know of one young Canadian graduating from the University of Ottawa’s science faculty who a few years ago ended up in New York to participate in cancer research as part of a post-graduate program.

Much of biomedical research deals with not only areas related to treatments, but also areas related to the prevention of diseases, including those which particularly affect our aging population in both countries.  To hamper the work of such an important American institution as the National Institutes of Health is a major disservice to Americans and Canadians alike, and will have longer-term consequences.

1 “Paying for Science”: Benjamin Mueller, New York Times, February 25, 2025

Leave a comment »

Trump’s Trade Policy Appears to be Directed at Securing Critical Mineral Rights

After three years of war that forged a new unity within NATO, the Trump administration has made clear it is planning to focus its attention elsewhere: in Asia, Latin America, the Arctic and anywhere President Trump believes the U.S. can obtain critical mineral rights.  Moreover, this is why Trump to a large extent has his eye on annexing Canada and Greenland, both of which have an abundance of critical minerals such as uranium, graphite and lithium.  Critical minerals are currently used in over 230 sectors of the U.S. economy, from energy infrastructure to advanced technology manufacturing, and from aerospace engineering, including satellites, to medical equipment.  Critical minerals are the building blocks for the green and digital economy and demand for them will only grow throughout the global energy transition. Disruption potential is related to how much of a commodity’s global production is concentrated in countries that are relatively unwilling or unable (due to political or economic instability, workforce or infrastructure inadequacies, regulations, etc…) to supply the U.S. with critical minerals.  Some critical minerals are produced primarily in countries that are economically or politically unstable, or do not have a reliable trade relationship with the U.S. —  thereby representing a higher supply risk.  This however does not apply to Canada which is a stable supplier of minerals in general, including copper, zinc, phosphorus, silicon metal, cobalt, high-purity iron ore, and rare earth elements.

The lack of stability in Ukraine is a major reason why Trump apparently ha turned down Ukraine
President Volodymyr Zelensky’s extraordinary offer that the U.S. be granted a 50 percent interest in all of Ukraine’s critical mineral resources as compensation for past and future support of the war with Russia. 

However, Canada recognizes that critical minerals are the foundation on which modern technology is built upon.  They’re used in a wide range of essential products, from mobile phones and solar panels to electric vehicle batteries and medical applications. By building critical minerals value chains, Canada can become a major global supplier of choice for critical minerals and the clean energy and technology sources they enable.  For this reason, Canada is not willing to simply give away control of these precious minerals to the U.S. or any other nation for that matter.  They are also essential to Canada’s economic or national security.

Canada has already partnered with the U.S. when it comes to discovering and mining critical minerals.  In January 2020, the Canada-U.S. Joint Action Plan on Critical Minerals was announced to advance bilateral interest in securing supply chains for the critical minerals needed in strategic manufacturing sectors.  Canada has also worked with other countries such as Japan to encourage cooperation on international standard-setting for critical minerals, as well as several multilateral organizations such as the International Energy Agency (IEA), the World Bank, the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), and the Intergovernmental Forum on Mining, Minerals, Metals and Sustainable Development (IGF).  The U.S. is also an active member of these multilateral organizations.

For these reasons, it is difficult to understand why Trump continues to be so aggressive when it comes to the U.S.-Canada trading relationship.  Canada is an exporting nation, which includes most of our natural resources which make up the bulk of exports.  Canada is very interested in exporting critical minerals to its allies through various trade agreements, and is investing more in the extraction of these minerals.  Canada already provides a stable and growing market when it comes to critical minerals.  If Trump wants to ignore the existing cooperation between the two countries, he does so at his own peril and that of those American businesses which rely on a steady and reliable supply chain.

