Great article from the WSJ
Trump’s Tweets
The upside of a social-media presidency.
Republican legislators in Washington spend a lot of time complaining to each other about President Trump’s tweets. The usual gripe—and they often have a point—is that he frequently undercuts his own message or creates an unnecessary controversy. The latest twitter eruption invariably sends reporters scurrying to Capitol Hill and demanding a response from GOP lawmakers, who tend to view such questions as distractions from the important task of enacting needed reforms. But the conventional twitter-bomb damage assessments may be overstated.
Let’s consider a full accounting of the impact of our tweeter-in-chief. Yes, the President’s 140-character fusillades typically attract immediate and nearly complet e attention from the political reporting class. So it’s hard to argue that they aren’t distractions, but the question is how reporters would be spending their time if they hadn’t been diverted to cover the latest missive from the White House. Would they instead be describing in loving detail how the burgeoning Republican plans to reform health care and reduce the tax burden will lead to healthier and wealthier Americans? Some would, but many would not.
Also, if Mr. Trump is much less cautious than a conventional politician, this too carries benefits as well as costs. The President may infuriate his fellow GOP elected officials and even his own staff when he ignores all the work they’ve done to craft an argument and instead decides to make a different one on the fly and share it with the digital world. But without having the normal fears of an experienced politician, he’s also more comfortable taking positions that are bound to generate negative press, even if they’re good for economic growth, for example.
Take corporate income taxes. Economists increasingly understand that they fall hardest on workers, who suffer when investors have less incentive to pay for the new plant and equipment that allows workers to be more productive and thus to earn higher wages. But given the inevitable media beating that results, not every Republican would be comfortable proposing to slash the federal rate all the way down to 15% from 35%, as Mr. Trump has. And while he’s extremely willing and even seems to enjoy bucking the conventional media wisdom, Mr. Trump also seems fairly flexible on the policy details.
Accept Mr. Trump’s twitter weirdness and set aside for the moment the potential damage that could result from his trade and immigration agenda and you have almost an ideal scenario for a growth-oriented Republican legislator. The person sitting in the Oval Office is willing to make deep cuts in the tax and regulatory burden but isn’t a fanatic about the particular ways to achieve these goals. Congressional Republicans just need to send him something to sign.
http://s.wsj.net/newsletter/logo-WSJ.png
Trump’s Tweets
The upside of a social-media presidency.
Republican legislators in Washington spend a lot of time complaining to each other about President Trump’s tweets. The usual gripe—and they often have a point—is that he frequently undercuts his own message or creates an unnecessary controversy. The latest twitter eruption invariably sends reporters scurrying to Capitol Hill and demanding a response from GOP lawmakers, who tend to view such questions as distractions from the important task of enacting needed reforms. But the conventional twitter-bomb damage assessments may be overstated.
Let’s consider a full accounting of the impact of our tweeter-in-chief. Yes, the President’s 140-character fusillades typically attract immediate and nearly complet e attention from the political reporting class. So it’s hard to argue that they aren’t distractions, but the question is how reporters would be spending their time if they hadn’t been diverted to cover the latest missive from the White House. Would they instead be describing in loving detail how the burgeoning Republican plans to reform health care and reduce the tax burden will lead to healthier and wealthier Americans? Some would, but many would not.
Also, if Mr. Trump is much less cautious than a conventional politician, this too carries benefits as well as costs. The President may infuriate his fellow GOP elected officials and even his own staff when he ignores all the work they’ve done to craft an argument and instead decides to make a different one on the fly and share it with the digital world. But without having the normal fears of an experienced politician, he’s also more comfortable taking positions that are bound to generate negative press, even if they’re good for economic growth, for example.
Take corporate income taxes. Economists increasingly understand that they fall hardest on workers, who suffer when investors have less incentive to pay for the new plant and equipment that allows workers to be more productive and thus to earn higher wages. But given the inevitable media beating that results, not every Republican would be comfortable proposing to slash the federal rate all the way down to 15% from 35%, as Mr. Trump has. And while he’s extremely willing and even seems to enjoy bucking the conventional media wisdom, Mr. Trump also seems fairly flexible on the policy details.
Accept Mr. Trump’s twitter weirdness and set aside for the moment the potential damage that could result from his trade and immigration agenda and you have almost an ideal scenario for a growth-oriented Republican legislator. The person sitting in the Oval Office is willing to make deep cuts in the tax and regulatory burden but isn’t a fanatic about the particular ways to achieve these goals. Congressional Republicans just need to send him something to sign.
http://s.wsj.net/newsletter/logo-WSJ.png