To mark this historical day, we’ve assembled a panel that we think reflects all sides of the new Trump administration — a mashup of the Ricochet Podcast and Need To Know with Charen and Nordlinger with a dash of Victor Davis Hanson thrown in for flavoring. It’s a bracing conversation that really gets into the weeds on the election and what may lie ahead.

Public service announcement: if you’re not a member of Ricochet and enjoy this podcast, be one of the 1,500 and join today.

Music from this week’s podcast: Orange Crush by R.E.M.

The ALL NEW opening sequence for the Ricochet Podcast was composed and produced by James Lileks.

Yes, you should absolutely subscribe to this podcast. It helps! And leave a review too!

@EJHill took an oath.

Please Support Our Sponsors!

Like this podcast? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s growing community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Members have made 196 comments.

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  1. Profile photo of Bryan G. Stephens Reagan

    Gossamer (View Comment):
    Granted I lived in #9 Somerset County in NJ on a grad student/post-doc salary (pulling down the mean, hard!!!) but, c’mon half of the top 10 richest counties circle DC – that’s a problem!!!

    Conservatives like Jay and Mona used to think it was a problem. Now it is just the way things are.

    Seems to me everyone is willing to change.

    • #31
    • January 21, 2017 at 7:23 am
  2. Profile photo of Bryan G. Stephens Reagan

    When it comes to feeling like political orphans. I might point out that a lot of Trump voters appear to have felt that way.

    • #32
    • January 21, 2017 at 7:26 am
  3. Profile photo of Patrick McClure Member

    Mona Charen (View Comment):
    And, as I said in the ‘cast, the point of progressive governance is not to enrich elites

    I can’t agree with this. I think there is a class of elites who want to “do well by doing good” and see nothing wrong with enriching themselves at the public trough while doing good, using other people’s money. Self-enrichment is not the only point of progressive government elites. But it is high up there.

    • #33
    • January 21, 2017 at 7:33 am
  4. Profile photo of Viruscop Member

    Peter praises the line in the inaugural address that paraphrases Bane from The Dark Knight Rises, thinking that it is Reaganesque.

    I guess that’s what happens when you get an English degree.

    • #34
    • January 21, 2017 at 7:38 am
  5. Profile photo of billy Inactive

    Ironic that Jay refers to the inaugural speech as something from a “beer haus putsch” on the same day that his fellow anti-Trumpers are rioting and burning on the streets of our nation’s capitol’

    A couple of weeks ago, Mona placed on Trump the old Cold War label “useful idiot” because of his alleged ties to Putin.

    Useful Idiot?

    Pundit heal thyself.

    • #35
    • January 21, 2017 at 8:30 am
  6. Profile photo of Ario IronStar Coolidge

    I haven’t listened to Need to Know for some time now (since it became clear that there would be nothing but unhinged vitriol until the election), but I suppose I can write it off for good now. Someone needs to help @jaynordlinger. Even @jameslileks was insufficiently anti-Trump so as to earn sneers from Jay.

    @monacharen comments disputing the enrichment of the connected during the Obama administration, however, were illuminating. She appears not to recognize that the crony capitalism of the administrative state very much and intentionally advantages the politically connected at the expense of most. To doubt that Trump will do anything about it is one thing; to fail to recognize that it a substantial (perhaps the greater part) of the problem is breathtakingly obtuse. At least for a self-described free market conservative.

    Jay and Mona have placed themselves in the position that, unless Trump is Hitler, their reputations are gone forever.

    • #36
    • January 21, 2017 at 8:47 am
  7. Profile photo of Mona Charen Contributor

    Japan is not a good example of the benefits of protectionism. They have been practicing it for decades. Their economy has been stagnant. Domestic prices are high.

    I agree that jobs are critical for political and social health. Also agree that there are some downsides for some people arising from international trade. But you start slapping tariffs on imports, as Trump is suggesting, and you hurt the very people who are already hurting (as VDH acknowledged). You will be taxing Americans, in effect.