Leave a comment »

Elon Musk May Be More Dangerous Than Trump

From a Canadian perspective, president-elect Donald Trump’s recent declarations about Canada’s sovereignty and the imposition of a 25% tariff on the country’s imports are bad enough.  What is even more worrisome is the rise of Elon Musk’s influence in Trump’s circles.  During the election, all of Musk’s posts traveled further and resounded more widely than ever. Mr. Musk’s X account began to dominate the platform, effectively making him the host of his own social media site.  More recently, he has a perch as Trump’s apparent right-hand man, even weighing in on his possible Cabinet choices and joining his conversations with global leaders.  One has to wonder what the role of J.D. Vance will be?

Internationally, Musk has begun an on-line and in-person campaign to try to influence foreign political parties’ policies.  Most notably, he has posted support for the policies of far-right and extremist figures in Europe, criticizing for example the current governments of Britain and Germany.  Recently, Musk has turned his attention to the northern neighbor, praising an interview with Pierre Poilievre, a populist firebrand who leads Canada’s Conservative Party and is expected be the country’s next Prime Minister.  In addition, his financial influence is everywhere because of his companies and investments in the U.S. and Europe.  In some instances, this has led to questions about potential conflicts of interest in light of his many business interests, especially in any future Trump administration.  For example, he once again in a tweet raised Britain’s Online Safety Act which will take effect in March 2025.  The British law requires social media companies like X to prevent children from accessing harmful and age-inappropriate content and to give adults more control over what they want to see online.  Companies that run afoul of the law can face fines of up to 10 percent of their global revenue.

Experiences with Trump’s past foreign policies had been troublesome, especially when it comes to NATO, the Middle East and relations with Canada and Mexico.  The involvement of Elon Musk in positioning the next president with respect to foreign policies is a major concern.  Originally, Trump appeared to want Musk to concentrate primarily on improving efficiencies and policies within federal departments and agencies, obviously leading to potential reductions in services, employees and regulations.  Now, reports are indicating that Musk is attempting to also influence Trump’s future foreign policies, including attempts to have an impact on the domestic politics of several European countries and Canada.  Needless-to-say, American interference in other countries’ governance will not be appreciated by their current governments.

The U.S. has been very vocal about any covert foreign interference in its governance and its elections, and rightly so.  Although Elon Musk is not an elected official at this time, he is expected to be part of Trump’s administration in some official advisory capacity.  Any attempt by Musk to influence or represent the foreign policy of the next administration is totally inappropriate.  That is the role of the Secretary of State.  What is especially dangerous is the opportunity presented to Musk to influence the future president on foreign matters by having his ear on a daily basis.  If I were the next Secretary of State, I’d be very concerned.  It’s one thing for Musk to involve himself in U.S. governance and domestic matters, it’s a whole other concern if he attempts to do so in matters related to foreign affairs and dealings with America’s allies!

Leave a comment »

What Does Next Year Have In Store For Canada-U.S. Relations?

Well, if the end of this year is any indication, 2025 is going to be a tough year for Canada-U.S. relations.  Even before he is sworn in as the next president, Donald Trump has alright stirred up a hornets nest with off the cuff statements aimed at Canada.  Firstly, he warns the Canadian government that he intends to impose 25 percent tariffs on Canadian goods if Canada does not reduce the flow of migrants and fentanyl into the U.S.  Such a move of course could be devastating for Canada, whose economy depends heavily on exports to the U.S.which is its largest trading partner.  However, Trump himself has suggested that the tariff plan may have less to do with border security than with his desire to eliminate the $50 billion trade deficit with Canada.  Interesting, given the fact that oil and gas exports from Canada account for most of that trade imbalance.  Without them, the U.S. generally has a trade surplus with Canada.  This would greatly impact the province of Alberta which supplies the U.S. with the bulk of crude oil and represents a safe, cheaper and more accessible source for Americans.  Therefore, the impact on the U.S. could mean higher costs for fuels.

