Tesla Cuts Model S And X Prices To Stoke US Demand Amid EV Price War Threats

Tesla Cuts Model S And X Prices To Stoke US Demand Amid EV Price War Threats

As per Tesla’s website, the company has reduced the prices of its two most expensive electric vehicles in North America. This decision follows the investor day event held last week, during which Elon Musk stated that recent price cuts had sparked demand for more affordable models.

The starting prices for the Model S and X in the US have been reduced by 5.3% and 9.1%, respectively, to $89,990 and $99,990. Additionally, the higher-performance Plaid version of the Model S and X have been lowered by 4.3% and 8.3%. The Plaid iterations of the S and X, which now cost $109,990, have been reduced by $26,000 and $29,000 compared to their prices in early January.

Source: Bloomberg 

Last week, Musk claimed that the demand for Teslas was nearly unlimited and would increase significantly as the company made its vehicles more affordable. The recent price reductions for the S and X models imply that these vehicles may not have experienced the same boost in demand as the rest of the lineup when the company reduced prices earlier this year. 

In January, Tesla slashed the prices of its more affordable vehicles by as much as 20%, which enabled buyers to qualify for the tax incentive by putting the vehicles under a $55,000 cap. 

Musk directly addressed the price cuts during the investor day: “We found that even small changes in the price have a big effect on demand, very big.” 

Electrek’s Fred Lambert reported last month that price cuts of Model Y vehicles led to “unprecedented demand” in the US. He said the EV crossover sold out entirely, with no more production builds until April. 

We pointed out in late January, “Tesla ‘Weaponizes’ Price-Cuts To Crush EV Competition.” 

According to Bank of America analyst John Murphy, legacy automakers have thin profit margins or even incur losses on their electric vehicle offerings due to their lack of scale in the EV market, unlike Tesla. Murphy suggests that Tesla’s recent price cuts could prompt automakers to lower their own EV prices in response, potentially sparking a price war.

“These price cuts are likely to make business even more difficult, just as they are attempting to ramp production of EV offerings,” Murphy said.

Reuters noted Tesla is planning to begin production of a new version of the Model 3, codenamed “Highland,” later this year. Additionally, the company is planning a styling change to the Model Y, codenamed “Juniper,” set to take effect next year.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 03/06/2023 – 07:45

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/cbN624L Tyler Durden

Central Banks Are Suffering Staggering Losses The Higher Rates Rise

Central Banks Are Suffering Staggering Losses The Higher Rates Rise

By Eric Peters, CIO of One River Asset Management

“That is money that cannot be spent elsewhere,” said German finance minister Christian Linder.

You see, annual interest on Germany’s government debt has risen 10x in the past two years, from 4bln to 40bln euros. That’s not a particularly big number, roughly 1% of GDP. But that’s not the only consequence of recent rate rises. In the race to exit Europe’s negative interest rate oxymoron, a multitude of changes are taking place.

Central bank balance sheets, bloated by a decade of monetary manipulation, now yield less than overnight interest rates. That gap is producing staggering losses for the very same central bankers responsible for creating it.

The German Bundesbank is thus expected to generate a 193bln euro loss over the coming decade. That’s a big number for the delicate German psyche. It’s the kind of number that will require a government bailout – indirectly with the passage of time and inflation. And if we’ve learned one thing from our long litany of financial crises, it’s that institutions requiring government assistance lose their independence, if not explicitly, then implicitly.

It’s not that central banks have ever been truly independent; they haven’t. It’s that the illusion of their independence from the politicians to whom they are accountable has ebbed and flowed over the decades.

Before this cycle is over, central banks across the developed world will turn to their politicians to beg for bailout forgiveness, even as they raise interest rates, which in turn lift interest payments that these same politicians must pay on government debts.

Any illusion of independence will fade. Calls for wholesale change will naturally come from the fringe, as it is the establishment that led us here.

“Inflation and the future depreciation losses that will arise from the ECB’s monetary policy – adopted in violation of its mandate – will be the nail in the coffin of Europe’s prosperity and the end of the euro,” declared Alice Weidel, co-leader of Germany’s rightwing AfD party.

“And no one will be able to say they weren’t warned.”

Tyler Durden
Mon, 03/06/2023 – 07:20

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/8vpnsOq Tyler Durden

Banks Increasingly Back Political Scheme To Track Gun Purchases by Credit Card


A man in an orange shirt and a vest stands with his back to the camera in front of a wall of long guns, for sale and on display.

The first credit card processor to announce plans to track purchases at gun shops is Discover Financial Services. The company hints that its competitors, specifically Visa, MasterCard, and American Express, are on the same schedule to implement a controversial gun-specific merchant category code announced last year. Given that the ideologically charged bank behind the new code has big plans for targeting gun purchases you can expect more fireworks to follow.

“Discover Financial Services, a provider of credit cards, told Reuters it will allow its network to track purchases at gun retailers come April, making it the first among its peers to publicly give a date for moving ahead with the initiative, which is aimed at helping authorities probe gun-related crimes,” the news service reports. “Discover’s announcement came after the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), which decides on the classification of merchant categories used by payment cards, approved in September the launch of a dedicated code for gun retailers.”

Merchant category codes (MCCs) are an IRS-developed scheme for tracking transactions. Behind the push for the gun-specific merchant category code is Amalgamated Bank, which boasts that it “supports sustainable organizations, progressive causes, and social justice.” It’s basically a political operation that uses its presence in the financial industry to advance political goals, and it joined with Democratic politicians to urge adoption of the new MCC. Why? Because at a time when everything is politicized, an ability to monitor buying and selling is enormously important to those who want to restrict or control whole areas of life.

“We all have to do our part to stop gun violence and it sometimes starts with illegal purchases of guns and ammunition,” Priscilla Sims Brown, president and CEO of Amalgamated Bank, gloated when the ISO approved the new category code last September. “The new code will allow us to fully comply with our duty to report suspicious activity and illegal gun sales to authorities without blocking or impeding legal gun sales.”

When the code was approved, firearms-specific payment firm GunTab warned that it was a step towards filing government-mandated Suspicious Activity Reports with the authorities on gun purchases.

“Your bank files a Suspicious Activity Report with your name for every day your cash activity exceeds $10k,” the company noted. “Anti-gun advocates want to apply this same ambiguous approach toward preventing gun violence.”

It didn’t take long for advocates of the code to confirm that suspicion.

“Banks are developing technology to identify potential mass shooters, according to a CEO backing the push to get credit-card companies to more closely track gun purchases,” Bloomberg reported last November. “‘Detection scenarios’ are in the works that, if triggered, would prompt banks to file a Suspicious Activity Report to the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, Amalgamated Bank Chief Executive Officer Priscilla Sims Brown said at the New York Times DealBook conference Wednesday.”

But the code applies to stores that deal in firearms, not just to gun sales. That means ringing up trail cameras or camping gear might land you on the naughty list. Or the purchase might be entirely blocked.

“Credit card companies may be changing how they process gun store sales, but it’s still up to banks to allow purchases coming in with that MCC,” cautions DirectPayNet, which works with merchants tagged as “high risk”—a category including adult entertainment, dating, and e-cigarettes as well as firearms. “Banks can see what companies are higher risk, extraneous, or essential (especially during a recession). They control what a cardholder can purchase, basically. So the pushback might not be from credit cards or processors, but from banks. The question is, should banks hold that much power over the decisions of individual cardholders?”

