A Pointless War With Political Fallout

In its roundtable review of Tuesday’s mindblowing Democratic victories, New York Times opinion columnist, Josh Barro, said Republican attacks “had lost sight of voters’ top concerns: the cost of living and a pointless war” (https://www.nytimes.com/2026/11/04/opinion/midterms-democrats-senate-house-results.html?smid=url-share). 

Was it really a “pointless war”?

Focus on the verb, “was.” Perhaps in the present, it “is” a pointless, stalemated, war. 

But at the outset, at the launch of devastating attacks on Iran in an effort to foment regime change while obliterating its ability to produce a nuclear arsenal, the war was “on point.”

What was pointless back then and continues to be so today was Donald Trump’s failure to prepare a comprehensive battle plan beyond shock and awe. He failed to plan contingencies, failed to anticipate Iran’s countermeasures and how to mitigate them. 

Trump is an active, sometimes even creative, thinker. But he greenlights initiatives, even wars, without considering impacts. His desire to seal the border and expel undocumented violent criminal aliens, for example, has been undermined by heavy-handed ICE leaders and jack-booted, masked footmen who turned enforcement into a national disgrace. 

We are suffering higher fuel prices, restricted passage through the Strait of Hormuz, attacks by Houthis on Saudi Arabia and the Bab al-Mandab Strait at the southern tip of the Red Sea, because Trump wanted to avoid sending Americans to fight on Iranian soil. Knowingly or not, he adhered to the maxim not to engage in a land war in Asia. But without boots on the ground Trump and Israel could not fulfill their objectives.  

Someone—was it Bibi?—sold him on the idea that Iran was ripe for a popular overthrow of the government. Surely, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth had no inkling of what it would take to force Iran to capitulate. Trump and Hegseth denigrated advice from seasoned military leaders. 

Trump is not a strategic military thinker. He acts on emotions, not in the best interests of the United States. He could have strangled Russia’s attack on Ukraine. Instead he has backed Putin the aggressor, choked democratic Ukraine, causing untold suffering to its people, all because he has been paying back Volodymyr Zelensky for his refusal to produce incriminating evidence against Joe and Hunter Biden before the 2020 election. 

The pointless war led to Trump’s repudiation Tuesday. For that, we should all be grateful, though the full consequences of Trump’s pointless unfinished war have yet to be determined in full.

Political Fallout: Departures from the Trump Administration are piling up. It’s not too early to speculate about who might be angling to be the Republicans’ next presidential candidate in 2028.

Anyone tainted by Trump’s shadow will be hard pressed to convince voters, in the primaries and general election, that they were innocent bystanders to the debacle wrought by the orange wonderman. 

No matter how hard JD Vance professes his opposition to the war, he was full-throated for it, as vice president. Marco Rubio as secretary of state is similarly burdened. They no longer are front-runners. 

Until Tuesday I thought Don Jr. had the inside track to the nomination. But the Trump brand is forever tarnished.

Here are my new possibles (not in rank order): Texas senator Ted Cruz; Tennessee’s new governor, former senator Marsha Blackburn; Arkansas governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders; Arkansas senator Tom Cotton; Utah senator Mike Lee; Missouri senator Josh Hawley; and possibly the most likely choice, conservative political commentator Tucker Carlson.

Meanwhile, before the election there was buzz that Pennsylvania senator John Fetterman might take his disappointment with his Democratic colleagues across the aisle and switch parties. That would have been devastating to the Dems if they had needed Fetterman’s vote to secure a majority. 

But Tuesday’s deluge of Democratic Senate victories made Fetterman’s vote less consequential. He might well be primaried in 2028 if he remains a Democrat. He might  have a better chance of being re-elected as a Republican. 

Another Meanwhile: Don’t be surprised if Alaska senator Lisa Murkowski abandons the Republican Party to either become an independent caucusing with Democrats or go full-bore Democrat. Unlike Susan Collins of Maine, she voted against Trump several times. 

