Grading the Second Trump Presidency, Six Months In
Awareness of life's ticking clock is important for any elected official, but it is particularly important for Trump. During his first term in office, much of Trump's agenda was derailed or sidetracked by forces beyond his direct control: an unexpected John McCain thumbs-down on the Obamacare repeal vote, "nationwide injunction"-happy lower-court judges, subversive administrative state actors, a bogus special counsel probe on Russian election interference, the COVID-19 pandemic, extraordinary Big Tech censorship, and more. Based on these experiences and sobered from those long interregnum years, Trump adjusted his game plan this time around. And it shows.
Here, then, is a six-month Trump administration report card.
Economy: B+
There has been much in the way of genuinely great news on the economy. The stock market is considerably up since Trump resumed office, Trump's tariffs are bringing in substantial revenue to the Treasury, the president renewed his landmark 2017 tax cuts and cut taxes on tips and overtime pay, he has finalized historic trade deals with major powers, inflation has stayed relatively consistent, and blue-chip companies have announced massive domestic investments in the U.S. economy. On the other hand, inflation stubbornly remains a bit high, the tariff rollout has been bumpy at best, and the "One Big Beautiful Bill," while a net positive piece of legislation, only exacerbated America's glaring debt problem. Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency, while still a great public service, also identified only a minuscule portion of federal bloat for rescission.
Domestic policy: A
The administration's broader domestic agenda has been, from a conservative perspective, extremely successful. Trump's war against the higher education establishment is long overdue and is already paying huge tangible dividends. Trump, through both court wins and crucial executive orders, has taken meaningful steps to curtail the administrative state Leviathan and consolidate executive power where it properly belongs: with the president himself. He has protected women's sports and female federal inmates from intimate exposure to biological males, protected vulnerable confused children from the irreversible depredations of transgender "medicine," and crushed the modern racism that is "diversity, equity, and inclusion." He has secured numerous other decades-sought-after domestic conservative goals, such as (partially) defunding Planned Parenthood, defunding NPR and PBS, and vastly downsizing the Department of Education.
President Donald Trump speaks during the "Winning the AI Race" summit in Washington, D.C. on July 23, 2025.
President Donald Trump speaks during the "Winning the AI Race" summit in Washington, D.C. on July 23, 2025.Immigration: A+
Trump has not disappointed on his longstanding signature political issue, immigration. Illegal border crossings and "gotaways" have impressively dropped to historic lows as Trump, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, and "border czar" Tom Homan have overseen the most effective border security and mass deportation operation in American history. There are no signs of slowing down, either. Perhaps even better, the administration has pursued its immigration enforcement agenda in a way that also redounds to its political interests—from the Hamas-sympathizing former Columbia graduate student Mahmoud Khalil to the MS-13-tied "Maryland man" Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the administration's highest-profile immigration battles have been waged against unsavory and unsympathetic figures.
Law: A-
Lower-court judges have tried to nip the administration's agenda in the bud with ludicrous "nationwide injunctions," but most of those acts of judicial hubris will be brought to heel by Trump's recent Supreme Court victory in the CASA case. The administration has secured other crucial Supreme Court victories, including the Skrmetti case, which paved the way for states to protect vulnerable children from mutilating transgender "surgeries." And while judicial nominations have gotten off to a slower start than during the first Trump term, the administration's picks thus far for federal courts have invariably been top-notch. On the other hand, the administration might want to try to entice more conservative older judges to take "senior status"—perhaps, for instance, by offering them shiny ambassadorships. Finally, the Jeffrey Epstein saga, while not the monstrous scandal-in-the-making some even on the MAGA Right make it out to be, has clearly not been handled particularly well.
Foreign policy: A
The Trump administration has reversed the Biden-era approach of rewarding geopolitical enemies and punishing geopolitical friends by returning to the more familiar approach he deployed during his first term: rewarding friends and punishing enemies. Trump's limited incursion in last month's 12-Day War between Israel and Iran achieved the decades-sought-after goal of severely hampering Iran's nuclear program, while also not suffering a single American casualty or even boot on the ground. In Europe, NATO nations are already committing to spend more money on defense, thus freeing up the United States to focus first and foremost on its true rival: Communist China. Trump has brought peace to India and Pakistan and to Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. A Russia-Ukraine peace deal remains elusive, but Trump has shown an admirable willingness to adjust in response to changing circumstances.