If you’re Amalgamated Bank the answer is an obvious “yes” since the outfit uses finance as a political tool. But it’s hardly alone in weaponizing finance for political purposes as we’ve seen in the aftermath of the U.S. Justice Department’s Operation Choke Point, which leaned on the financial industry to shun payday lenders, adult entertainment, gun dealers, and other politically disfavored enterprises.

“The general outline is the DOJ and bank regulators are putting the screws to banks and other third-party payment processors to refuse banking services to companies and industries that are deemed to pose a ‘reputation risk’ to the bank,” George Mason University law professor Todd Zywicki wrote in 2014. “Most controversially, the list of dubious industries is populated by enterprises that are entirely, or at least generally, legal.”

That program to marginalize legal businesses formally ended in 2017. But American Banker reported in 2019 that financial institutions were still pressured to deny services to “politically divisive clients” and that “efforts to use banks as a lever for broader social change are just getting underway.”

Inevitably, if one political faction is willing to lean on private industry to implement harassments and restrictions that can’t be achieved through the legislative process or aren’t permitted by the Constitution, its opponents will enter the battle.

“Credit-card companies could face fines up to $10,000 per violation for tracking firearm and ammunition sales in Florida, under a measure approved Tuesday by a Senate committee,” reports the Orlando Weekly. “The Republican-controlled Senate Banking and Insurance Committee voted 7-3 along party lines to approve a bill (SB 214) that would target yet-to-be-enacted plans by some credit-card companies to create a separate ‘merchant category code’ for sales at firearm businesses.”

With Republican majorities in the state’s Senate and House, and Gov. Ron DeSantis very comfortable in a world in which everything is political warfare, SB 214 looks likely to pass. Mississippi, Oklahoma, Texas, and West Virginia may approve similar laws. Then the fight will really begin.

“A Discover spokesperson said following the publication of the story that other payment network companies had already decided to implement the new code in April, and that Discover was following their lead,” Reuters added of the credit card industry’s adoption of the gun-specific MCC code.

Ultimately, the key to staying out of political conflicts over guns or any other transactions that authoritarians want to restrict is to use payment systems that don’t require a third party’s approval. Cash is always good. Cryptocurrency, despite its recent tribulations, may ultimately fill this role. Freedom can only survive if we are able to spend our money on things government officials don’t like.

The post Banks Increasingly Back Political Scheme To Track Gun Purchases by Credit Card appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/Zo16QqX
via IFTTT

“I Can’t Get My Money Out”: Billionaire Mark Mobius Says China Blocking Investment Outflows

“I Can’t Get My Money Out”: Billionaire Mark Mobius Says China Blocking Investment Outflows

Emerging markets investment pioneer Mark Mobius says that China is blocking his ability to withdraw money from the world’s second-largest economy.

“I’m personally affected because I have an account with HSBC in Shanghai. I can’t get my money out. The government is restricting the flow of money out of the country,” Mobius told Fox Business on Thursday. “So I would be very, very careful investing in China.”

“It’s just amazing. They’re putting all kinds of barriers,” Mobius continued. “They don’t say, ‘No, you can’t get your money out,’ but they say, ‘Give us all the records from 20 years of how you’ve made this money,’ and so forth. It’s crazy.”

Mobius says that Hong Kong “seems to be a little more open,” and that he’s been able to get his money “in and out” of there.

According to Mobius, China under President Xi Jinping is operating “in a completely different direction” than the country’s former market-friendly leader Deng Xiaoping.

So where to invest? India or Brazil, according to Mobius.

“You’ve got a billion people, they can do the same thing that the Chinese do. They can do the same kind of manufacturing and so forth.”

“I’m now in Brazil, and Brazil, you’ve got 250 million-plus people. Very good people, open society. Hey, why not come here? It’s another alternative.”

Tyler Durden
Mon, 03/06/2023 – 06:55

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/qkrzCHT Tyler Durden

First-Time Homebuyers Are Absolutely Screwed Right Now

First-Time Homebuyers Are Absolutely Screwed Right Now

Despite a recent softening in the US housing market, a combination of rising borrowing costs and still-high prices have put prospective first-time homebuyers in a serious bind.

How times have changed…

For the first time since records began, first-time homebuyers made up the smallest share of sales last year at 26%. And as we noted on Thursday, a surge in mortgage rates above 7% have sent homebuyer applications to a 28-year-low across all age groups.

Now, as the spring homebuying season approaches, tight inventory and uncomfortably high interest rates mean that the American dream can only be achieved by those with high-paying jobs, lots of money, or rich parents, Bloomberg reports.

The average rate for a 30-year, fixed mortgage climbed for a fourth straight week, reaching 6.65%, Freddie Mac data released Thursday show.

The difficulties for first-time buyers have been escalating for years. During the pandemic boom, they were frequently squeezed out as they competed against people with cash and investors who frequently target starter homes. The typical household income for first-time buyers soared to as much as $90,000 in 2022 from about $70,000 in 2019. -Bloomberg

We’re far from affordability for the masses,” according to Zillow senior economist, Nicole Bachaud. “The scales are shifted toward homebuyers with higher incomes and a better financial background. This will be the norm until we get more inventory in the market.”

When mortgage rates hit 7% towards the end of 2022, Zillow predicted that it would take around 10 years for an individual saving 5% of the median household every month to set aside enough for a 10% down payment on a typical home (and are banks even taking 10% down?). What’s more, supply of entry-level housing remains tight, with the inventory of America’s cheapest properties down 1.5% in January vs. the same time last year, while supply for the most-expensive properties jumped 37%.

Also submitted for your consideration – 99% of outstanding mortgages have interest rates below the Primary Mortgage Market Survey. People bought and refinanced when rates were low, while new applications have essentially crashed as illustrated above.

Lowered expectations

Bloomberg highlights the plight of Rob and Kelsey Scott, a Seattle couple who have a combined income of $200,000, and were able to save $70,000 toward a down payment on a house. After the surge in mortgage rates, the Scotts had to lower their budget from $800,000. They ended up buying a two-bedroom house in a ‘quaint’ neighborhood for $700,000.

Rob and Kelsey Scott with cat child bought their first home in November

“If we compared ourselves to our parents who bought in their late 20s, we felt like we were behind. But if we look around today, we’re on track,” said 35-year-old Rob. “Where we were workwise as a couple is the only reason we’re in a house.”

Meanwhile, the median age of first-time buyers has jumped from 29 in 1981 to 36 in 2022, the oldest in the National Association of Realtors’ records – and is due to the fact that home prices have far outpaced wages, according to Zillow chief economist Skylar Olsen.

Rich kids win again

Even before the pandemic, around 1/3 of first-time homebuyers tapped rich parents or family members for a gift or loan to cover at least part of their down payment, Zillow’s Olson says. That increased to around 40% in 2021, while the percentage of young adult buyers with a co-borrower over the age of 55 has spiked since 2021, Freddic Mac reported.

Source: Freddie Mac

I don’t know how anyone could afford a home on their own at my age,” said Maddie Duleyrie, 29, who was only able to buy a condo in New York City thanks to help from her parents, despite being “fortunate to have a well-paying job.”