    Further, there is the problem of seen versus unseen things. We can see the harm that comes to some industries and regions from trade. It’s harder to see the benefits. Capital flows increase from abroad as people use their dollars to invest in the US. A capital surplus is the flip side of a trade deficit. We ran trade deficits throughout the go-go 80s and 90s and still had great GDP expansion.

    Overwhelming majority of manufacturing jobs are never coming back because they were lost to automation, not outsourcing. We can’t go back to 1960. Trump’s rhetoric about foreigners stealing our jobs and our wealth is warmed over Bernie Sandersism, and I don’t see why we should endorse it just because the man selling it has a newly-minted R next to his name.

    We can’t know where the new jobs will come from. That’s the nature of millions of people making their own decisions. We cannot have Washington DC deciding that manufacturing jobs are what we’re going to support. Best thing for us to do, if we want to create jobs, is to make the US the very best place on Earth to do business. Cut corporate rates. Cut red tape. Eliminate regulations that discourage risk taking. Eliminate rules (like those in Dodd/Frank) that have dried up lending and then hope that the economy will revive in ways we cannot predict.

    This country still has tremendous vitality. But if we declare a trade war instead of attempting to become a business mecca, we are in very dangerous territory.

    • #37
    • January 21, 2017 at 8:51 am
  8. Profile photo of Ario IronStar Coolidge

    Mona Charen (View Comment):
    The only way to limit the growth of what is arguably a group of influence peddlers is to reduce the size and scope of gov’t regulation so that big companies (and it’s always big industries, small ones can’t afford lobbyists) don’t feel that it’s worth their while to hire them.

    If Trump does that, great. I am skeptical, but open to the possibility.

    And, as I said in the ‘cast, the point of progressive governance is not to enrich elites (though that may be one side effect) …

    The problem for you Mona, is that you repeatedly, adamantly insisted on the podcast that this did not happen (i.e., this side effect of elite enrichment; to the contrary, you insist that it is natural and inevitable), and Trump’s references to it were therefore inoperative.

    Lots of people listen to the podcast and few people read the comments. On the podcast you came across as someone who, to her dying breath, would dispute the enrichment of the politically connected by the regulatory state. You will not keep the esteem of economically literate conservatives with that.

    You didn’t take a breath during the podcast to think. You don’t appear to have done so in the last 20 months. You really should. And help your friend Jay, who appears to be in deep trouble.

    • #38
    • January 21, 2017 at 9:08 am
  9. Profile photo of ToryWarWriter Member

    ‘Japan is not a good example of the benefits of protectionism. They have been practicing it for decades. Their economy has been stagnant. Domestic prices are high.’
    Japan also practices net zero immigration policies. They have no one from the outside coming in to give them new ideas.

    ‘Overwhelming majority of manufacturing jobs are never coming back because they were lost to automation, not outsourcing’

    As someone who works in the realms of manufacturing and has seen the rise of robots occur it has done so because of high cost of energy, regulation and taxation that has forced companies to pursue a path of ever greater automation. Reduce those three down dramatically and we will see innovation. I saw a chart that showed the real reduction of regulations during the Reagan era led to the boom and not actually the tax cuts. Personally, I think both led to the results of the period.

    I have recently seen automation is being used as the latest excuse and panacea to the problems we face. Once we allow for those factors to reduce, some manufacturing will return to the West.

    Modern China and 19th century USA both benefited from the use of the Tariff and mercantilist policies. A temporary return to those policies may well be of benefit. We have seen what the results of ‘Free Trade’ have wrought and are gravely disappointed with the results.

    • #39
    • January 21, 2017 at 9:15 am
  10. Profile photo of ToryWarWriter Member

    ‘This country still has tremendous vitality. But if we declare a trade war instead of attempting to become a business mecca, we are in very dangerous territory.’

    ‘I am against the war and against Hitler.’

    You and Jay remind me so much of those who applauded Chamberlains return with his Peace in our Time document.