There is undoubtedly much work left to be done. Trump would probably be the first to say that himself. But his second administration is off to a very strong—and fast—start. Seize the day, indeed.
Josh Hammer is Newsweek senior editor-at-large, host of "The Josh Hammer Show," senior counsel for the Article III Project, a research fellow with the Edmund Burke Foundation, and author of the new book, Israel and Civilization: The Fate of the Jewish Nation and the Destiny of the West (Radius Book Group). Subscribe to "The Josh Hammer Report," a Newsweek newsletter. X: @josh_hammer.
The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Safe Spaces Are Coming Back to Brown University—All Thanks to Trump
Brown University has settled with the Trump administration, which is currently waging war on elite institutions of higher education. Under the guise of combating antisemitism on campuses—an important problem, though not one the federal government is well-suited to address—President Donald Trump's Education Department has gone after Columbia University, Harvard University, and also Brown. Brown's deal with the federal government has been described as more favorable to the university than Columbia's; Harvard has yet to reach an agreement at all, but is reportedly willing to spend up to $500 million to settle the matter. Large sums of money are at stake for all three universities, as the federal government is responsible for doling out billions of dollars in research grants. Brown is the recipient of $510 million in public funding. So it's not surprising that Brown wanted to make a deal. It's unfortunate, of course, that the Trump administration is using the threat of a funding reduction to dictate terms to what is ultimately a private institution. This is obviously a version of jawboning, in which political figures use non-legislative means to achieve some sort of policy end. When the Biden administration threatened social media companies and browbeat them into making different moderation decisions, it was swiftly recognized as a free speech issue by many conservatives, libertarians, and even some on the left. It's similarly vexing when the Trump administration—which has pledged to restore free speech and end federally driven censorship—does this. It's true that institutions of higher education are not entitled to federal funding, which, after all, is paid by taxpayers. The Trump administration, or any administration, could decide, in a moment of unusual frugality, that the U.S. is too indebted to continue sending billions of dollars to wealthy private organizations that have their own massive endowments. But the government shouldn't use the threat of a funding cut as a form of coercion. That's no different from how the Obama administration handled Title IX enforcement: Obama's Education Department instructed campuses to adopt policies that were hostile to free speech and due process, and they implied that federal research dollars would evaporate in the event of noncompliance. Indeed, the extent to which the Obama higher ed coercion blueprint has been adopted by Trump is under-acknowledged. All that said, the details of the Brown settlement are disturbing in their own right. It's true that Brown avoided some of the harsher penalties that Columbia got stuck with, and it's good that the settlement recognizes that the government has no "authority to dictate Brown's curriculum or the content of academic speech." Veena Dubal, a law professor at the University of California at Irvine, complains that the settlement includes "no barrier to government interference in faculty hiring," but the only thing it really says about hiring is that it must be race neutral. The Supreme Court has already held that race-based hiring and admissions policies are almost always impermissible, so this is hardly some unreasonable, out-of-nowhere demand. But Dubal is also concerned about a provision of the settlement that permits the feds to collect and read Brown faculty course evaluations, and that's legitimately concerning. In fact, it speaks to the most troubling aspect of the settlement: It lends itself toward the creation of a campus antisemitism police that will be laser-focused on identifying, cataloguing, and eliminating uncomfortable and offensive speech that is nevertheless clearly protected by the First Amendment. In other words, the Trump administration is directly encouraging the formation of campus safe spaces. The settlement instructs Brown to survey students on their feelings of emotional safety. The survey questions are really something, and include: "whether they feel welcome at Brown; whether they feel safe reporting anti-Semitism at Brown; whether they have experienced harassment on social media." These are vague questions that will prompt subjective answers. Social media harassment is a particularly fraught topic; what constitutes harassment? If one student is being unkind to another student on Instagram or TikTok, is it really the university's job to intervene? Brown should act to counter identity-based harassment in cases where it's egregious, criminal, or abjectly violates the code of conduct. If students are drawing swastikas on Jewish people's doors, the