This Week in Geopolitics

Game Time

January 23, 2017

Last Friday, Donald Trump became the 45th president of the United States. For Trump, as with every president before him, everything he said until that point consisted of promises. He had no power, so the only thing that could be expected of him was his analysis of what is wrong with the country, and what he would do to solve it.

On Friday, the question shifted from what he will do, to what he is doing. Presidents don’t stop promising, but the promises become more hollow over time if they are not matched by some degree of achievement.

The President’s Weak Position

The American presidency is a paradox.

It is the most noted position in the world, imbued by observers with all the power inherent to the world’s most powerful country. Everyone is now trying to understand what Trump intends to do.

At the same time, the American president is among the weakest institutional leaders in Euro-American civilization. He can do some things unilaterally, particularly in foreign policy, but Congress can block them. He can do some things by executive order, but the Supreme Court can overrule them. He can pass certain programs that require cooperation from states, but the states can refuse to cooperate. At every step, as the founders intended, his ability to act unilaterally is severely limited. The difference between how presidential power appears and how it is applied in reality is enormous.

So now, the most important question is not, what does Trump intend to do… but instead, what will Congress do? Both chambers have Republican majorities. Republican control of the House of Representatives is overwhelming. Republican control of the Senate, though, is not.

The Senate has 52 Republicans, 46 Democrats, and two independents who are likely to vote with the Democrats. This essentially gives the Republicans a four-vote majority. Because the vice president would be the deciding vote in a tie… and because he is a Republican, three Republicans would have to switch sides to defeat any legislation.

Under the Constitution, senators are not elected to rubber-stamp the president. They are elected to represent their sovereign states. So this battleground will not be between Republicans and Democrats. Nor will it be between both chambers. The real battle will be among Senate Republicans.

Three defections make it impossible to pass any proposed legislation. As such, any Republican senator who can position himself as a potential defector will be able to negotiate for the president’s support on any number of issues. The president will either be forced to compromise or risk having the legislation defeated.

Approval Ratings Are Key

Senators are not free actors. They need to be re-elected. Their calculation on whether to oppose a Republican president will depend heavily (if not entirely) on whether the president will help or hurt them in their re-election bids. That depends on the president’s approval ratings, particularly in the senators’ home states.

According to a Fox News poll taken just before Inauguration Day, 37% of those polled approved of Trump’s performance and 54% did not. And therein lies Trump’s problem and battleground.

President George W. Bush, President Richard Nixon, President Lyndon B. Johnson, and President Harry S. Truman all had approval ratings around 37% toward the end of their terms. This number is normal for a failed or worn-out presidency.

I know of no president in the 20th century who began his term this way. Each party historically commands about 40% support among voters. When a president falls below 40%, he is actually losing support from his own party. It is normally hard to come back from that… and it usually takes years to get to that low level.

This poses a problem for Trump’s administration. With these numbers, it is possible that more than three Republican senators could decide that rigid support for the president might cost them their political lives.

Trump’s approval ratings are unlikely to fall below 37%, but to be effective, he can’t stay at that level. Republican senators will look at the president’s negative ratings in their states and calculate whether supporting his programs might lock 50% of voters against them. It is important to recall that constitutionally, a senator is supposed to serve the people of his state, not the president.

Because public support wanes over the course of a presidency (though it sometimes blooms with nostalgia later in his term), it is essential to start a term with as much support as possible. Therefore, if Trump wants to get controversial bills passed, he must build his popularity quickly. His staff, particularly the vice president, will be examining every Republican senator who is up for re-election in 2018 to determine how to help sway their states’ voters. Trump’s fear will be that he will alienate his core while failing to make inroads with his enemies.

The Other Roadblock

The final point to consider is, of course, the use of filibusters. This is a deep tradition in the Senate, and it has served as another check on power that the founders would have been proud of. Any senator may filibuster a bill, and if a whole party does it, the filibuster can only be stopped by getting 60 votes in favor or by letting the senators go on until they drop.

If the latter happens, the Democrats in the Senate would effectively be able to block Trump’s entire agenda. Alternatively, Trump would need the support of eight Democrats to get 60 votes to end a filibuster. That isn’t likely to happen.

The president can achieve some things with an executive order, assuming the Supreme Court doesn’t step in. But broader policies like infrastructure development won’t get passed without congressional support.

That battleground will be within the Republican Party in the Senate. The result will depend on whether Trump’s approval ratings increase above 37%. Just holding there won’t do it, as that number has been “Death Valley” for other presidencies… although we have no way to benchmark a presidency that starts at this level.

Before we wrap up this week, it is my pleasure to invite you to Geopolitical Futures’ inaugural conference, The Next 4 Years: The Role of the United States in the World. This exclusive one-day event at the Army and Navy Club in Washington, DC, will bring together brilliant minds in the fields of geopolitics and defense, our own analysts, and Geopolitical Futures readers. During in-depth panel sessions, we will discuss today’s critical geopolitical issues, including the evolution of US-Chinese relations and the future of the United States’ trade policy.

For me, one of the most fortunate aspects of the conference is having the opportunity to meet you. The post-event cocktail reception gives all of us—you and me, my analysts, and several of the guest speakers—the chance to freely exchange thoughts and ideas.

