&w=3840&q=100)
Donald J Trump: Salsa, not Taco
Speaking at the Hague, US President Donald Trump said that progress was being made to end the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza. Reuters
After President Donald J Trump ordered US B2 bombers to destroy Iranian nuclear facilities using 30,000-pound GBU-57 bunker buster bombs, it would be difficult to poke him with the TACO jibe. For those still not in the know, TACO stands for 'Trump always chickens out,' reportedly coined by Financial Times journalist Robert Armstrong. When, three weeks back, a CNN reporter hurled the TACO accusation at him, Trump said it was a 'very negative question' and that what Wall Street called 'chickening out' was actually negotiation.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Be that as it may, the TACO meme went viral. As to who liked Trump to Salsa, I think the credit should go to an episode description I saw on PGurus in a conversation between Sree Iyer and Sridhar Chityala. I don't think they developed the metaphor, though.
By now TACO seems to have been comprehensively falsified, even if the anti-Trump establishment has already started its propaganda that the strikes were not effective. Let us acknowledge that while it is easy to poke fun at Trump, his actions have proved that he is a very gutsy individual in addition to being a decisive president. Let's not forget his response to the assassination attempt during the heat of his campaign when he got back to his feet, raised his fist and said, 'Fight, fight, fight.' I agree that he loves to shoot his mouth off, especially when he has the media, and via the media, the world as his stage. But that doesn't mean that he talks nonsense all the time or that he doesn't know what he is about or trying to accomplish.
Instead, I would argue that his actions prove that he is the boldest American president in recent decades. Now, salsa, also part of the Mexican cuisine so popular in the US and all over the world, which does much to spice up a bland taco, may not function as an acronym. But its spicy and memorable taste is more akin to Trump's presidency, which is as unforgettable as it is exciting. Never a dull moment and certainly zesty all the way.
Hence, the quip 'Trump always chickens out,' now sounds and lands like a cheap shot, a lazy caricature hurled by critics who underestimated the US president's resolve.
The bombing of Iran sent shockwaves through global geopolitics. As did the Trump engineered ceasefire. Again, critics may carp, 'It has already been violated. By both sides.' True. But ceasefires don't stop the bleeding like diarrhea pills plug loose motions. They take a while fully to take effect, with each side trying some last-minute strikes to smoothen over the wrinkles, so to speak, if not mop up some of the spillovers.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
For years, Iran's regime had poked and prodded, testing America's resolve through proxy militias and nuclear brinkmanship. Previous administrations, cautious, deliberative, and often paralysed by escalation concerns, had largely given Iran a free run of the middle east. With their surrogates and proxies such as Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis, plus various bands of mercenaries swarming across Syria and Iraq, they had created a ring of fire encircling Israel. Even if the rest of the world didn't care, this was clearly an existential threat to the very existence of the only Jewish state in the world.
Worse, Iran's nuclear bomb-in-the-making was, to change metaphors, a thorn in the side of most other middle eastern states, including Saudi Arabia and UAE. Neither Russia, nor China were comfortable with the idea of nuclearised Iran and the middle east. The US position was that it would not, under any circumstances, permit Iran to build a bomb. Previous administrations under Joe Biden and Barrack Obama tried to buy peace by bribery or sanctions. But that was only kicking the can down the road. It is Trump who has bitten the bullet. Risking isolation and opprobrium not only from the other members of the G7 but also from the European Union.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Where India stand in all this? The Indian 'right wing' commentariat, quite foolishly at times, called Trump names and painted him out to be untrustworthy, or worse, treacherous and cowardly. The US is, whether we like it or not, still a superpower. India is not.
Actually, geopolitics is much more complicated. The US economy is nearly eight times the size of India and China's five times. We shouldn't punch below our weight, true. But trying to punch above our weight is to pump fists in the air and look silly. We cannot afford to underestimate either the US or China. While Operation Sindoor was a grand success, we cannot rest on our laurels. We have to plan and prepare for the next confrontation. Our enemies are not going to take their worsting lying down. They are already reequipping themselves swiftly and surely.
India needs to play the hyperpower rivalry to its advantage rather than trying to take down the US president a notch or two through its 'B' team of social media influencers.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Now, let's return to the 'salsa, not taco' metaphor. A taco is familiar, structured, even boring. A known quantity. Salsa, on the other hand, is unpredictable. It's the kick of jalapeño, the tang of lime, and a variable level of spice from the mild to the sizzling. Trump's presidency, similarly, is undeniably spicy, a whirlwind of controversy, charisma, and unrelenting energy.