university should certainly intervene. But the language in the settlement is too non-specific, and almost requires university administrators to overreach. No one should be naive about this, because it's obvious what's going to happen: An anti-Israel student will go after a pro-Israel student on social media, the pro-Israel student will say they are being harassed, and Brown will feel obligated to respond. No student should be made actually unsafe—i.e., be a victim of violence—because they are Jewish, or for any other reason. But it should be self-apparent to everyone who criticized the liberal safe space trend of the 2010s that re-orienting the campus speech police around the protection of Jewish students' subjective feelings of discomfort is not a positive development. This will produce the same sort of histrionics that existed when campus authorities were dedicated to policing speech that was perceived to be anti-black, anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-trans, etc. There will be an uptick in bias incident reports as students discover that they can weaponize the process against perceived enemies, as students absorb the idea that the administration is responsible for making them feel emotionally well at all times. I really thought the idea was to undermine the ideological foundations of the safe space mentality, not expand its identity-based reach. The Trump administration is erecting an edifice that would have been much to the liking of all those Play-Doh-loving, coloring-book-needing, puppy-hugging, safe-space liberals circa 2015. I'm joined by Amber Duke to discuss South Park's jokes about Trump, the latest Epstein Files news, Sydney Sweeney, Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D–Texas), and more. It has begun: My Nintendo Switch 2 arrived last night. I bought the system, one extra set of Joy-Cons, the Pro Controller, and three games: Donkey Kong Bananza, Mario Kart World, and Super Mario Party Jamboree. (The grand total was in the $800 range.) I spent most of the night transferring my data from the old Switch to the new one, and I've only had time to play about 20 minutes of Donkey Kong, so the full report will have to wait until next week. The post Safe Spaces Are Coming Back to Brown University—All Thanks to Trump appeared first on
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump gives Mexico 90-day tariff reprieve as deadline for higher duties looms
By David Lawder and Aida Pelaez-Fernandez (Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump gave Mexico a 90-day reprieve from higher tariffs to negotiate a broader trade deal but was expected to issue higher final duty rates for most other countries as the clock wound down on his Friday deal deadline. The extension, which avoids a 30% tariff on most Mexican non-automotive and non-metal goods compliant with the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement on trade, came after a Thursday morning call between Trump and Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum. "We avoided the tariff increase announced for tomorrow," Sheinbaum wrote in an X social media post, adding that the Trump call was "very good." Approximately 85% of Mexican exports comply with the rules of origin outlined in the USMCA, shielding them from 25% tariffs related to fentanyl, according to Mexico's economy ministry. Trump said that the U.S. would continue to levy a 50% tariff on Mexican steel, aluminum and copper and a 25% tariff on Mexican autos and on non-USMCA-compliant goods subject to tariffs related to the U.S. fentanyl crisis. "Additionally, Mexico has agreed to immediately terminate its Non Tariff Trade Barriers, of which there were many," Trump said in a Truth Social post without providing details. Trump is expected to issue tariff rate proclamations later on Thursday for countries that have not struck trade deals by a 12:01 a.m. EDT (0401 GMT) deadline. South Korea agreed on Wednesday to accept a 15% tariff on its exports to the U.S., including autos, down from a threatened 25%, as part of a deal that includes a pledge to invest $350 billion in U.S. projects to be chosen by Trump. But goods from India appeared to be headed for a 25% tariff after talks bogged down over access to India's agriculture sector, drawing a higher-rate threat from Trump that also included an unspecified penalty for India's purchases of Russian oil. Although negotiations with India were continuing, New Delhi vowed to protect the country's labor-intensive farm sector, triggering outrage from the opposition party and a slump in the rupee. TOUGH QUESTIONS FROM JUDGES Trump hit Brazil on Wednesday with a steep 50% tariff as he escalated his fight with Latin America's largest economy over its prosecution of his friend and former President Jair Bolsonaro, but softened the blow by excluding sectors such as aircraft, energy and orange juice from heavier levies. The run-up to Trump's tariff deadline was unfolding as federal appeals court judges sharply questioned Trump's use of a sweeping emergency powers law to justify his sweeping tariffs of up to 50% on nearly all trading invoked the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act to declare an emergency over