Nevertheless, both federal and provincial governments in Canada hit the panic button.  Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was forced to meet with the provincial premiers to discuss how to positively react to Trump, especially as it pertains to the issue of border security.  By the way, the issue of border security has a lot more to do with the border between Mexico and the U.S. That southern border has been a far worst scenario when it comes to illegal border crossings and drug smuggling.  The subsequent immediate result was the dinner Trudeau had with Trump at Mar-a-Lago over the Thanksgiving weekend, as well as telephone conversations between members of Trudeau’s cabinet and Thomas D. Homan, Trump’s designated border czar.  Next, was a follow-up by two top Canadian ministers, Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly and Finance Minister Dominic LeBlanc.  They met on December 27th with members of Trump’s circle in Florida about a planned 1.3 billion Canadian dollars’ worth of a package of proposed new border security measures.

Whether the Canadian government’s preemptive moves will satisfy Trump is anyone’s guess?  I would suggest that it won’t and he will continue to pursue the matter as part of trade negotiations with Canada once he is in office.  Meanwhile, Trump is clearly aware that Trudeau’s minority government is now politically in trouble.  There is little doubt that the opposition parties intend to introduce a non-confidence vote possibly by the end of January after parliament re-adjourns after the holidays.  This would then result in an election being called early in the New Year, with a predicted majority win by the Conservative Party under Pierre Poilievre.  Whether Trudeau will lead the Liberal Party once more is still up in the air given his current unpopularity among the electorate.

This will place a lot of perceived difficulties for Poilievre’s Conservatives on this and other potential issues in the face of President Trump’s administration.  It may mean that the next Canadian government will spend a good deal of its time simply reacting and responding to Trump’s demands.  The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), signed in 2018 during Trump’s first term, is up for review in 2026.  Should a Trump administration take a hard-line stance requesting fewer restrictions on American exports to Canada, it could lead to a trade war with the U.S.  Such an outcome will no doubt further damage our relations, and would lead to higher product costs for consumers in both countries.  Due to our size, Canada has to be an export-import country in order to grow and thrive economically.

What makes the future that much more unclear are the irrational and uninformed outbursts of one Donald Trump.  How the next Canadian government will react to his social media musings will be very interesting?  For Canadians, there is little doubt that these will be trying times.  Stay tuned for more of the Donald Trump saga!

Leave a comment »

New Political and Social-Economic Realm of Diversity in America

Back in March of this year, the Biden administration ordered changes to a range of federal surveys to gather more detailed information about the nation’s ethnic and racial makeup.  Why is this important?  For example, most people of Middle Eastern and North African descent reportedly are currently classified as “white” in U.S. census data.  According to the Census Bureau estimates, this represented about 3.5 million people falling into that category.  They represent for example people whose descent is Lebanese, Egyptian, Iranian, Syrian, Iraqi, and Israeli.  Under the new format, people of Middle Eastern and North African descent will have their own category.  Officials of the Office of Management and Budget, which oversaw the review of the current survey questions, said the changes were needed in part to make surveys more accurate.

The reason more accurate surveys are increasingly important is that America is increasing becoming more diverse.  The non-white population has nearly doubled since 1990 to over 40% in 2023, as the proportion of non-Hispanic whites decreased from 75% to 58%.  According to the USAFacts Team, the nation’s non-white population has almost doubled over the past four decades, growing from about 24% of the population in 1990 to over 40% in 2023.  Furthermore, according to the US Census Bureau, the multiracial population is projected to be the fastest-growing racial or ethnic group over the next four decades, followed by the Asian or Pacific Islander and Hispanic populations.  The non-Hispanic white population is expected to continue shrinking.

The above announced changes most likely have the potential to rankle conservatives who believe that the nation’s focus on diversity has already gone too far.  Interestingly, both the Republicans and Democrats during the recent election attempted vigorously to cater to Blacks, Latinos and Hispanics to have their votes which were deemed critical in several states.  This time around, the Trump campaign notably targeted those communities with diverse populations.  In many cases, the non-White populace was just as concerned about the economy and immigration as many of his White supporters.  Something that the Democratic Party failed to fully realize during its campaign — a startling factor given Pamela Harris being a Black candidate.