Final Fallout: Don’t be surprised if Trump, trying to salvage his reputation as a transformative presence, attacks Cuba. He has often hinted at such action. He probably thinks Cuba would be a pushover given how weak it has become under his restrictions on trade entering the island. 

Even if the battle is decisive, U.S. military presence in Cuba would be long term. Do you think Trump cares?

Looking Forward to the next State of the Union

I wonder how Donald Trump’s next State of the Union speech will play out before an empowered group of Democratic senators and representatives. 

Will he be belligerent or conciliatory? 

Will he laud the power of the presidency with its executive orders and veto pen, or seek common ground to solve the nation’s lingering problems of high fuel costs, high medical costs, burdensome tariffs, rising financial inequality, corruption in government, environmental hazards, ICE excesses, frayed foreign relations with traditional allies including Israel, realigned relations with Ukraine and Russia, and, resolution of the war with Iran, to name just a few issues exacerbated by the mercurial Trump.. 

The next two months will offer clues to Trump’s temperament. Based on his history, we might do well to gird ourselves to expect a “slash and burn” presidency, particularly since he cannot run again and his loyalty to Republicans runs only as deep as it influences his own standings. 

Expect Trump to push harder for his pet construction projects—the ballroom, the golf course, the arch, a renaming of a renovated Kennedy Center. 

Until January 3 at noon, when the newly elected Congress takes office, Trump might be able to count on a pliant though badly butchered lame duck Republican majority in the Senate to confirm administration and judicial nominations. Of course, cowered Republicans might now realize the orange mass behind the Resolute Desk no longer is an omnipotent wizard. They might start thinking for themselves, thinking about ways they can improve the lives of their constituents and not the bank balances of Trump family and friends. 

I would be astonished if Trump does not maneuver Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito into retirement in the coming weeks so he could rush through conservative successors on the Supreme Court while Republicans still can confirm them, no matter how flawed they may be. What better legacy can all three men have than assuring the continued rightward tilt of the court for decades to come. 

Trump will be invited to give his State of the Union vision at a date chosen by the new speaker of the House, probably an evening in late January or early February. During those first weeks of Democratic control of the House and Senate our newly elected majorities will begin tackling some of the legacies of Trumpmania. 

Expect legislative proposals to begin coalescing around the following: Raising the minimum federal wage from $7.25 per hour to $15; Restoring funding for Obamacare; Restoring funding to school food programs; Restoring funding and staffing to FEMA; Protecting the Kennedy Center from destruction; Stripping funding for the Triumphal Arch.

Trump will argue such moves will add to the deficit. True, but they would help ease the cost of living burden that Trump orchestrated. He may well veto passage of any such legislation. Democrats will use those vetoes to underscore the need for a Democrat to be elected president in 2028 along with sustaining majorities in both chambers of Congress. 

Two Scenarios of Midterm Election Results

The drama, the uncertainty, of the midterm elections has finally caught up with me. Since waking up Tuesday morning I have been on edge. Stomach queazy. Short of breadth.

Would love of country, of democracy, outpoll misplaced ardor for a flawed leader? Would sufficient voters choose a return to civility, to the rule of law, to working toward a united experience versus division and the enrichment of a few chosen oligarchs?

The tragedy of this election is that the results will portend two divergent, dispiriting outcomes. 

Scenario One: If Donald Trump and his lackeys retain control of either the House or Senate, or both, he will feel empowered to continue dismantling a government order that for almost 100 years has been the leading light for all nations and their peoples. 

Scenario Two: On the other hand, if Democrats secure majorities of either chamber of Congress, or both, all that we can expect for the next two years is a contest of wills between elected representatives and a lame duck president who, with the acquiescence of the Supreme Court, has almost unchecked authority to issue executive orders that would supersede acts of Congress. 

ICE raids would continue to terrorize our streets. Russia’s aggression in Ukraine, and possibly elsewhere in Eastern Europe, would be rewarded. Strongmen dictators would have an ally in the White House. Relationships with long-time allies would continue to deteriorate. The sanctity of treaties would be imperiled. Civil servants and military leaders would continue to be purged if they failed to bend the knee to Trump’s excesses. State and local governments would have federal funds withheld if Trump found disfavor with their elected officials. Environmental and healthcare safeguards would be weakened if not entirely jettisoned. 