Kimberly Jay, the Duleyrie family’s real estate broker, said “I see some parents giving gifts for the full price of a million-dollar property.”

“This is a city with wealthy people.”

Even in Dallas, Texas, at least half of young first-time homebuyers are getting help from their families, according to real estate agent Connie Segovia, who says that most are receiving the entire minimum down payment from such sources.

Others simply have to make due with less.

Ashley Shipp-McGhee didn’t just want to buy her first house — she urgently needed more space after adopting her late aunt’s two children. The 39-year-old nurse started her search in December 2021 in the Illinois suburbs north of St. Louis, with a $260,000 budget.

Nearly one year and 30 houses viewed later, she finally landed a place for $256,000, a higher price than she had hoped.

She used an escalation clause to pay $1,000 over competing offers, waived the inspection and paid all the closing costs. She felt “uncomfortable” with her monthly mortgage payments after she was preapproved for 2.9% at the beginning of her hunt, only to close on the home at 6.4%. But she’s holding on to hope that she can refinance down the line if rates go down. -Bloomberg

Thanks to higher interest rates, a buyer purchasing a $400,000 home with 20% down on a 30-year fixed loan, the monthly payment, including principal and interest, is now roughly $230 a month more than it would have been a month ago. Compared with a year ago, when rates were in the 4% range, today’s monthly payment is about 50% higher, according to CNBC’s Diana Olick.

Good luck out there…

Tyler Durden
Mon, 03/06/2023 – 05:44

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/7Rt28dY Tyler Durden

Matt Hancock’s Plan To “Deploy The New Variant” To “Frighten The Pants Off Everyone”

Matt Hancock’s Plan To “Deploy The New Variant” To “Frighten The Pants Off Everyone”

Authored by Nick Dixon via The Daily Sceptic,

The latest of the Telegraph’s ‘Lockdown Files’ has arrived, and impressively it is even more damning than the previous instalments. Here’s an excerpt:

Throughout the course of the pandemic, officials and ministers wrestled with how to ensure the public complied with ever-changing lockdown restrictions. One weapon in their arsenal was fear

“We frighten the pants off everyone,” Matt Hancock suggested during one WhatsApp message with his media adviser. 

The then Health Secretary was not alone in his desire to scare the public into compliance. The WhatsApp messages seen by the Telegraph show how several members of Mr. Hancock’s team engaged in a kind of ‘Project Fear’ in which they spoke of how to utilise “fear and guilt” to make people obey lockdown.

As with the other revelations, it is shocking yet not surprising. We knew they were doing this, but there’s something truly grotesque about seeing the contempt they had for people laid bare. The absolute disregard for freedom, and worse, the revelling in this exercise of power by the likes of Simon Case, the Cabinet Secretary, who found forcing travellers to quarantine in shoebox hotel rooms “hilarious”.

It is a toss up between Hancock and Case for the title of the Lockdown Files’ Greatest Villain. I was considering awarding it to the wretched Case until this latest round of files dropped, and Hancock went full Dr. Evil with his question: “When do we deploy the new variant” [sic].

Of course we shouldn’t let the unintentional comedy of Hancock’s messages (one has him text shouting “SOMEONE INSTALLED A CAMERA IN MY OFFICE WITHOUT TELLING ME!”) distract from how appalling his actions were.

How far Boris should be excused is another question. Throughout the Lockdown Files he shows his instinct for freedom, but lacks the courage to convert that into policy. This latest episode is no different, as the Telegraph reveals:

Boris Johnson, then the Prime Minister, had promised that families would be reunited at Christmas – the first since the pandemic struck in early 2020. He said foregoing long-awaited reunions “would be inhuman and against the instincts of many people in this country”.

But behind the scenes, his ministers and officials were increasingly aware that vast swathes of the public faced a grave disappointment and that the Johnson administration would take the blame for their frustration. 

The solution in December was “to frighten the pants off everyone” with a declaration of a new strain of COVID-19, known as the Alpha or Kent variant.

In a conversation between Mr Hancock and Mr Poole on Dec 13th, the pair discussed how to survive the coming backlash and storm. On the day, there were 18,409 cases of Covid recorded and 410 deaths. Five days later, on Dec 18th, Mr. Johnson would scrap his planned five-day Christmas amnesty in an about turn. 

Every time I think I have hit peak anger with this ongoing saga, the messages reveal a new low.

The bizarre power given to chancers “Slackie and Lee” (James Slack and Lee Cain in the Downing St comms team) to dictate policy; Simon Case’s nauseating glee at imposing petty restrictions, and his characterisation of the desire to retain basic privacy around one’s contact details as “pure Conservative ideology”; Boris’s claim that another lockdown would be the “height of absurdity”, before immediately implementing it – I could go on.

But Hancock’s brazen fear tactics, apparently divorced from any kind of scientific evidence, deployed, to use his word, with borderline psychopathic disregard for the impact they would have on people, is the worst finding yet in this already incredibly sordid tale.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 03/06/2023 – 06:20

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/0vcpJHj Tyler Durden

Top US General Makes Rare Visit To Syria, Reaffirms Occupation

Top US General Makes Rare Visit To Syria, Reaffirms Occupation

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley made a rare, unannounced visit to Syria on Saturday, which was his first trip there as America’s top general. The purpose was to reaffirm the US troop presence and mission there even as the public has by and large grown weary of foreign military entanglements.

An official estimate of some 900 American troops remain in the northeast portion of the country, which is Syria’s oil and gas rich region which before the war supplied the rest of the country. Also the US has troops at Tanf base on the Iraq-Syria border. Milley was asked by reporters if the Pentagon’s presence in Syria was worth the risk. He responded: “If you think that that’s important, then the answer is ‘Yes,’” according Reuters.

Via Reuters: Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley, left, speaks with US forces at a US military base in northeast Syria.

“So I think that an enduring defeat of ISIS and continuing to support our friends and allies in the region … I think those are important tasks that can be done,” he added. For years US special forces have advised and assisted the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). They maintain control of the major oil fields.

While the US has long sought to portray the US presence as part of a counter-terror and counter-ISIS mission, when President Trump was in office he admitted it was about “securing the oil”. Ultimately, the US is actively cutting off Damascus from its own badly needed natural resources on top of a sanctions policy aimed at strangling Assad’s Syria. The Pentagon also sees the occupation as about countering Iran, by keeping up pressure on Iran’s ally Damascus.

Naturally, Damascus was outraged at Gen. Milley’s entering sovereign Syrian territory (occupied), with a foreign ministry statement calling it a “flagrant violation of Syria’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, and unity.”

According to a regional publication

A source at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates said, “Syria strongly condemns the illegal visit of the US Chief of Staff to an illegal US military base in northeastern Syria, and affirms that it is a flagrant violation of the sovereignty, the sanctity of its lands and unity,” according to RT.

“Syria calls on the US administration to immediately stop its systematic and continuous violations of international law and stop its support for separatist armed militias … and Syria affirms that these US practices will not deviate it from its approach to combating terrorism and preserving its sovereignty, security, and stability,” the source added.

Turkey has also long wanted to see American troops gone from the region, given they support Kurdish groups which Ankara views as ‘terrorists’.