Please mark your calendar for April 5. Attendance is strictly limited to 80 guests, so make sure to get on our invitation-only waitlist, which will give you first notice when tickets become available and the opportunity to secure an early-bird discount. For more details, and to join the waitlist, please click here.

George Friedman
George Friedman

 

Prepare Yourself for Tomorrow with George Friedman’s
This Week in Geopolitics

Geopolitical Futures To learn more about George Friedman and Geopolitical Futures, click here. »


Discuss This

0 comments

We welcome your comments. Please comply with our Community Rules.

Comments

Ron Miller 52518598

Jan. 25, 2:32 p.m.

Who beleives in polls nowdays or anything the main stream news media puts out? I was never a Trump fan but with some people protesting “nothing to protest”, I am becoming a big fan. Since Trump is now fighting for Americans (we haven’t seen this for 8 years), I am sure Trump is winning over more and more “working people”. People that have jobs to do and don’t have time to protest something that hasn’t even happened yet.

Brad Ferguson

Jan. 23, 3:39 p.m.

Further to the low approval ratings, in an interview with a co-founders of Home Deport (by CNN)the co-founder stated that CEOs of major companies would be reluctant to express support for Trump for fear of offending customers and of loosing sales.  For individuals, (as a result all of the demonstrations, property damage and physical attacks that have followed Trump’s election) it wouldn’t surprise me if they would be reluctant to express their true feelings in an approval rating poll.

Brad Ferguson

Jan. 23, 3:33 p.m.

The low approval ratings may be a function of the polling methodology.  I recall one of the talk-radio hosts stating that it was necessary to “drill down” into how the ratings were determined.  The same host stated that at least one of the polls sampled only 23% Republicans.  Imagine how that would skew the polling result.

mike_bradley@mentor.com

Jan. 23, 2:31 p.m.

I don’t have much faith in the polls these days.  Look how poorly the predicted Trump’s win, and to a lesser extent Brexit.

While the media tout’s 37%, I don’t trust how they ask questions, nor how they sample the population.

The media is Trump’s enemy; he has shown that he is willing to call them out, and side step them (e.g. Twitter), as needed.  I trust he will not fall to their desires to get caught up in a popularity argument.

I certainly agree that he needs to keep the senate united.  I just don’t trust the correlation of that with popularity rating.

Cheers,
-Mike


Use of this content, the Mauldin Economics website, and related sites and applications is provided under the Mauldin Economics Terms & Conditions of Use.

Unauthorized Disclosure Prohibited

The information provided in this publication is private, privileged, and confidential information, licensed for your sole individual use as a subscriber. Mauldin Economics reserves all rights to the content of this publication and related materials. Forwarding, copying, disseminating, or distributing this report in whole or in part, including substantial quotation of any portion the publication or any release of specific investment recommendations, is strictly prohibited.
Participation in such activity is grounds for immediate termination of all subscriptions of registered subscribers deemed to be involved at Mauldin Economics’ sole discretion, may violate the copyright laws of the United States, and may subject the violator to legal prosecution. Mauldin Economics reserves the right to monitor the use of this publication without disclosure by any electronic means it deems necessary and may change those means without notice at any time. If you have received this publication and are not the intended subscriber, please contact service@mauldineconomics.com.

Disclaimers

The Mauldin Economics website, Yield Shark, Thoughts from the Frontline, Patrick Cox’s Tech Digest, Outside the Box, Over My Shoulder, World Money Analyst, Street Freak, Just One Trade, Transformational Technology Alert, Rational Bear, The 10th Man, Connecting the Dots, This Week in Geopolitics, Stray Reflections, and Conversations are published by Mauldin Economics, LLC. Information contained in such publications is obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but its accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The information contained in such publications is not intended to constitute individual investment advice and is not designed to meet your personal financial situation. The opinions expressed in such publications are those of the publisher and are subject to change without notice. The information in such publications may become outdated and there is no obligation to update any such information. You are advised to discuss with your financial advisers your investment options and whether any investment is suitable for your specific needs prior to making any investments.
John Mauldin, Mauldin Economics, LLC and other entities in which he has an interest, employees, officers, family, and associates may from time to time have positions in the securities or commodities covered in these publications or web site. Corporate policies are in effect that attempt to avoid potential conflicts of interest and resolve conflicts of interest that do arise in a timely fashion.
Mauldin Economics, LLC reserves the right to cancel any subscription at any time, and if it does so it will promptly refund to the subscriber the amount of the subscription payment previously received relating to the remaining subscription period. Cancellation of a subscription may result from any unauthorized use or reproduction or rebroadcast of any Mauldin Economics publication or website, any infringement or misappropriation of Mauldin Economics, LLC’s proprietary rights, or any other reason determined in the sole discretion of Mauldin Economics, LLC.

Affiliate Notice

Mauldin Economics has affiliate agreements in place that may include fee sharing. If you have a website or newsletter and would like to be considered for inclusion in the Mauldin Economics affiliate program, please go to http://affiliates.ggcpublishing.com/. Likewise, from time to time Mauldin Economics may engage in affiliate programs offered by other companies, though corporate policy firmly dictates that such agreements will have no influence on any product or service recommendations, nor alter the pricing that would otherwise be available in absence of such an agreement. As always, it is important that you do your own due diligence before transacting any business with any firm, for any product or service.

© Copyright 2017 Mauldin Economics