With a congressional majority, Democrats would be able to fashion a creditable alternative, even if it could not overcome a probable Trump veto.   

Don’t expect relief from an impeachment of Trump or any of his appointees. JD Vance is no improvement. Without a supermajority in the Senate a conviction would not be possible. 

I prefer the second scenario. I prefer believing sufficient Americans have awakened from the miasma of a Trump administration. 

God help us if they have not. 

  

Disappointments: Halloween, Cromulent, Uline

Four small hands reached into our overflowing bowl of candy. Just four cheery kiddies squealed, “Trick or Treat.” How disappointing, especially since just a few weeks ago our cul-de-sac neighborhood’s annual block party showcased more than a dozen youngsters. 

I stocked up expecting a horde of hungry kids. I bought the 200 pack of caramel flavored chocolate treats—Three Musketeers, Snickers, Twix and Milky Ways. 

I should have known better. The neighborhood WhatsApp foretold disappointment as several parents advised they were taking their kids to the Highlands sectioin of town to Trick or Treat. 

Even the four who showed up were last minute beggars. The oldest child implored his mother to walk them around our development. 

Gilda doesn’t eat caramel chocolates. As a diabetic who monitors his dietary indiscretions, I figure my stash of goodies will last through next Halloween. 

Stumped by The Simpsons: I think I have a good vocabulary. As a writer my mission is to be as clear and unambiguous as possible, conveying my thoughts directly to the reader without requiring him or her to detour to the dictionary to decipher my words.

That’s prelude to my gripe with a New York Times columnist, whose name I will not reveal, whose prose displays a penchant for obscurity. Here’s an example from a recent column: “Under this standard, even Watergate may well have been perfectly cromulent.” 

Cromulent? What language was that? What does it mean? 

A quick Google check revealed cromulent is a made-up word, created by David Cohen, a writer of The Simpsons. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines it as meaning acceptable, satisfactory in a humorous way as befitting its origin in 1996 in episode 16, season 7 of The Simpsons (“Lisa the Iconoclast”). 

Not being a Simpsons devotee, cromulent caught me by surprise. In fact, cromulent never made it into a Simpson script beyond its 1996 debut. 

Lest you think I am being too picky, that same Times columnist included “ontological” in the same article. I’ll let you research what it means. 

Drawing the Line: I covered retailing and foodservice companies, and their suppliers, for more than 30 years. You’d be hard-pressed to find a collective group of executives  more regressive than those who populate those companies.

They generally, but not universally, oppose raises to the minimum wage. They’re anti-union. They offer minimal healthcare benefits. All while paying eye-popping compensation to their executives. 

I bring these comments to your attention because of a recent Times Opinion article by Ben Wikler, chairman of Wisconsin’s Democratic Party from 2019 to 2025, on the major funders of the Republican candidate for governor of Wisconsin. Tom Tiffany’s sugardaddies are Richard and Elizabeth Uihlein (https://www.nytimes.com/2026/10/09/opinion/midterms-wisconsin-georgia-arizona.html?smid=url-share). 

Here’s one paragraph from that article: “Much of the money being spent to elect Mr. Tiffany comes from one multibillionaire couple, Richard and Elizabeth Uihlein. Mr. Uihlein was reportedly among the largest funders of the rally that morphed into the Capitol riot. The Uihleins have given more than $30 million to the Republican Party of Wisconsin this year. By late last month, the party had transferred close to $35 million to Mr. Tiffany’s campaign. And Mr. Uihlein is the main contributor to the Restoration of America PAC, which has reported spending more than $12 million in support of Mr. Tiffany.”

If you’re like me, you probably had never heard about the Uihleins. Unless, unless your mailbox is weighted down every few months or so by a thick Uline product catalog of shipping boxes, packing materials, warehouse supplies, and material handling equipment.