Now one has to ask is whether Donald Trump will allocate more positions in his cabinet to better reflect the nation’s diversity?  So far, the answer appears to be a resounding “no”.  Specifically selecting people from such bodies as Fox News certainly doesn’t help.  He may have to go outside his comfort zone!  In addition, federal policies will have to better reflect the importance of diverse populations.  Those who broadly support the new survey questions — academics, civil liberties advocates and racial and ethnic interest groups among them — say they would help promote greater fairness in schools, housing, hiring and other aspects of society where census data is used.  I’m not so sure that Trump’s immediate advisory body, made up mainly of rich White men, is going to facilitate appropriately dealing with such issues.

Favouring one group over another will lead to even more division within the country.  Hopefully, the Republicans in Congress will appreciate this matter in their deliberations.  Many marginalized groups are made up of persons from diverse communities, and are affected particularly hard by any reduction in socio-economic benefit programs.  Such policies would no doubt lead to increased hardships for these people.  Cutting such programs in the name of “efficiency” should not be an option in these dire times, accentuated by growing poverty, homelessness and inadequate medical care.  One has to question what Trump means when he proposes to make America great again?  Just who will actually benefit?

Leave a comment »

Trump’s Tariff Threats Against Canada and Mexico Will Hurt Americans Equally

Here we go again, Donald Trump’s bargaining concept is getting in the way of economic realities.  Threatening to impose a 25% tariff on all Canadian and Mexican products entering the U.S. is simply nonsense, and most likely in violation of the current U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement.  This agreement, by-the-way signed during the former President’s first term, is up for re-negotiation in two years. 

The U.S. is the largest importer of goods in the world, with Mexico, China and Canada its top three suppliers.  Take for example the North American automotive sector which relies on integrative parts and components from both Canada and Mexico, whereby auto plants on both sides of the border and some production lines would most likely screech to a halt.  Not only can higher tariffs cause increased inflation, but they would also cause job losses in all three countries.  The tariffs, if implemented, could dramatically raise prices for consumers on everything from gas to automobiles to agricultural products.

For some reason, President-elect Trump believes that putting economic pressure on Mexico and Canada would force both countries to tighten up their borders against illegal migrants and the influx of drugs like the deadly synthetic opioid fentanyl.  Mexico’s efforts to fight drugs — which are manufactured by Mexican cartels using chemicals imported from China — have apparently weakened in the last year.  However, the new Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum has argued that the flow of drugs is more of a problem of public health and drug consumption in American society, and rightly so.  On the other hand, both Mexico and Canada have an argument when it comes to the influx of weapons smuggled in from the United States, estimated to account for over 90% of arms smuggled into both countries.

Unfortunately, neither Mexico nor Canada like to be bullied into adherence to some needless policies by an American president, past or present.  President Sheinbaum has already declared that the introduction of new tariffs would result in retaliatory measures by Mexico.  The Canadian government is already examining the ramifications of increased tariffs, hoping to open up a further dialogue with the new American administration.  Hoping to avoid a trade war, both countries have indicated that they are willing to engage in talks on the issues at hand. 

What’s obviously a shot across the bow, Trump appears to think that these threats are an effective manoeuvre as part of some form of future negotiating tactics.  However, the resulting consequences will be dire for all parties concerned.  Canada in particular has clamped down on the flow of fentanyl both into and out of the country.  More aggressive attempts have also been made to deal with the influx of weapons from the U.S.  There is little doubt that these are security issues on both sides of the border.  Canada is also concerned about the potential influx of migrants from the U.S. as a result of Trump’s talks about a “massive deportation” program of illegal migrants during his second term.  Northern border security is just as important to Canadians as it is to Americans, and is nowhere close to American concerns over its southern border security.

I believe that the Canadian government will take a more cautious and respectful approach to Trump’s threat than the Mexican government which has warned the U.S. against any blatant attempts to subjugate its sovereignty through such threats.  As noted, Sheinbaum’s bristly response suggests that Trump faces a much different Mexican president than he did in his first term.  As for Canada, time will tell.  In addition, federally there will be an election next year and Trump’s administration will have to face a new Canadian government.  Unfortunately, the entire situation does not look good for the future of all three countries, both economically and politically.