    The argument you are staying is that we cannot use our economic weapons to fight the opponents of our trade block. Is no different than those who told the French and British that they were being needlessly hostile while the Rhineland was being remilitarized. Syria is Spain.

    Trump has proposed the use of economic weapons and threats to achieve the goals of the United States through economic policies. The threatened use of economic weapons in order to achieve prosperity and peace.

    You are advocating for economic pacifism when we know the Chinese and Japanese and the EU are more than willing to use those same economic weapons against us.

    We have seen what 30 years of those policies have gotten us. The rust belt cities, the hollowed out manufacturing sectors and the destruction of the family.

    The barbarians are at the gates, and what you are proposing has failed. Economic Appeasement is the path that you and Jay are proposing. Excuse me while I go listen to what this guy is saying. Trump is no Churchill. But he is a De Gaulle. And I will take what I can get.

    • #40
    • January 21, 2017 at 9:26 am
  11. Profile photo of Ario IronStar Coolidge

    Mona Charen (View Comment):

    We can’t know where the new jobs will come from. That’s the nature of millions of people making their own decisions. We cannot have Washington DC deciding that manufacturing jobs are what we’re going to support. Best thing for us to do, if we want to create jobs, is to make the US the very best place on Earth to do business. Cut corporate rates. Cut red tape. Eliminate regulations that discourage risk taking. Eliminate rules (like those in Dodd/Frank) that have dried up lending and then hope that the economy will revive in ways we cannot predict.

    Correct. “We can’t know where the new jobs will come from.” Correct. But insisting that “Trump isn’t going to do any of this shrinking-government deregulation, you morons” buries anything good you might have to say.

    Also note, because “we can’t know where the new jobs will come from,” precludes you from having a clue whether there will be more or fewer manufacturing jobs if state intervention is indeed curtailed. Once again, you need a dose of humility.

    It is not necessary to esteem, trust, approve of, agree with, etc., Trump or his manner in order to speak constructively. It requires only not assuming the worst and not denigrating those who don’t assume the worst.

    (Yeah, I know Mona ain’t readin’ my comments.)

    • #41
    • January 21, 2017 at 9:26 am
  12. Profile photo of Jim Beck Member

    Afternoon Mona,

    Japan is an interesting example, at one time the future power house of the world, now with a birthrate of one child per family, adult diaper sales higher than child diaper sales, and almost no immigration; this is a culture dying. Protectionism may have played a part and hurt Japan’s economy but it hurt ours as well. It maybe that China’s currency manipulation in the past decade may have a long term negative consequence, however the benefit in the short term has been great, the number of Chinese who have had dramatic improvements, many from a peasant life of $1 or $2 dollars/day wages is a moral good. The cost to our free trade economy has been to trade jobs for cheap goods, which is good if you did not loose your job.

    Concerning manufacturing, my experience is a little different. My sister has worked for a company that made socks for cyclists. They started in South Korea, then on to Costa Rica, then to China, last in Greece. The moves were based on labor costs, quality, reliability. She now works for a company making HallMark-like cards, the work is done in China. We used to make TV’s, now they and the IPhones are all made overseas and the jobs lost are not lost due to automation. This is also true of hot water heaters, washers/dryers, etc.

    It is true that automation displaces workers and that this trend will probably increase, this fact should give us a heightened focus on how to solve or mitigate the loss of work for our citizens. Your suggestions that we create the best business environment in our country are fine, no one disagrees, not one person, but no other country plays by the Marquis of Queensberry rules of free trade. We don’t even now practice totally free trade. So with your focus on tariffs, you have exempted yourself from addressing the question of jobs and work. You say you recognize that there will be losers, so, all economic systems have winners and losers. The hard question is given the human cost, what can be done. Pack up granny and follow the frackers? It is easy to say that, free trade and globalism and automation benefit the greatest number. Anyone can list the benefits, even for automation, relieving hard and hazardous work, but will still are avoiding answering how to solve the problem concerning essential nature of work for our culture given that free trade, globalism, automation cause dramatic displacements. We have seen that small, even well intentioned choices changed cultural norms causing bad outcomes, as with the marriage rates and single parent rates especially in those lower income groups that need stability and tradition the most. When men are not working they are not attractive or good husbands, to not see this hazard, or to offer no solution is to mistakenly imagine that tariffs are the bigger. threat to society, they are far from it.