When the first catalog showed up more than a dozen years ago we needed a new kitchen floor mat. Uline had a good price and could cut it to our required size. Several times a day I stand on that mat. Several times a day I regret not knowing the company’s background before making the purchase. Now, I toss new catalogs into the recycle bin without opening them.

The Uihleins are billionaires funding politicians who, in my opinion, are not working expeditiously to benefit the lives of Americans.

It is almost impossible to abstain from patronizing companies whose executives support conservative causes. But there’s a line I find difficult to cross. 

Wikler noted the importance of electing Democrats to key governorships in presidential election battleground states because governors must certify results for them to be official. Republican Tiffany has a track record of denying Joe Biden won Wisconsin in 2020. Come 2028, he might deny certification to a Democrat in a closely contested election. 

“In Wisconsin,” Wikler pointed out, “the past three presidential elections came down to margins of less than one percentage point, making the state attractive to those fraudulently claiming that chicanery has affected election results.”

Though I stand on a Uline floor mat, I stand opposed to anyone who would undermine our electoral system.

Conjuring Up a Trump-Putin October Surprise

An October surprise is quite common before a November election as candidates try last minute tactics to sway voters. 

Don’t be surprised if the following transpires: Donald Trump will shortly declare that as a result of his diplomacy with Russia, Vladimir Putin has agreed to suspend attacks on Ukraine’s civilian population plus its power and heat networks. In exchange, Ukraine would stop strikes against targets inside Russia. 

A triumph of Trumpian statesmanship, Fox News and his media and political champions will proclaim. A first step towards a complete cease fire and peace agreement. Perhaps it will sway sufficient undecided voters to return Republican control of the House and Senate. 

But what I suspect will happen after the votes are tallied is that Putin will reignite his inhumane assault after a false-flag attack on a Russian power plant that he attributes to Ukraine. Putin’s ultimate goal is the annihilation of an independent Ukraine.

Trump will feign surprise but he will have been in on the ruse Putin, his puppet master, was going to perpetrate. True to form, Trump will blame Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy for sabotaging the truce. 

Far-fetched? Perhaps. But Trump cozies up to autocrats while assailing democratic leaders of all nations.  

I hope I am wrong. But Trump has not earned my trust through his actions or rhetoric. So I am left to my imagination to prepare for his next assault on decency. And now, so are you. 

Culling the News for Interesting Times

Check out the byline of The New York Times obituary of Mike Ditka, the ultimate Chicago Bears player and coach (https://www.nytimes.com/2026/10/09/sports/mike-ditka-dead.html?unlocked_article_code=1.I1E.5W2J.1TZpgIUYjmLg&smid=url-share). For those unable or too lazy to open the link, the byline belonged to Barry Bearak. No, that was not a typo. His name actually contained the sequential letters B-e-a-r. 

I’m above average: At least as it pertains to banana consumption. The Times reported the average American consumes 80 bananas a year ( https://www.nytimes.com/2026/10/12/business/economy/bananas-iran-war.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share ). 

My breakfasts “usually” are a mixture of grapes, blueberries, the occasional strawberry, cashews, almonds, raisins, dried cranberries, figs, low fat plain Greek yogurt and honey. And a banana. When I say “usually,” I’m talking upwards of 300 breakfasts a year, taking into account vacations and the infrequent times I have eggs, French toast, or hot cereal in the morning. 

These days my breakfasts are much healthier than when I was growing up. In high school they usually encompassed four Oreos dipped in a glass of milk. 

Let The Sun Shine In: In 16 days (November 1) Daylight Savings Time ends. Darkness will begin earlier in the afternoon, offset by an earlier sunrise. 

Despite perennial debate on the value of DST becoming permanent throughout the country, Congress is not ready to legislate a change. But if recent history is any guide, who needs Congress? Donald Trump, a vocal advocate for permanent DST, could simply mandate it and claim it’s a matter of national security and defense. 

If logic informs you it isn’t, don’t be a stickler. Trump has claimed national security and defense for any number of actions his administration has implemented. If he orders government agencies to run their departments under a DST clock our national security and defense would truly be endangered. 

Election Truths: If we have learned anything about our elections over the last 10 years, two truths have emerged. 