Leave a comment »

Angry Young Males Revolt In America

Back in 2013, I read a very interesting book by Michael S. Kimmel entitled: “Angry White Men: American Masculinity at the End of an Era.”  In it, he described an increase in anger in the seismic economic, social and political shifts that have so transformed the American landscape among young white men.  Downward mobility, increased racial and gender equality, and a tenacious clinging to an anachronistic ideology of masculinity left many white men feeling betrayed and bewildered.  “Angry white male” is a term for white men holding conservative or right-wing views. Today, the term is often used when talking about the politics of the U.S. The term mostly refers to a group which emerged in the early 1990s. They reacted to what they thought were injustices created by “affirmative action.”  An angry white male is opposed to anti-discrimination policies (such as affirmative action) that benefit racial minorities and women.  Supporters of Donald Trump are sometimes said to largely include angry white men.  Today, one might add young Black and Hispanic men to their numbers, especially now that affirmative action is no longer in play.

Back in the 1960s, when activists pushed for laws to equalize opportunities for women, girls had been much less likely than boys to graduate from college.  However, a recent study indicated that by 2015, the situation had flipped.  Boys were much less likely than girls to make it through college and reap the premium jobs that came with degrees.  Young men were not just getting lower-paying jobs than young women, they were also more likely to leave the job market altogether.  This left many of them living with their parents and gave them lots of free time to spend on video games and in chat rooms.  One research team looked at national time-use surveys and found that young men between the ages of twenty-one and thirty spent 12 percent less time on paid work in 2015 than they had ten years earlier — a much sharper drop than was seen in any other demographic group. The newly freed-up time was spent largely in front of a computer.  The amount of time that men under thirty dedicated to video games and “recreational computer time” rose to 520 hours a year in 2015, 99 hours more than what it had been ten years earlier; a significantly greater amount of time and a sharper increase than was seen among older men and women of all ages.1

Even when it comes to investing and playing the markets on-line, young men dominate the scene, preferring to gamble in day trading in order to possibly become wealthier as well as clearly attaining a high out of risk-taking.  Normally, these men are between 20 and 30 years old and live at home with a lot of time on their hands.2  This phenomenon was particularly exasperated by the pandemic, which also continued to have negative impacts on men with respect to  the post-pandemic labour market and low wages.

The results of the American elections illustrated a clear statistical divide between more educated males and lesser educated males, with the majority of the prior supporting Kamala Harris and the latter Donald Trump.  In particular, young men in the so-call working and middle classes are unhappy with the way the economy has gone for them.  They are also still angered over what they perceive to be as unfair and unequal treatment when it comes to women, whether real or not.  This placed Harris at a clear disadvantage during the election when Democrats obviously failed to address the issue.  The Republicans used conservative social media effectively to appeal to the grievances of young working, unemployed and underemployed men.  Policies pushed by the Democrats, including reproductive rights and gender-based ones, did not appeal to most young men.

Canada is not immune to the lure of conservative policies which tend to attract young Canadian males to their political thinking, all of which will have a direct impact in the federal election expected to happen next year.  Unless there is a drastic change in the economy and labour market, one can expect a similar backlash against the current Liberal government whose social policies will no doubt be a major target by conservative groups.

1. Richard V. Reeves and Ember Smith: “Boys Left Behind: Education Gender Gaps Across the US” (The Brooking Institution, October 12, 2022)  https://www.brookings.edu/articles/boys-left-behind-education-gender-gaps-across-the-us/.