One likely reason for the weekend trip by Milley is to show the world the US won’t let up pressure on Assad in the wake of the devastating earthquake which resulted in over 50,000 deaths and billions of dollars in damage across both Turkey and Syria. This as the past weeks have seen Arab capitals send representatives to Damascus, while issuing messages of support to Assad and providing humanitarian aid to Syria. Washington is still trying to dissuade the Arab world from re-embracing the Assad government, however. 

Tyler Durden
Mon, 03/06/2023 – 05:45

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/6ZLVWaR Tyler Durden

A Massive Global Restructuring Is Underway… Here’s What It Means For Europe

A Massive Global Restructuring Is Underway… Here’s What It Means For Europe

Authored by Chris Macintosh via InternationalMan.com,

Several shifts in alliances and bifurcations are happening right now which are going under the radar.

Hungary out of the EU?

We’ve long said that Hungary was going to leave the EU. It is just a question of time.

The daily news announced that “hundreds of high-ranking military officers sacked in Hungary”. From the article:

Multiple Hungarian media outlets reported that Hungary’s defense minister sacked hundreds of high-ranking military officers. The people concerned have two months to leave and will get 70 percent of their current salaries as a pension-like allowance even if they continue to work. The minister says the move served the rejuvenation and modernisation of the army. The opposition believes the government fired pro-NATO officers.

To be clear, I don’t know if this is true. But as with most things, you piece together multiple bits of information and a picture forms providing probabilities. It is with these probabilities that we begin to price outcomes and assets accordingly. Where most probable outcomes coincide with cheap or expensive asset classes is where we find asymmetry.

So what we do know is that Hungary has been against the Ukraine war from the get go.

Orban has been a thorn in the EU’s side, refusing to bow to ever increasing levels of control and mismanagement. He is extraordinarily popular at home and this has the pointy shoes in Brussels in a tizz. How dare he?

The article goes on to explain the mass sacking.

The ministry says this move served the aim to modernise the army and pave the way to the rise of a new officer generation. Media reports about more than a hundred generals, colonels and other high-ranking officers sent away. Meanwhile, the former defence secretary and the Democratic Coalition’s MP, Ágnes Vadai, counted around 170 officers on Thursday. She added the officers sent away were pro-NATO.

What may have prompted this? Well, I did note this…

This guy with the dress sense of a circus clown just resigned.

He is — or should I say was — advisor to Zelensky’s chief of staff.

A recent article announced that Oleksiy Arestovich resigns as advisor to Zelensky’s office

Oleksiy Arestovich submitted his resignation from the position of external adviser to the office of the president of Ukraine.

“I want to show an example of what civilized behavior is: a fundamental error, then resignation,” he wrote on his social media, attaching a photo of his letter.

After his resignation he went on political analyst Yuri Romanenko’s Youtube channel and had this to say.

I’m an unofficial person already, I can say what I want.

Then having said that, spat this out…

If everyone thinks that we are guaranteed to win the war, it seems very unlikely.

This is particularly interesting since the former actor (I know right, it’s like the entire cabinet are actors) coined the name. I’d say propagandist but whatever.

His job, as far as I can tell, was to run a Youtube channel, which earned him the nickname “Therapist-in-Chief” and was devoted to assuring Ukrainians that the situation was under control, Ukraine had the upper hand, and that the war would be over soon. So basically a professional liar. A Ukrainian version of the BBC and CNN.

So as you can see, quite a turnaround for the “everything’s under control” kid. I guess the cocaine dwarf didn’t funnel enough of the Western taxpaying serfs’ money through Europe’s laundromat to him in order to keep up the charade. Or he quite possibly actually fears for his life because at some point a Russian bullet may exit the back of his head. Who knows?

Largest Number of Politicians are in Ukraine. But at whose expense?

ZeroHedge highlighted the wave of rats jumping ship… urgh, I mean “resignations.”

And I know what you’re thinking. “Where did they get all the money from?”

It is a good question.

The Zelensky regime thanks you, American taxpayers, for your service. Lambos and French villas don’t just land in your pocket on their own, ya know.

So there are at least two things to consider here. A top Ukraine official acknowledged what we’ve been saying all along — that the mighty Ukrainian military is NOT about to win. On the contrary, they’re getting hammered. A meat grinder.

And now Hungary is preparing. For what?

Well, what is the step for the US… urgh, I mean Ukraine when they’re winning so hard that Russia will be in control by spring?

The US/NATO/EU certainly cannot lose. Why? Because the harm to the US military hegemony would be a game changer. The rest of the world and all the military intelligence, from Delhi to Beijing to Ankara and even Tel Aviv, knows full well this is a US war.

So what do they do? If their previous actions are anything to go by, they ramp up the conflict, attempting to ensure other so-called participants “HAVE TO” join. This was what the bombing of the Nordstream pipeline was designed to do. To cut off all options, forcing Germany in particular to follow Washington’s policy.

Now, ahead of time, Orban is preempting a declaration of war by NATO. Hungary wants no part in this, but under their current NATO and EU membership they’d be obliged regardless.

Is Orban prepping for the time when he has to take his country out of the EU and out of NATO? If he was to do that (and I’m not saying that this is what he’s doing, merely that it is a logical and possible explanation), then he’d get rid of all the pro-NATO military because, by golly, he’s going to need a strong ideological position domestically within the military if he is to succeed in doing so. He’d almost certainly understand that the CIA would be active in promoting a “colour revolution” that would appear out of nowhere like a military myocarditis.

In a recent speech Orban had this to say:

The West violated Central Europe’s 1000 year old borders and history. It has pushed us to indefensible limits. Deprived of our natural resources. Cut off from natural resources. Made our country a house of mourning. They redrew the borders of Central Europe without moral concerns. Just as they drew the borders of Africa and the Middle East. This we will never forget.

Takeaways?

Aristotle, 2,500 years ago, wrote a book on the constitutions of Greece. He wrote, “All these constitutions call themselves democracies, but they are really oligarchies.”

Look around you and tell me that today’s so-called democracies are not run by a financial oligarchy. Many call it the deep state, but what exactly is the deep state? It is a financial oligarchy.

What else? Well, I think the euro is F.U.K.T (fragile, useless, korrupt, and terminal). So there’s that, but you know what else I’ll be looking out for? Should this indeed be the case, then when or if Hungary announces its exit, I expect Hungarian assets to immediately be sold by European institutions, not because they necessarily disagree but because everything has become so politicized that holding assets of Hungary would be immediately deemed “unpatriotic” and/or sanctioned. So we’ll wait for that to play out and then go hunting and probably buy the snot out of Hungary. If they can extract themselves from the WEF puppets, then there is hope.

I do realize that Hungary is a tiny landlocked country and really this works only where it gains momentum as/if others join. Serbia? Quite possibly. Italy under Maloni? Sure, I can see that, though for reasons stated other than the Russkie angle. Croatia, sensing the tide turning? I wouldn’t discount it.

So as you can see, lots going on and lots to keep our beady eye on. For now, get out of the euro if you are long and realize that as screwed as the dollar is, it looks positively glorious compared to the klustafuk that is Europe and the euro.