First, polling is an inexact science. One cannot rely on them, nor be complacent. Only voting, not relying on others to do our patriotic duty, can affect your preferred outcome. 

Second, Trump and his MAGA gang will challenge the veracity of any result they dislike. 

Forewarned is forearmed. Get out and vote.

Robot Fear: it may be years before robots turn into terminators. But they apparently have already mastered the “art” of mashing. 

German police have arrested two  teenagers in Cologne who programmed their robot to grope a teenage girl. “Investigators said the roughly four-foot-tall robot approached her from behind, grabbed her buttocks, and made thrusting movements against her,” the dailyvoice.com reported. 

Humanity might not be coming to an end soon, but civility’s days surely are numbered. 

Politics Is Not a Game of Limbo Dance: Speaking of bad taste, how low can Trump go? 

Apparently we have not reached the depth of his immorality as evidenced by his circulating AI images of himself wrestling and hugging a tiger just days after an Amur tiger killed a mentally troubled man who jumped into his pen at a northern England nature preserve. 

My sensibilities keep me from providing a link to Trump’s repulsive video.

A Nail and a Screw Determine Military Success; Updarting the McConnell Rule

Who knew Benjamin Franklin was prescient some 270 years ago about modern day warfare? 

In his 1758 edition of Poor Richard’s Almanac, Franklin included the following ditty:

“For the want of a nail the shoe was lost,

For the want of a shoe the horse was lost,

For the want of a horse the rider was lost,

For the want of a rider the battle was lost,

For the want of a battle the kingdom was lost,

And all for the want of a horseshoe-nail.”

The limerick has been ascribed to the fate of King Richard III of England. In August 1485 he lost the Battle of Bosworth Field, and his life, when his horse stumbled and threw him from the saddle because a horsehoe had only three, not four, nails keeping it in place. Richard’s death marked the end of the 331-year reign of the Plantagenet dynasty. The victorious Tudors assumed the royal title.

It’s the little things that can matter as much, if not more, than the big things when analyzing why a plan or a battle might go awry. 

To wit—The New York Times carried an article on the precision ball screw, a seemingly prosaic screw that is key to the successful operation of Patriot missiles, aircraft and humanoid robots (https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/26/business/ball-screws-military-production.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share). 

The thrust of the article is that there is a dire need for more precision ball screws than are currently being produced, a condition compounded by our exhaustive use of military hardware during the war with Iran. Replacing expended equipment will take years, leaving America vulnerable for completion of the current conflict and initiation of future actions. 

It’s another example, a la the closure of the Strait of Hormuz by Iran or attacks by Houthis along the Red Sea, thus choking off the free-flow of oil from Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states, of Trump-Hegseth being blindsided by events they did not anticipate or appreciate before embarking on their war with Iran. 

Iran and its proxies cannot claim they vanquished America and Israel. But they could justifiably claim victory if, after negotiations, they survive intact, more in control than before of two waterways vital to the world economy, and still in possession of enriched nuclear material. 

Updating The McConnell Rule: With fingers crossed that Democrats will seize majority control of the Senate in January after results of next month’s midterm elections are certified, the future composition of the Supreme Court and lower federal courts hangs in the balance. 

If Democrats prevail they will no doubt invoke the McConnell rule to deny Donald Trump any possibility to have nominees to any federal court brought before the Senate for confirmation. It will be payback for McConnell’s reluctance to have the Senate consider Merrick Garland’s Supreme Court nomination by Barack Obama to succeed Antonin Scalia during the last year of his presidency. 

To be sure Trump would still have not one but two years in office. However, Democrats would be foolish to cede him the power to pack the courts with more conservative decision makers during those last two years. 

To circumvent Democratic restraints Trump might pressure Justices Alito and Thomas to retire from the Supreme Court in time for him to nominate successors, pushing them through the way he secured Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s seat on the court in the waning days of his first term while Republicans still controlled the Senate. Trump would have from early November to early January to effect his judicial onslaught.

The bottom line is politics will play an even greater role, at least on the surface, for all federal court nominations after November 3.