His unfiltered communication style, willingness to upend decades of political orthodoxy, and penchant for chaos throws his opponents off balance and the public engaged, if not enraged.
Salsa doesn't apologise for its hotness; neither does Trump.
The writer is an author, columnist, and former Director, Indian Institute of Advanced Study. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time of India
32 minutes ago
- Time of India
Senate Republicans seek to end EV tax credit by September 30
US Senate Republicans late Friday released a revised tax and budget bill that would end the $7,500 tax credit on new electric vehicle sales and leases on September 30 as well as the $4,000 tax credit for used EVs. The prior version would have ended the credit for new sales 180 days after the bill was signed into law, 90 days for used vehicles and immediately ended the credit for leased vehicles not assembled in North America and meeting other requirements. Republicans have taken aim at EVs on a number of fronts, a reversal from former President Joe Biden's policy that encouraged electric vehicles and renewable energy to fight climate change and reduce emissions. The House of Representatives version would allow the $7,500 new-EV tax credit to continue through the end of 2025, and through the end of 2026 for automakers that have not yet sold 200,000 EVs before killing it. The Senate bill also includes a provision to eliminate fines for failing to meet Corporate Average Fuel Economy rules in a move aimed at making it easier for automakers to build gas-powered vehicles. The Republican bill exempts interest paid on auto loans from taxes for new cars made in the US through 2028, but phases it out for individual taxpayers making more than $100,000 annually. Senate Republicans dropped a bid to force the US Postal Service to scrap thousands of electric vehicles and charging equipment in the bill following a ruling from the Senate parliamentarian. The US Postal Service has 7,200 electric vehicles, made up of Ford e-Transit and specially built Next Generation Delivery Vehicles built by Oshkosh Defense and warned scrapping its EVs would cost it $1.5 billion. President Donald Trump this month signed a resolution approved by Congress to bar California's landmark plan to end the sale of gasoline-only vehicles by 2035, which has been adopted by 11 other states representing a third of the US auto market.


Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Trump has struck trade deals with 2 countries ahead of July 9; what about the others? What is India's position?
As the July 9 deadline set by the Donald Trump administration approaches soon, officials have struggled to strike trade deals with a lot of countries. In almost three months, the US has been able to sign trade agreements with just two countries, with Trump and his officials hinting that a long pipeline is in place. Countries failing to strike deals with the US within the July 9 deadline will face tariffs as was announced by Trump in April. The President however on Friday indicated that the deadline could be moved forward. 'We can do whatever we want. We could extend it. We could make it shorter. I'd like to make it shorter. I'd like to just send letters out to everybody: Congratulations, you're paying 25 per cent,' he told reporters at the White House. Here's what you need to know about Donald Trump's trade deals. As of now, only two countries — China and UK — have signed trade deals with the US. 'The [Trump] administration and China agreed to an additional understanding for a framework to implement the Geneva agreement,' a White House official said on Thursday. That followed the talks in Geneva in May, where the US and China had agreed to reduce mutual tariffs. US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told Bloomberg TV on Thursday that 'they [China] are going to deliver rare earths to us', and once Beijing does that 'we'll take down our countermeasures'. Trump signed an agreement on June 16, formally lowering some tariffs on imports from Britain as the countries continue working toward a formal trade deal. The deal, announced by Trump and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer on the sidelines of the G7 Summit in Canada, reaffirmed quotas and tariff rates on British automobiles and eliminated tariffs on the U.K. aerospace sector, but the issue of steel and aluminum remains unresolved. While UK and China are the only countries that have signed trade deals with the US, Trump on Friday called off discussions with China, calling it a 'difficult country'. Trump abruptly ended the negotiations over its tax targeting US technology firms, saying that it was a "blatant attack" and that he would set a new tariff rate on Canadian goods within the next week. Majority of the trade partners of US, including South Korea, Vietnam and EU countries, are struggling to sign deals with America. Countries like France have rejected the notion of striking a deal that favours the US, and have proposed removal of tariffs altogether. Some EU member states have also rejected the idea of a tit-for-tat tarif, and are preferring a quick deal to a perfect one. India and Japan are considered to be the next countries that could strike trade deals with the US. 'But some of the bigger countries, India, I think we're going to reach a deal where we have the right to go in and trade. Right now, it's restricted. You can't walk in there. You can't even think about it,' Trump told reporters on Friday.


Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Immigrants scramble for clarity after Supreme Court birthright ruling
* Immigrants scramble for clarity after Supreme Court birthright ruling Supreme Court ruling causes confusion over birthright citizenship * Lawyers and advocates field calls from anxious clients * Uncertainty remains on policy across different states By Ted Hesson and Kristina Cooke WASHINGTON, - The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling tied to birthright citizenship prompted confusion and phone calls to lawyers as people who could be affected tried to process a convoluted legal decision with major humanitarian implications. The court's conservative majority on Friday granted President Donald Trump his request to curb federal judges' power but did not decide the legality of his bid to restrict birthright citizenship. That outcome has raised more questions than answers about a right long understood to be guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution: that anyone born in the United States is considered a citizen at birth, regardless of their parents' citizenship or legal status. Lorena, a 24-year-old Colombian asylum seeker who lives in Houston and is due to give birth in September, pored over media reports on Friday morning. She was looking for details about how her baby might be affected, but said she was left confused and worried. "There are not many specifics," said Lorena, who like others interviewed by Reuters asked to be identified by her first name out of fear for her safety. "I don't understand it well." She is concerned that her baby could end up with no nationality. "I don't know if I can give her mine," she said. "I also don't know how it would work, if I can add her to my asylum case. I don't want her to be adrift with no nationality." Trump, a Republican, issued an order after taking office in January that directed U.S. agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of children born in the U.S. who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident. The order was blocked by three separate U.S. district court judges, sending the case on a path to the Supreme Court. The resulting decision said Trump's policy could go into effect in 30 days but appeared to leave open the possibility of further proceedings in the lower courts that could keep the policy blocked. On Friday afternoon, plaintiffs filed an amended lawsuit in federal court in Maryland seeking to establish a nationwide class of people whose children could be denied citizenship. If they are not blocked nationwide, the restrictions could be applied in the 28 states that did not contest them in court, creating "an extremely confusing patchwork" across the country, according to Kathleen Bush-Joseph, a policy analyst for the non-partisan Migration Policy Institute. "Would individual doctors, individual hospitals be having to try to figure out how to determine the citizenship of babies and their parents?" she said. The drive to restrict birthright citizenship is part of Trump's broader immigration crackdown, and he has framed automatic citizenship as a magnet for people to come to give birth. "Hundreds of thousands of people are pouring into our country under birthright citizenship, and it wasn't meant for that reason," he said during a White House press briefing on Friday. WORRIED CALLS Immigration advocates and lawyers in some Republican-led states said they received calls from a wide range of pregnant immigrants and their partners following the ruling. They were grappling with how to explain it to clients who could be dramatically affected, given all the unknowns of how future litigation would play out or how the executive order would be implemented state by state. Lynn Tramonte, director of the Ohio Immigrant Alliance said she got a call on Friday from an East Asian temporary visa holder with a pregnant wife. He was anxious because Ohio is not one of the plaintiff states and wanted to know how he could protect his child's rights. "He kept stressing that he was very interested in the rights included in the Constitution," she said. Advocates underscored the gravity of Trump's restrictions, which would block an estimated 150,000 children born in the U.S. annually from receiving automatic citizenship. "It really creates different classes of people in the country with different types of rights," said Juliana Macedo do Nascimento, a spokesperson for the immigrant rights organization United We Dream. "That is really chaotic." Adding uncertainty, the Supreme Court ruled that members of two plaintiff groups in the litigation - CASA, an immigrant advocacy service in Maryland, and the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project - would still be covered by lower court blocks on the policy. Whether someone in a state where Trump's policy could go into effect could join one of the organizations to avoid the restrictions or how state or federal officials would check for membership remained unclear. Betsy, a U.S. citizen who recently graduated from high school in Virginia and a CASA member, said both of her parents came to the U.S. from El Salvador two decades ago and lacked legal status when she was born. "I feel like it targets these innocent kids who haven't even been born," she said, declining to give her last name for concerns over her family's safety. Nivida, a Honduran asylum seeker in Louisiana, is a member of the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project and recently gave birth. She heard on Friday from a friend without legal status who is pregnant and wonders about the situation under Louisiana's Republican governor, since the state is not one of those fighting Trump's order. "She called me very worried and asked what's going to happen," she said. "If her child is born in Louisiana … is the baby going to be a citizen?" This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.