*  *  *

The Western system is undergoing substantial changes, and the signs of moral decay, corruption, and increasing debt are impossible to ignore. With the Great Reset in motion, the United Nations, World Economic Forum, IMF, WHO, World Bank, and Davos man are all promoting a unified agenda that will affect us all. To get ahead of the chaos, download our free PDF report “Clash of the Systems: Thoughts on Investing at a Unique Point in Time” by clicking here.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 03/06/2023 – 05:00

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/N6w4s9k Tyler Durden

Speak Loudly and Carry a Big Bat: Ron DeSantis Is on Deck


cover3

As a 12-year-old in 1991, DeSantis was part of a team from Dunedin, Florida, that qualified for the Little League World Series, the global youth baseball championship event held every summer since 1947 in the hills of Williamsport, Pennsylvania. “We were like local celebrities for a while,” he recalled 10 years later for an article published by the Yale Daily News. “We were the lead story in the local newspapers and on the front page of the Tampa area newspapers.”

In 1991, the Little League World Series hadn’t yet morphed into the two-week-long competition featuring 20 teams and wall-to-wall coverage on ESPN that it is today. Even so, it was newsworthy enough to lead local news coverage back home in Florida and to give young Ronald DeSantis, as he was listed on Dunedin’s roster, his first mention in an Associated Press wire report: He pitched five innings and hit a home run as Dunedin won, 23–7, against a team from Saudi Arabia in a consolation game on the tournament’s second day. Perhaps DeSantis was thinking back to that blowout victory when, a week after the 2022 midterm elections, a reporter asked the governor to respond to a forgettable barb from former President Donald Trump, and the newly reelected governor responded: “At the end of the day, I would just tell people to go check out the scoreboard from last Tuesday night.”

For Republicans across most of the country, DeSantis’ victory was a consolation prize for otherwise disappointing GOP results.

But in Florida, DeSantis was a star player on the front pages once again. His coattails carried Republicans to a supermajority in both state legislative chambers. For many in the GOP, his victory seemed to confirm that DeSantis was not just a rising star in the Republican Party but the next MVP.

DeSantis’ scoreboard view of politics is a natural fit for a Republican Party that has benched its former interest in any particular set of principles or policies in order to prioritize winning above all else. If winning requires embracing tried and true limited government policies, great. But if winning requires, as it more often seems to these days in conservative circles, wielding the power of the state against your enemies, that seems fine for Republicans too.

But what do they need to win? Polls suggest that many Republicans are looking for, essentially, a relief pitcher—someone who can take over for Trump, the tiring starting pitcher of the MAGA movement—while others believe the starter has another inning in him, at least. If the GOP decides to make a call to the bullpen, DeSantis figures to be first in line.

The qualities that make an effective chief executive and a useful relief pitcher are surprisingly similar. Both get called upon in the middle of ongoing action. Sometimes they have to step in with the bases loaded and the game tied. Other times, their job is to maintain a steady course and protect a comfortable lead. It’s a job that requires a cool head, a consistent delivery, and trusting the other guys on the field with you.

That’s the argument for DeSantis. More than that, it’s also the role that polls suggest many Republican voters are hoping their next presidential nominee will fill—and that has implications in the realms of both politics and policy.

But the governor doesn’t seem to be content with the important, but often overlooked, role of reliever. When DeSantis’ campaign auctioned off 500 replica baseball cards as a fundraiser for the governor’s 2022 reelection effort, the photo on the front was of a college-aged DeSantis holding a bat over his head, arms flexed, waiting on a pitch to smash. DeSantis is “going to bat” for Florida, promised one campaign ad hawking the cards.

For the past few years, he’s attempted to rebrand himself as a bombastic power hitter, ready to take a huge swing at whatever pitch the other team throws his way. That’s gotten DeSantis more attention from the fans and media—chicks dig the long ball, after all, and so do Republicans—but it has come with a cost.

In politics, unlike baseball, these two positions are not quite so mutually exclusive. But understanding how DeSantis fits into both roles reveals the tension between the competing claims at the center of his prospective candidacy. On one hand, he’s a competent conservative who has overseen a successful state through a challenging time—the type of pitcher you can trust when there are runners on base. On the other, he’s a brash anti-woke slugger whose authoritarian antics draw more attention, by design, than the results of his big swings.

However conservatives might rationalize away that tension during the coming season, libertarians can at least be heartened by DeSantis’ tendency to strike out when he takes a big cut at the Constitution. Indeed, while DeSantis might have come up through the farm system of a limited-government team, he’s donned a very different uniform since reaching the big leagues.

Big Leagues, Small Government

In college at Yale, DeSantis captained the baseball team while working on his undergraduate degree, posting a solid .313 batting average during his four years. But instead of pursuing sports, DeSantis went into law—and then politics. He shipped up to Harvard, earned a law degree, served in the Navy Judge Advocate General’s Corps, then moved back to Florida to run for Congress.

People have been coming to Florida for decades, and not just to watch spring training. That population boom has translated into more political power—the state has gained at least one seat in Congress following every census since 1930—and in 2012 there were two newly minted districts needing to be filled. With no incumbent to get in the way, DeSantis won a six-way Republican primary, then got 57 percent of the vote in the general election to carry a newly drawn GOP-leaning district that stretched south of Jacksonville along the Atlantic coast, including Daytona Beach and St. Augustine.

DeSantis had made it into the big leagues—and the game was changing.

DeSantis arrived in Congress in much the same way that he now hopes to arrive in the White House: by following the path carved by an unexpected revolution within the Republican Party. Two years before his first congressional campaign, the Tea Party wave had crashed across the midterm elections, carrying dozens of new Republican candidates into elected offices at all levels of government on the promise of shrinking the size and cost of government and restoring constitutional principles.

As he launched his first campaign for elected office, DeSantis eagerly hopped aboard the trend. “The Constitution is the focal point of American political life, providing the federal government its sole source of authority and safeguarding many of the God-given rights that Americans cherish,” DeSantis wrote in his 2011 book Dreams From Our Founding Fathers.

The book’s title and cover are unsubtle. It was meant as a direct response to Barack Obama’s own memoir, Dreams from My Father, and it alternated between being a love letter to the Framers and a condemnation of what DeSantis saw as then-President Obama’s betrayal of their principles.

“The reaction against the policies of Obama and his congressional allies by a large number of Americans has been motivated by their sense that the transformational change instituted in the nation’s capital betrayed” the principles and values outlined in the Constitution, DeSantis wrote, “by their fear that the Republic was being unmoored from her limited government roots.”

As a work of political writing, Dreams From Our Founding Fathers is clichéd and unmemorable. Today, nearly a decade since the Tea Party wave petered out and after the GOP traded talk of first principles for America First, it almost reads like a spoof of that bygone period in conservative politics.

But the book is notable as a point of reference in DeSantis’ career arc. He entered Congress as a firebrand for limited government and constitutional principles—and mostly lived up to that billing.

Shortly after taking office in 2013, he voted against providing federal funds to states and localities hit by Hurricane Sandy—something that’s not easy for a lawmaker from Florida to do—and pointedly criticized Congress’ “put it on the credit card mentality” that had driven the national debt to the now-quaint figure of $17 trillion.

He was a supporter of Wisconsin Republican Rep. Paul Ryan’s proposal to balance the federal budget by 2030. He was one of the founding members of the originally libertarian-ish House Freedom Caucus and was involved in the faction’s efforts to unseat House Speaker John Boehner in favor of Ryan in 2015. He supported the near-miss 2017 “Repeal and Replace” effort that would have undone large portions of Obama’s signature accomplishment, the Affordable Care Act. (And, in two appearances at the annual congressional baseball game, DeSantis posted a .333 batting average.)