    • #42
    • January 21, 2017 at 10:05 am
  13. Profile photo of Tom Kalbach Member

    I do not think VDH helps his “anti-anti-Trump” arguments when he says something similar to “They behave horribly, but I won’t say who, you’ll just have to believe me.” My own observation of the various factions is at odds with the assertion, and I’m not likely to alter my conclusions without specific counter examples. I understand not wanting to engage in ‘calling out’ someone, but if that data is central to you’re point you’re trying to make, then there really isn’t any way around it.

    I have a similar issue with Ace over at AoSHQ. I’m more than willing to listen to the argument, but if it’s not going to be backed up with specifics, it’s just wasted print space.

    • #43
    • January 21, 2017 at 10:14 am
  14. Profile photo of Umbra Fractus Coolidge

    billy (View Comment):
    Ironic that Jay refers to the inaugural speech as something from a “beer haus putsch” on the same day that his fellow anti-Trumpers are rioting and burning on the streets of our nation’s capitol’

    For god’s sake, man, those people are not “Jay’s fellow” anything other than Americans.

    If you want to know why Trump skeptics on the right keep accusing his defenders of demanding loyalty, look right here. Jay Nordlinger has nothing to do with those protests, and you should be ashamed of yourself for suggesting such a thing.

    • #44
    • January 21, 2017 at 10:26 am
  15. Profile photo of Chris Williamson Member

    Wow! This has to be the best flagship podcast I’ve heard; this why I subscribe to Ricochet. We heard from all sides of the conservative spectrum, and I heard arguments and reasons for opinions. Sure, there are strong feelings involved, but it made for great discussion. Try finding this on The Weeds….

    • #45
    • January 21, 2017 at 10:49 am
  16. Profile photo of ToryWarWriter Member

    @tomkalbach in fairness to VDH he did later blurt out who he meant. He was talking about Max Boote, who dumped his Republicanism to run into the arms of Hillary Clinton. Many of the Neo-Cons ran back into the party that birthed them. Thats the type of people VDH was angry at.

    • #46
    • January 21, 2017 at 10:54 am
  17. Profile photo of Ario IronStar Coolidge

    Umbra Fractus (View Comment):

    billy (View Comment):
    Ironic that Jay refers to the inaugural speech as something from a “beer haus putsch” on the same day that his fellow anti-Trumpers are rioting and burning on the streets of our nation’s capitol’

    For god’s sake, man, those people are not “Jay’s fellow” anything other than Americans.

    If you want to know why Trump skeptics on the right keep accusing his defenders of demanding loyalty, look right here. Jay Nordlinger has nothing to do with those protests, and you should be ashamed of yourself for suggesting such a thing.

    No, it’s quite apropos. Anti-Trump rioters are destroying things, and Trump is Hitler? (Yes, Jay owned it.) Those are Jay’s fellow anti-Trumpers because they sincerely agree with him that Trump is Hitler. Jay Nordlinger absolutely does not have nothing to do with those protesters, at least.

    See that’s the thing. If you’re going to engage in arguendo ad Hitlerium, you’re going to have a hell of a time disassociating yourself. You’re also going to have a hell of a time getting anyone to take your calls to civility seriously, coming from you.

    If you want to know why Trump skeptics on the right keep accusing his defenders of demanding loyalty, it’s because they need a straw man to justify their own boorishness. Criticism of Trump is fine. It’s the the Hitler stuff that’s self-beclowning.

    • #47
    • January 21, 2017 at 10:58 am
  18. Profile photo of Andy Blanco Thatcher

    Bahahaha- WOW. Jay didn’t even speak to Victor!