2. The Trolls of Wall Street (How the Outcasts and Insurgents are Hacking the Markets)”: Nathaniel Popper (HarperCollins Publishers, New York, N.Y., 2024) p. 53

Leave a comment »

Environment Was Barely Mentioned By Presidential Candidates

Despite being the hottest issue on our planet at this time, issues concerning the environment were barely mentioned by either presidential candidate during the debate or while campaigning.  Indeed, what we heard was a continuous slogan about “drill baby drill” and the need to increase the output of the American oil and gas sector. 

It has just been announced that this was the hottest year on record.  Across the U.S. and Canada, one has had to deal with extreme weather events, including hurricanes off the gulf states, wild fires in California, New Jersey and Alberta, drought across all American states except Alaska and Kentucky, flooding across the North-eastern states, heat wave records this past summer, etc., etc.  This left Americans and Canadians with billions of dollars in damages, especially to communities and their infrastructures. 

Nearly 200 countries will gather next week for the U.N. climate summit, COP29, in Baku, Azerbaijan.  As usual, reaching a consensus for a deal among so many can be difficult.  29

China produces the most energy from climate-warming fossil fuels and also from renewable energy sources.  China retains the developing country designation in U.N. climate negotiations that began in the 1990s.  As such, it says the United States and other industrialised countries should move first and fastest with climate action.

The world’s second largest emitter and largest historic emitter, the United States, comes to COP
29 following an election that will put Donald Trump back in power in 2025.  Trump’s victory has reduced the chance of a strong deal on a new global finance target, or an agreement to increase the pool of countries that should contribute.  President-Elect Trump has promised to again pull out of the 2015 Paris Agreement and has labelled efforts to boost green energy a “scam”.

The most immediate concern will be over how the least developed countries will cope with the impact of recent severe weather patterns associated with climate change, including those in Africa, South and Central America and in Asia.  Moreover, this group’s 45 nations are also highly vulnerable to climate change but have contributed little to it. They are asking for significant funding from developed countries, preferably in the form of grants. They also want more money to flow into the loss and damage fund.  The question of how to deal with potential migrant movements from these countries will also have to be dealt with.

Both Canada and the U.S. are failing to meet their emissions reduction targets set out in 2015.  There is a real danger that both countries will return to supporting the fossil fuel sector in order to meet short-term economic goals.  President-Elect Trump has made it very clear that he wants to see more fracking across the U.S., and federal lands and protected areas will be more open to drilling.  He is particularly non-supportive of renewable energy initiatives and will cut back a number of federal programs and policies in support of that sector.  Canada, and Alberta in particular, will more than likely seek to encourage the U.S. to import more of our oil and gas with new pipeline construction, something denied by previous Democrat administrations.  Even Kamala Harris changed her position on limiting fracking in order to garner the support of states such as Pennsylvania.

All of these developments tend to lessen one’s optimism about finding ways to reduce greenhouse emissions, despite a lot of unsubstantiated rhetoric by industrialized countries.  When Americans were polled and asked which issues were the most important to them in the election, the environment and climate change was way down the list.  They obviously gave more import to the immediate state of the economy, jobs and immigration.  Once again, the issues surrounding climate change will have to take a back seat to such issues, despite growing concerns over its evident impact on our lands, agriculture and the oceans.

Leave a comment »

Is a Potential Leader of the Free World Mentally Unstable?

Needless-to-say, most readers would immediately know that I’m talking about Donald Trump, who at 78 is beginning to display certain characteristics associated with senility and cognitive decline.  His recent speeches and social media commentary appear to indicate that he is ever more confused, forgetful, incoherent or disconnected from reality.  I declare this not with any malice against the former president, but with a great deal of concern over his ability to fulfill presidential responsibilities.  It’s also pretty bad when you have his vice-presidential candidate attempting to explain or interpret what Trump meant in his nonsensical remarks. 