DeSantis was, in short, a consummate small-government Republican congressman during the times when it was in vogue to be a small-government Republican. But he also seemed to have a sense that a curveball was coming.

When Boehner complained that Freedom Caucus members were acting out against the Republican establishment because it was helping them raise money for future campaigns, DeSantis told National Review that Boehner was getting it backward. “I don’t think that they would be able to generate outrage or generate dissatisfaction where none existed,” he said. “I think they’re tapping into an existing dissatisfaction with Republican leadership and with Washington, D.C., more generally.”

That dissatisfaction with Republican leadership culminated, a year later, with Republican voters choosing a political neophyte and former reality television star as their nominee for the presidency. With Trump’s endorsement, DeSantis narrowly won the 2018 gubernatorial election in Florida. In his victory speech that night, DeSantis was still playing the role of a small government conservative—he quoted Lincoln, talked up how Florida’s low tax rates translate into higher revenue by attracting investment, and credited outgoing Republican Gov. Rick Scott with having put the state on the right path, one that DeSantis would aim to follow.

He was, in short, promising to be an effective relief pitcher—a steady hand, taking over in the midst of a game.

Put Me In, Coach

As he gears up for a run at the GOP presidential nomination, that’s still what DeSantis is implicitly promising—except now he’s making the case that he should step in for Trump. Republican voters seem open to the possibility.

A December poll by Suffolk University and USA Today found that just 31 percent of Republicans want Trump to run again—but an overwhelming 61 percent say they want the next GOP president to continue Trump’s policies. That’s both a remarkable accomplishment for an administration that might have been the least policy-focused in American history and a serious blow to anyone who hopes the GOP will fully discard Trumpist populism in the near future. As David Paleologos, director of the Suffolk University Political Research Center, said, “Republicans and conservative independents increasingly want Trumpism without Trump.”

This early, polls reveal little or nothing about the likely outcome of the race. At this stage of the 2016 cycle, Trump was not considered a favorite, and former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie at one time looked a lot like DeSantis does now. But polls can offer some insight into the shape of the electorate as the GOP tries to reassemble itself after the internal civil war that was the Trump presidency and the disappointments of the 2022 midterms.

“We are in an entirely different world than in 2016, when Trump was new, when he had the initiative, when he caught the rest of the party flat-footed,” says Patrick Ruffini, a longtime Republican pollster, a political adviser, and the co-founder of Echelon Insights, a Washington, D.C., polling firm. Echelon’s polling suggests that the GOP is divided into three overlapping camps, like a Venn diagram. Roughly a third of Republicans remain die-hard Trump supporters, while another 25 percent have always been hostile to the former president and now want him to go away. The remaining 40 percent are in the overlapping part: supportive of Trump but willing to look at alternatives.

DeSantis’ goal, as Ruffini sees it, is to persuade that middle group that “he’ll be all the things they like about Trump—taking no prisoners against the radical left—without the infighting, craziness, or drama.”

Ruffini says the 2022 midterms might have been an inflection point because so many Trump-backed candidates lost or underperformed. In Echelon’s monthly tracking polls, Trump held a 33-point lead over DeSantis as recently as October. By December, the two were in a virtual dead heat. “The key difference now is that Trump’s aura of ‘winning’ really has been seriously damaged,” says Ruffini.

Politically, then, the argument for picking DeSantis is pretty clear. As he said in December: Check the scoreboard.

In pitching terms, Trump was a crowd-favorite starter who had the unfortunate tendency to throw wild pitches, as in his dangerous mishandling of the aftermath of the 2020 election. So it’s easy to see why 65 percent of Republicans would like to see a reliever warming up in the bullpen, even as Trump insists he can play another inning.

But deciding that you need a relief pitcher and deciding which one to bring into the game are two different things. Indeed, the second question might be even more important than the first.

To that 65 percent slice of the GOP, DeSantis can hold up a record that any good relief pitcher would like to have: one that shows he’s effective even when he’s called into a crisis.

Catching COVID

“We’re not closing anything going forward,” DeSantis announced on September 25, 2020, about six months after the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic triggered shutdowns of vast swaths of normal American life.

DeSantis’ initial handling of the pandemic reflected the uncertainties of the times. He’d pitched carefully, but deliberately: first refusing to issue a statewide lockdown even as he ordered bars, restaurants, and nightclubs to close, then reversing course on April 1 and ordering all Floridians to stay home for 30 days. The reopening came in fits and starts, with a new round of restrictions on business activity issued in June—including, as in many other states, a ban on serving alcohol in bars, even though bars were allowed to be open to half capacity.

By mid-summer, however, DeSantis made clear that he was not willing to go back to full lockdown, despite ongoing infections and deaths. It wasn’t “people going to a business” that was driving infections, he told reporters in June. By September, with the summer wave passing, DeSantis was focused on reopening the economy and the state’s schools. No longer would the state government leave people “twisting in the wind,” as DeSantis put it. Anyone who wanted to get back to work could do so. While private businesses would be allowed to reduce capacity or mandate mask-wearing, DeSantis’ order issued that same day banned local governments from issuing such requirements.

And, true to his word, nothing was closed going forward, even as other states returned to semi-lockdowns the following winter and school closures persisted elsewhere for months to come.

More than two years later, it’s easy to forget how bold that decision was—and how much DeSantis was attacked for it. Orlando Weekly ran a graphic depicting DeSantis using a coffin-shaped surfboard to ride a wave of skulls.

DeSantis’ COVID policies were seemingly informed by the lingering elements of his pre-Trump identity—including a focus on personal responsibility as the primary defense against the pandemic.

“The masks, we’ve basically said from the beginning, if you can’t social distance or if you’re in a face-to-face, then the masks are recommended. But you don’t need to be wearing it if you’re going for a jog or you’re on the beach and so some of this stuff can get out of hand. I want to be more reasonable about it,” DeSantis told Florida Politics in June 2020, as he laid out a multistep plan for reopening the state’s economy.

But it’s not just his handling of COVID that makes DeSantis look like a reliable reliever for national Republicans aiming to move on from the Trump years. In less stressful situations, he’s also shown an ability to keep throwing strikes.

School choice, an issue made even more important by the pandemic, has expanded in Florida under his watch. Families of four earning up to about $99,000 annually are now eligible for a private school scholarship program that he signed into law in 2021.

On the nuts-and-bolts of budgeting, too, DeSantis is a better-than-replacement-level governor. In stump speeches, DeSantis brags about the fact that Florida has roughly the same population as the state of New York, but has a state budget of only about half the size. He scored a “C” on the Cato Institute’s biannual gubernatorial scorecard this year, though his average score is mostly a reflection of what he didn’t do—no broad-based tax or spending cuts—than what he has done. He’s maintained Florida’s status as one of the lowest tax states in the country, and, as DeSantis loves pointing out, people keep flooding into the state.

But DeSantis, for whatever reason, seems to be unhappy playing the role of a relief pitcher. And as is often the case when a pitcher steps into the batter’s box, the results have been ugly.