the growing U.S. trade deficit and impose his "reciprocal" tariffs and a separate fentanyl emergency. The Court of International Trade ruled in May that the actions exceeded his executive authority, and questions from judges during oral arguments before the U.S. Appeals Court for the Federal Circuit in Washington indicated further skepticism. "IEEPA doesn't even say tariffs, doesn't even mention them," Judge Jimmie Reyna said at one point during the hearing. CHINA DEAL NOT DONE U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the United States believes it has the makings of a trade deal with China, but it is "not 100% done," and still needs Trump's approval. U.S. negotiators "pushed back quite a bit" over two days of trade talks with the Chinese in Stockholm this week, Bessent said in an interview with CNBC. China is facing an August 12 deadline to reach a durable tariff agreement with Trump's administration, after Beijing and Washington reached preliminary deals in May and June to end escalating tit-for-tat tariffs and a cut-off of rare earth minerals. (Additional reporting by Doina Chiacu and Susan Heavey in Washington and Aftab Ahmed in New Delhi; Editing by Nick Zieminski) Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Los Angeles Times
18 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Key inflation gauge picks up on goods, spending barely rises
The Federal Reserve's preferred measure of underlying inflation increased in June at one of the fastest paces this year while consumer spending barely rose, underscoring the dueling forces dividing policymakers over the path of interest rates. The so-called core personal consumption expenditures price index, which excludes food and energy items, rose 0.3% from May, according to Bureau of Economic Analysis data out Thursday. It advanced 2.8% on an annual basis, a pickup from June 2024 that underscores limited progress on taming inflation in the past year. The data also showed inflation-adjusted consumer spending edged up last month after declining in May. The data illustrate the tug and pull in the economy that has Fed officials split over the course of monetary policy. On the one hand, progress on inflation has essentially stalled and central bankers fear that President Donald Trump's tariffs — some of which are already being passed on to consumers — will exert greater pressure on prices. On the other, a retrenchment in consumer spending due to a softening labor market risks a broader slowdown in the economy. The Fed kept borrowing costs unchanged for a fifth straight meeting on Wednesday, though two governors dissented in favor of a quarter-point cut. Chair Jerome Powell was staunch in his defense of a solid labor market and upside risks to inflation that support keeping rates steady for now. 'Weaker consumer spending and an upturn in goods prices due to tariffs could further complicate Fed policy,' Sal Guatieri, senior economist at BMO Capital Markets, said in a note. 'We will need to see either calmer inflation figures or weaker growth/softer job conditions to spur a rate cut on September 17.' The S&P 500 rose, Treasury yields declined and the dollar advanced after the report. The figures round out the softest consecutive quarters of growth in consumer spending since the pandemic. The gain in June spending reflected a rebound in outlays for non-durable goods. Purchases of durable goods fell for a third month — the longest stretch since 2021 — and outlays for services were tame, indicating weak discretionary spending. What Bloomberg Economics Says... 'Consumers are becoming more discerning in their spending habits — spending relatively more on necessities — as firms test how much of the tariff cost they can pass along.' — Stuart Paul and Estelle Ou Underlying the weakness in spending is a cooling labor market. Real disposable income was flat after declining in May, while wages and salaries barely rose. The July jobs report due Friday is expected to show a continued moderation in hiring and a slight pickup in unemployment. The saving rate held at 4.5%. Separate data Thursday showed initial applications for unemployment insurance were little changed last week. Another report showed labor cost growth rose 3.6% from a year ago, matching the lowest since 2021, reassuring Fed officials that the job market isn't a source of inflationary pressure. Inflation in June was driven by a pickup in prices for goods, including household furnishings, sports equipment and clothes that indicates some pass-through of import duties to consumers. Last month's consumer price index also showed costs of commonly imported goods like toys and appliances rose firmly. A key metric of services inflation that excludes energy and housing rose 0.2% for a second month. The PCE inflation figures were largely known coming into this report, thanks to inputs from the CPI data, as well as details from the producer price index and quarterly figures in Wednesday's report on gross domestic product. Looking ahead, economists say there could be more upward pressure on inflation as Trump is expected to outline a new round of tariffs on Friday and a stock-market rally keeps a key PCE input elevated. Smith writes for Bloomberg.