    • #48
    • January 21, 2017 at 11:00 am
  19. Profile photo of Ario IronStar Coolidge

    ToryWarWriter (View Comment):
    @tomkalbach in fairness to VDH he did later blurt out who he meant. He was talking about Max Boote, who dumped his Republicanism to run into the arms of Hillary Clinton. Many of the Neo-Cons ran back into the party that birthed them. Thats the type of people VDH was angry at.

    I don’t think he meant Max Boot. I think he was using him as a further example citing a Max Boot column. VDH chose not to identify his interlocutor in his private conversation out of deference to the fact that it was private. But given the public condescension and opprobrium in opinion columns by top conservatives directed toward Trump supporters in general, VDH’s anecdote is not in the least surprising. Frankly, I would have been pleasantly surprised had he said, “despite their public hostility, I have never experienced anything but respect for my right to exercise my judgement.”

    After listening to Mona and Jay, would you find that latter quote remotely plausible?

    • #49
    • January 21, 2017 at 11:09 am
  20. Profile photo of billy Inactive

    Umbra Fractus (View Comment):

    billy (View Comment):
    Ironic that Jay refers to the inaugural speech as something from a “beer haus putsch” on the same day that his fellow anti-Trumpers are rioting and burning on the streets of our nation’s capitol’

    For god’s sake, man, those people are not “Jay’s fellow” anything other than Americans.

    If you want to know why Trump skeptics on the right keep accusing his defenders of demanding loyalty, look right here. Jay Nordlinger has nothing to do with those protests, and you should be ashamed of yourself for suggesting such a thing.

    That is hyperbole, mostly.

    The rioters and the Left’s reaction to Trump is insane.

    Jay’s overwrought reaction to Trump is mere hysteria, or perhaps unhinged.

    @umbrafractus

    • #50
    • January 21, 2017 at 11:09 am
  21. Profile photo of Ario IronStar Coolidge

    Tom Kalbach (View Comment):
    I do not think VDH helps his “anti-anti-Trump” arguments when he says something similar to “They behave horribly, but I won’t say who, you’ll just have to believe me.” My own observation of the various factions is at odds with the assertion, and I’m not likely to alter my conclusions without specific counter examples. I understand not wanting to engage in ‘calling out’ someone, but if that data is central to you’re point you’re trying to make, then there really isn’t any way around it.

    I have a similar issue with Ace over at AoSHQ. I’m more than willing to listen to the argument, but if it’s not going to be backed up with specifics, it’s just wasted print space.

    In the discussion, VDH criticized the anti-Trumpers by saying “I don’t understand why you’d prefer Hillary” and by pointing out that calling Trump Hitler is unhelpful and unjustified. Meanwhile, Jay proudly called Trump Hitler and refused to speak to VDH.

    Which one of them was a gentleman? Did Mona argue much that wasn’t ad hominem? If your previous “observation(s) of the various factions (has been) at odds with the assertion,” I think you now have a pretty clear example that is not (should you choose to observe.)

    • #51
    • January 21, 2017 at 11:29 am
  22. Profile photo of ToryWarWriter Member

    I have always found calling people Hitler a form of Holocaust Denialism.

    Unless they are actually doing something Hitler like. When Trump publishes his version of My Struggle or has an army of black shirt followers beating up people in the street.

    I expect better of Jay who like me seems to be a student of history.

    Trump is at best Crassus.

    • #52
    • January 21, 2017 at 11:41 am
  23. Profile photo of Ario IronStar Coolidge

    ToryWarWriter (View Comment):

    Trump is at best Crassus.

    Arguendo ad Crassium? At least it makes historical sense. And nobody’s going to argue that Trump isn’t crass.

    • #53
    • January 21, 2017 at 11:47 am
  24. Profile photo of Tom Kalbach Member

    Ario IronStar (View Comment):
    In the discussion, VDH criticized the anti-Trumpers by saying “I don’t understand why you’d prefer Hillary” and by pointing out that calling Trump Hitler is unhelpful and unjustified.

    I have no major problem with this point. I also do not think that is relevant to my initial comment.

    Ario IronStar (View Comment):
    Meanwhile, Jay proudly called Trump Hitler and refused to speak to VDH.