Speak Loudly and Carry a Big Bat

In the innings after COVID, DeSantis has staked his national reputation on taking big swings in the culture war. “We fight the woke in the legislature,” DeSantis promised in his election night victory speech in November, which was worlds away from his restrained, conservative speech in 2018.”We fight the woke in the schools. We fight the woke in the corporations,” he said. “We will never, ever surrender to the woke mob. Florida is where woke goes to die.”

The term woke gained traction in the early 2000s on the political left as a way to describe someone who was aware of the ways that racism can be both subtle and systemic. But woke increasingly seems to mean different things depending on who is using the term. For those on the left, it is used to signal an appreciation for progressive ideals that extend beyond or intersect with racial issues. When DeSantis and other Republicans use it, it’s a convenient catch-all for anything conservatives currently dislike.

DeSantis has applied the label to everything from the NCAA to Ben and Jerry’s ice cream—the former for threatening to withhold championship events from states with laws discriminating against trans athletes, the latter for a statement issued by the company’s founders condemning Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories. Some math books are “woke,” according to DeSantis, if they contain word problems that inject racial perspectives. Then–State Attorney Andrew Warren was accused of being woke after DeSantis suspended him for saying he would refuse to enforce the state’s abortion law. As part of a lawsuit subsequently filed by Warren against the state, several of DeSantis’ aides were reportedly asked to define the word, but that doesn’t seem to have narrowed things down.

DeSantis’ war on woke included asking the state’s GOP-controlled legislature in December 2021 to pass the Stop the Wrongs to Our Kids and Employees—or Stop WOKE—Act, which limited discussions of sexual orientation and gender identity in public schools and universities.

The STOP Woke Act drew harsh condemnation from free speech advocates. The law is “stuffed to the gills with vague language that leaves professors unsure which lessons are government-approved” and “constrains the ability of professors to play devil’s advocate and forbids them from ‘advancing’ viewpoints, even just for the sake of Socratic discussion,” according to the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, which filed a First Amendment lawsuit against it.

In November, Judge Mark Walker of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida called the law “positively dystopian” and issued a temporary injunction against the parts of the law that limit discussion of racial issues in college and university settings. Courts are still reviewing the constitutional merits of the law.

But one culture war soon begat another. When then–Walt Disney Company CEO Bob Chapek publicly criticized DeSantis over the passage of a bill banning discussions of gender and sexuality in grade school classrooms, the governor responded by asking state lawmakers to pass another bill, this time revoking Disney’s special tax status and its authority to operate a quasi-government that covers more than 25,000 acres of Floridian swampland-turned-resort.

DeSantis left no doubt that he was simply taking a swing at a private company because its CEO exercised his First Amendment rights. “You’re a corporation based in Burbank, California, and you’re going to marshal your economic might to attack the parents of my state,” DeSantis said when he signed the bill in April. “We view that as a provocation, and we’re going to fight back against that.” For good measure, he also called Disney woke.

The two-page bill did not seriously grapple with the consequences of abolishing the Reedy Creek Improvement District, which was granted to Disney as a pseudo-governmental entity in the 1960s. Disney is solely responsible for everything from water and fire services to building inspections within the zone. Far from being a special privilege granted to an out-of-state corporation, the existence of Reedy Creek frees local taxpayers in Orange and Osceola counties from having to foot the bill for Disney World’s basic services to supply its 77,000-employee work force and millions of annual visitors.

The legislation abolishing the district also ignored the bondholders who had bought shares of Reedy Creek’s debt over the years. “Florida simply cannot promise to prospective bondholders that it won’t interfere with Reedy Creek, and then dissolve Reedy Creek. If Reedy Creek is ever dissolved, it would be a monumental and complicated enterprise even on a years-long timeline,” Jacob Schumer, a Florida-based attorney, wrote for Bloomberg shortly after the law was signed.

Sure enough, the state already seems to be backing down. State Rep. Randy Fine (R–Palm Bay), the lawmaker who originally drafted the bill to strip Disney’s self-rule power, told the Tampa Bay Times in December that the announced departure of Chapek as Disney’s CEO makes it likely that lawmakers will pass a new bill making “a few modifications” to the Reedy Creek district instead.

DeSantis may have viewed Disney’s CEO expressing an opinion as a “provocation,” but in the end this is a story about a state government exerting significant pressure on a private company to change its CEO—and threatening to put Florida’s own taxpayers on the hook for huge expenses if the company refuses to comply.

That’s hardly the only such incident. With the help of a GOP-controlled state legislature, DeSantis has ordered social media companies to change how they moderate the accounts of prominent elected officials—prompted, seemingly, by Twitter’s decision to ban Trump on January 6, 2021. He’s used federal COVID relief funds to fly migrants from Texas to Massachusetts, threatened to jail some Floridians for voter fraud despite the fact that they’d voted legally, and ordered the state’s Department of Business and Professional Regulation to investigate holiday-themed drag shows.

Each prodigious swat is followed by the political equivalent of a gleeful bat-flip—a did-you-see-what-I just-did victory lap on social media and within the right-wing media sphere.

Those cheering for each of DeSantis’ culture war swings are being clear about why they like him: not because he’s following in Trump’s footsteps, but because he’s pushing beyond anything the 45th president did.

“DeSantis’s combativeness on hot-button social issues reflects Mr. Trump’s influence, but he’s gone even further and used government power as an instrument in the culture war—something Mr. Trump talked about but never really did,” wrote Rich Lowry, editor in chief of National Review, in a New York Times op-ed in May. “If any of Mr. DeSantis’s Republican admirers are hoping he will chart a path back to the pre-2016 party, they’ll probably be disappointed.”

Conservatives taken in by DeSantis’ culture warring might want to see where the ball lands before they start celebrating the governor’s home runs, however.

Take that social media law, for example—the Stop Social Media Censorship Act, which, among other things, required sites like Twitter and Facebook to host speech from elected officials and “journalistic enterprises,” even if those officials and journalists violated the sites’ terms of service. When he signed the bill in May 2021, DeSantis framed the bill as a pro–free speech measure and said the law would offer Floridians “guaranteed protection against the Silicon Valley elites.”

That’s a catchy sound bite, but it’s far from stable legal ground in a country where the First Amendment still exists. When attorneys for the state had to go before a federal judge to defend against a lawsuit seeking to block the law’s implementation, they struggled to articulate how it could pass constitutional muster. At one point, Northern District of Florida Judge Robert Hinkle asked the state’s attorneys if they had “ever dealt with a statute that is more poorly drafted.” He later granted the injunction, blocking the law’s implementation. In May 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit upheld that decision, ruling that the law was “substantially likely” to be a violation of social media platforms’ free speech rights. The law remains unenforced.

In his eagerness to swing at anything resembling wokeness, DeSantis is also undermining his record on COVID.

During the past year, DeSantis has turned away from his earlier pandemic strategy based on personal responsibility and instead embraced the exact logic once held by public health officials who favored lockdowns: Government knows best.

In November 2021, DeSantis signed a bill banning private companies in Florida from requiring that their employees get vaccinated against COVID-19 as a condition of employment. “Nobody should lose their job due to heavy-handed COVID mandates and we had a responsibility to protect the livelihoods of the people of Florida,” DeSantis said in a statement announcing his support for the bill. The governor’s office called it “the strongest pro-freedom, anti-mandate action taken by any state in the nation.”