There is no longer anything particularly funny about the situation as it stands — despite late night talk show hosts using Trump’s commentary as fodder for comedic purposes.  His campaign has refused to release medical records, instead simply pointing to a one-page letter apparently released in July by his former White House doctor reporting that Mr. Trump was “doing well”, particularly after being grazed by a bullet in an assassination attempt.  I believe that that unfortunate attempt and subsequent second attempt may have indeed affected his outlook and temperament.  Concerns about his age have also heightened now that he is trying to return to office, concerns that were not alleviated by his unfounded debate claim about Haitian immigrants “eating pets” in Springfield, Ohio.  After his debate with Kamala Harris, his poor showing raised a number of vital questions about his cognitive capabilities.

What is also interesting and something that I have noticed in various interviews given by Trump, he has a great deal of difficulty answering specific questions directed to him.  This is not just a political manoeuvre of avoidance of an issue, but also demonstrates on his part the apparent lack of ability to focus.  In his speeches, he rambles on about all kinds of weird things, from talking about sharks, malaria and Hannibal Lecter: none of which makes any sense from an issue and policy point of view.  As well, he’s has had some pretty noticeable moments of obvious confusion.

What does this mean for America’s allies?  Right now, countries such as Canada, the U.K. and France must be wondering what is going on in the American presidential election!  Out of respect for diplomacy and non-interference is another country’s elections, their leaders are not saying anything out loud.  However, in private, these allies are very concerned to say the least as to Trump’s general behaviour, and especially his continuing outbursts, blatant lies and overt conspiracy theories.  With a month left before the final voting in November, other countries must be holding their breath, wondering what will be the eventual outcome in what many have described as the most important election of this century.  Trump’s proposed economic, defence and foreign policy positions are being studied to death with much trepidation.

We live today in volatile world where strong leadership is essential and close cooperation among democratic countries is a must.  This requires forward and sensible policy and decision making on the part of all leaders.  It is time for younger leadership in order to support the many current and future needs of our new century.  We cannot afford to have leaders who are stuck in the past and without the necessary skills to move us forward into the future.  Surely, most citizens today recognize the need to be able to effectively tackle the important issues, everything from foreign wars, new technologies and climate change.  The most immediate danger however is that Donald Trump could become the next president of the United States of America!

Leave a comment »

The Comedy Hour In American Politics

Let’s get serious.  Anyone watching the American political scene now must be scratching their heads!  Since President Biden stepped aside and Kamala Harris became the Democrat’s presidential candidate, a relatively chaotic situation has emerged.  Donald Trump and J.D. Vance have completely gone off the rails.  In an obvious defensive posture, their attacks on both Harris and her V.P. selection, Tim Walz, have become ludicrous.  Any outside observer like myself can only laugh at some of the things emerging from the two Republican candidates.  Nothing really surprising about Trump and mini-Trump Vance!  Their accusations should become good fodder for the likes of Saturday Night Live.  Moreover, thankfully we have nothing comparable in Canada
at this time.

It all began with Trump questioning whether Harris is actually Black.  Of course, he had originally questioned whether or not former President Obama was actually born in the U.S. Vance then attacks Time Walz over his twenty-four years of military service.  Since when does one veteran attack another veteran over his service to the country?  Then you have Trump declaring that Harris in not “intelligent” enough to run the country.  As if Trump should talk about someone’s intelligence!  Vance’s comments suggesting that Democrat’s are “anti-child” tells one more about his state of mind than anything else.  Expect more name-calling and nonsense from both Trump and Vance.

The fact of the matter is that Kamala Harris has demonstrated that she can be a good campaigner.  She has reinvigorated the Democratic Party and now has a great start to the finish, which the polls and the huge increase in campaign donations have demonstrated.  The emergence of Harris is just what the U.S. presidential campaign needed.  Her crowds and momentum just keep going.  One now has a real race and a real choice.  Trump is now the old guy running on the same old same old ticket.  I can’t wait until the upcoming debates.  Everything indicates that Trump and his Republican Party are in real trouble.  This will no doubt lead to more of Trump’s extreme rhetoric and more and more lies.  Nothing will surprise me.  Unfortunately, this may no longer be a laughing matter. Too much is at stake for not only the U.S.
and democracy, but also for the rest of the free world.

Leave a comment »