    While I will admit to not having listened with 100% attention during the podcast (doing other things), I will suggest that this may be an overstatement.

    @arioironstar @torywarwriter I think my larger complaint is the vague argumentation. “NeverTrumper are Horrible and they all act such and such a way” / “Trump Apologists are Horrible and they all act such and such a way.”

    Maybe “Jay Nordlinger’s analysis of Trump’s speech was off because it over-emphasized rhetorical flourishes” / “I’m concerned Peter Robinson is being a bit pollyannaish on the ideas that Trump is putting front and center in his public statemtents” is more useful.

    sidenote: I’m a big fan of most of VDH’s (and Ace’s) work, I was critiquing this one aspect of their commentary.

    • #54
    • January 21, 2017 at 12:09 pm
  25. Profile photo of Jager Member

    Umbra Fractus (View Comment):
    Jay Nordlinger has nothing to do with those protests, and you should be ashamed of yourself for suggesting such a thing.

    Nothing to do with the protests sure. I am sure that Jay personally finds the protests horrible. He does share the views of the the protesters. Trump is awful, Trump is an authoritarian strong man. Jay himself stated that it did not bother him that his positions were the same as those of the Slate/Saloon crowd. If there were clear “sides” Jay has positioned himself on the ideological side of the protesters even if he dislikes the protest itself

    There is no need for any type of blind loyalty to Trump or even liking Trump. But when your vitriol matches that of the extreme left, it should be a time for quite contemplation not doubling down.

    • #55
    • January 21, 2017 at 12:10 pm
  26. Profile photo of billy Inactive

    Just in case NTK ever needs a guest host:

    @blueyeti

    • #56
    • January 21, 2017 at 12:12 pm
  27. Profile photo of Ion Inactive
    Ion

    The problem with Jay is that his commentary on Trump is useless to me. Jay seems to be caught up in how some call him names, bringing him to construct a worldview in which he thinks he’s some sort of white martyr, speaking truth to power or whatever. To me, he’s just boring and petulant. His thoughts on Trump just aren’t constructive or educational and much of what he has to say amounts to a pity party conducted in elevated language.

    To make this point in another way: when I listen to Steve Wynn (interviewed by Bill Bennett), I often come away having learned something new and having expanded my range of thought because Wynn engages with political issues by emphasizing paths to progress which are both based in freedom and possible. Jay’s thoughts have neither quality, and he’s seemingly content to define himself by a bizarre pride in dishing out soft-spoken vitriol to Trump and those who hope Trump does well.

    Don’t need it. Don’t care to hear it. And turned off the podcast because of him.

    (Also, thank goodness for Peter.)

    • #57
    • January 21, 2017 at 12:28 pm
  28. Profile photo of ToryWarWriter Member

    Another issue with Jay is I expect better of him.

    My post on the main feed about Angleton and Russia was written specifically about him and Mona going on about how the SVR had stolen the election for Trump. It was pure hysteria.

    • #58
    • January 21, 2017 at 12:51 pm
  29. Profile photo of Bryan G. Stephens Reagan

    Umbra Fractus (View Comment):

    billy (View Comment):
    Ironic that Jay refers to the inaugural speech as something from a “beer haus putsch” on the same day that his fellow anti-Trumpers are rioting and burning on the streets of our nation’s capitol’

    For god’s sake, man, those people are not “Jay’s fellow” anything other than Americans.

    If you want to know why Trump skeptics on the right keep accusing his defenders of demanding loyalty, look right here. Jay Nordlinger has nothing to do with those protests, and you should be ashamed of yourself for suggesting such a thing.

    Jay went on about “America First” as having bad connotations. I think he deserves lumps for his beer haus comment. He is implying fascism to Trump.

    • #59
    • January 21, 2017 at 12:59 pm
  30. Profile photo of ToryWarWriter Member

    Certainly I thought the America First was probably the worst part of the speech.

    • #60
    • January 21, 2017 at 1:22 pm
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7