But no matter how DeSantis describes it, the bill banning businesses from imposing vaccine mandates is still a government intrusion into the private interactions between workers and their employers. An anti-mandate mandate is still a mandate.

The vaccine mandate bill was antithetical to the individual-choice approach DeSantis had taken throughout the first 18 months of the pandemic. It also seems to have helped steer the governor further into the right-wing fever swamps of vaccine conspiracy theories.

It was a rather stunning about-face for DeSantis, who had been an unabashed advocate for the COVID-19 vaccines since even before they were available. He flew to D.C. to participate in one of Trump’s “Operation Warp Speed” media events in December 2020, during which he outlined plans for Florida’s vaccine distribution efforts. He made an appearance on Fox News in February 2021 from the home of a 94-year-old military veteran, who got his shot live on-air as DeSantis talked up how the state government was arranging house calls for elderly residents.

In July 2021, just a few months before banning private vaccine mandates, he was still talking about the shot as a matter of personal responsibility. “If you are vaccinated, fully vaccinated, the chance of you getting seriously ill or dying from COVID is effectively zero,” he said at a press conference in St. Petersburg. “Seventy-five percent of Floridians over the age of 50 have gotten shots, so we think that’s really, really positive.”

In December 2022, however, DeSantis announced a new state initiative to investigate what he says are the lies told by vaccine producers and promoters. He promised the effort would “come with legal processes that will be able to get more information and to bring legal accountability for those who committed misconduct.”

What to make of this sudden turn? Perhaps DeSantis noticed that Trump got booed at one of his own rallies after announcing that he’d received a booster.

Trump has continued to boast of the vaccines quickly developed as part of the “Operation Warp Speed” that his administration launched at the outset of the pandemic. He called DeSantis “gutless” for refusing to talk about his vaccine status.

At the very least, there’s a clear contradiction in DeSantis’ approach to the final stage of the pandemic: Was he misleading constituents when he promoted the jab, or is he doing that now by holding the opposite view? Or perhaps DeSantis’ newfound vaccine skepticism is just pure political cynicism.

A Swing and a Miss

Vaccine antics aside, possibly the best illustration of the contradiction at the center of DeSantis’ politics comes from two scripted remarks that the governor made just moments apart in September.

In the middle of his keynote address at the National Conservatism Conference in Miami, DeSantis bragged about how Florida’s businesses and tax coffers were benefitting from the influx of people fleeing places like New York and California during the pandemic. The state ran a $22 billion surplus last year, something DeSantis chalked up to booming population growth, a growing labor force, and record-high tourism totals.

In short, more people moving to Florida to seek freedom and a better way of life is great news for the state.

Not five minutes later, DeSantis bemoaned the influx of immigrants into the United States—and not just those who circumvent the law to get here. “Mass immigration, whether illegal immigration or whether it’s just mass immigration through the legal process,” he said. “That is not conducive to assimilating people into American society.” The crowd cheered.

More people moving into the United States to seek freedom and a better way of life, apparently, is bad news.

Immigration has been Florida’s secret weapon for much of its history—more people translates into greater economic and political power. DeSantis knows this, of course. He benefited from the creation of a new congressional district in the Sunshine State a decade ago, and now from the economic surplus of the immigration boom.

But he can’t, or won’t, apply those lessons to the nation as a whole. Worse, he seems to think it’s acceptable to use immigrants as pawns in his own political game.

In September, DeSantis used state emergency relief funds to fly dozens of migrants from San Antonio, Texas, to Martha’s Vineyard—the well-heeled and famously liberal Massachusetts island where Obama now owns a home. A state inspector general is probing whether DeSantis improperly used federal COVID relief funds to pay for the flights.

DeSantis’ defense is that the line item for the fiasco was actually included in the state budget, which means the legislature shares the blame. But even if the money was spent legally, the incident is telling. DeSantis hasn’t merely tried to layer his culture-war-slugger persona atop his existing persona; the two are often in direct opposition. State taxpayers are on the hook for more than $17 million in costs associated with lawsuits stemming from DeSantis’ culture war policies, the Miami Herald reported in December.

And DeSantis’ decision to elevate the culture war in an attempt to outflank Trump to the right might be politically questionable as well. There are a lot more people in the other parts of the GOP’s Venn diagram.

David Boaz, vice president of the Cato Institute and a longtime observer of the intersection between conservative and libertarian politics, says the best-case scenario for a DeSantis presidency is that he backs off the nonstop culture war and “realizes that the nation is not Florida.”

There are reasons to be optimistic—and spring training, after all, is a time for optimism. In a future where DeSantis is president, the 2024 election ends with Trump either losing or withdrawing. Maybe that’s enough to break Trump’s hold on the party, and maybe a freed DeSantis even rediscovers an earlier version of himself, evolving again into a small-government conservative. If not, maybe he at least appoints some good judges and governs as a mostly middle-of-the-road Republican.

But Boaz isn’t betting on that possibility. “His feud with Disney suggests that he has Trump’s instinct to use government power to hurt his critics, and his new anti-vaccine campaign is right out of the MAGA playbook,” Boaz says.

Boaz worries that DeSantis will be more like an American version of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, a pugnacious social conservative and favorite among American right-wing nationalists. In this outcome, Boaz says, DeSantis would turn out to be “a smart and disciplined politician using the power of the presidency and a slim popular majority to attack alternative power centers—Congress, the judiciary, business, media, universities—and implement nationalist and populist policies that would make us less prosperous and less free.”

Perhaps the best defense against that possibility is another contradiction at the center of DeSantis’ recent transformation. The idea that he’s a more competent version of Trump is undercut by the results of his most high-profile culture war policies, which, like Florida’s social media law, have been blocked by the courts or walked back. If this is what using state power to fight the culture war looks like, it’s not accomplishing much—except raising the political profile of the guy doing it.

But DeSantis is committed to the bit. “We will never surrender to the woke mob,” the governor declared in his second inaugural address on January 8. He used the occasion to confirm that private businesses are not to be exempt from the conflict. “Fighting for freedom is not easy because the threats to freedom are more complex and more widespread than in the past,” DeSantis said. “The threats can come from entrenched bureaucrats in D.C., jet-setters in Davos, and corporations wielding public power.”

“But fight we must,” he concluded.

Yogi Berra, the New York Yankees’ longtime catcher, once supposedly quipped to a reporter: “Baseball is 90 percent mental. The other half is physical.” You might be able to say nearly the same thing about contemporary conservative politics, where the culture war has taken on an outsized level of importance relative to actual policy making—and where the math and logic increasingly don’t seem to matter.

The closer you look at DeSantis’ record as a culture warrior, the less he seems like the fearsome power hitter many conservatives want to believe him to be. Sure, he takes big swings, flips the bats, hams it up for the TV cameras, and trots around the bases. But that increasingly looks like it’s in the hope that no one will notice how often he’s striking out.

There are plenty of strikeout-prone power hitters on the Republican bench at the moment. But there are few, if any, rock-solid relief pitchers: experienced players who can manage a tricky situation, calm nerves, and protect a lead. DeSantis has proven he’s effective in that role, even if he now seems unwilling to keep playing it. That would be a shame. Winning, after all, requires both effective offense and a pitcher who can keep the other team off the scoreboard.

The post Speak Loudly and Carry a Big Bat: Ron DeSantis Is on Deck appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/O8RJVAT
via IFTTT