Mediaboss Marketing

President Donald Trump speaks during a news conference announcing Alexander Acosta as the new Labor Secretary nominee. (Getty Images)

Did Donald Trump inherit "a mess" when he took the oath of office? He certainly thinks so.

He used the phrase four times in his marathon press conference on Feb. 16:

"As you know, our administration inherited many problems across government and across the economy," he told the assembled reporters. "To be honest, I inherited a mess. It's a mess. At home and abroad, a mess. Jobs are pouring out of the country; you see what's going on with all of the companies leaving our country, going to Mexico and other places, low pay, low wages, mass instability overseas, no matter where you look. The Middle East is a disaster. North Korea -- we'll take care of it folks. We're going to take care of it all. I just want to let you know, I inherited a mess."

Was it really a "mess"? As fact-checkers, our research on the economy, at least, has shown a lot of improvement in recent years.

Because "a mess" is a subjective term, we decided not to rate his statement on our Truth-O-Meter. Instead, well look at some hard numbers and let readers make up their own minds.

We should note that no president is all-powerful in controlling the economy. Global market forces, changes in technology, oil shocks and random events play roles as well. So assigning a president full credit or blame is unwise.

That said, well proceed to an assessment of two areas. First, well look at the economy. Then well analyze foreign policy.

The White House sent us a supporting document titled "Inheriting A Mess" that listed slow growth in gross domestic product and wages, losses in manufacturing jobs, "higher costs and fewer choices" under the Affordable Care Act, and rising college tuition and student debt loads. On the foreign policy front, they cited negative developments in North Korea, Syria and Afghanistan, the spread of ISIS, tensions with Israel, and the negotiations that led to the Iran nuclear agreement. We'll expand on these topics below.

The economy

President Barack Obamas greatest economic achievement was to prevent the Great Recession from spiraling into a full-blown depression.

By the time Obama was inaugurated in 2009, the unemployment rate had spiked from 5 percent to 7.8 percent, on its way to 10 percent a few months later. A rising tide of middle-class families were losing homes, turning to food stamps and seeking government-sponsored health care for the first time.

Yet Obama handed Trump the reins of an economy with a 4.7 percent unemployment rate; 75 consecutive months of job growth; rising stock prices, home values, corporate profits and consumer confidence; low inflation; and, following several years of sluggish income growth, a record spike in middle-class incomes.

In 2016, increases in hourly earnings accelerated, which, when combined with increased rates of employment, helped boost overall household incomes. Real household debt is lower than it was in 2006.

"As 2016 ends, the U.S. labor market is in its best shape since the recession, with nearly every measure of the market at its most favorable level in years," economist Jed Kolko concluded in his end-of-the-year report for the jobs website Indeed.

In other words, Obama left the economy in much better shape than he inherited it, even if it remains imperfect for every American.

"In general, the response to the Great Recession was forceful but sensible," Edward Glaeser, a Harvard University economist, told us last year. "There were few massive mistakes on his watch."

Obama oversaw several far-reaching programs designed to prevent a chain reaction of collapse. Two began under Bush. One was the $426 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, which helped stabilize the financial industry. The other was the auto bailout, which helped set the stage for a genuine rebound in the auto industry later in Obamas tenure. Within a few years, car sales were hitting record highs.

In the two years when he had a Democratic-controlled Congress, Obama proceeded to enact a roughly $800 billion stimulus bill that included federal spending on infrastructure, tax cuts and fiscal help help for cash-strapped states. He also managed to enact the financial regulatory bill known as Dodd-Frank, as well as the Affordable Care Act, his signature initiative that helped provide options for people to keep health insurance even if they lost their job.

This isnt to say that everything was perfect on Obamas watch.

Income inequality remains persistently high, with many rural and blue-collar areas of the country stuck in a decades-long economic rut. While food stamp use and poverty rates have eased, they still havent returned to their pre-recession levels. Gross domestic product growth the engine of long-term economic prosperity remains sluggish, even after the recession officially transitioned into the recovery.

Job gains have been relatively modest in scale compared to some previous recoveries. And even those who credit Obamas actions worry about a declining labor-force participation rate, which hasnt been this low since the 1970s. Part of this is due to retirements by baby boomers, but not all of it, and economists arent entirely sure why a relatively large number of Americans have decided to do things other than work.

All told, Obama took an economy with a big hole in it and was able to fill it in and give it stability, said Brookings Institution economist Gary Burtless. That stability was passed on to Trump.

"It would have been far more accurate to describe the economy as a mess when President Kennedy took office in 1961, when President Reagan took office in 1981, when President Obama took office in 2009, or even when President Clinton took office in 1993 than it is to describe the economy as a mess in January 2017," Burtless said.

Ultimately, the epitaph for the Obama economy is more likely to be about perils avoided, Tara Sinclair, a George Washington University economist, told us at the end of Obamas term.

"He could have done somewhat better," she said, "but he also could have done a lot worse."

Foreign policy

Trump can make a stronger case that he inherited a foreign policy "mess" than an economic one, though most foreign policy specialists said the situation is more nuanced than he makes it out to be.

We found broad agreement that certain areas of the world are more unstable today than when Obama took office. The biggest one is probably the Middle East.

"Obama presided over the period of the Arab Spring, in which many Middle Eastern states witnessed large-scale uprisings and the complete failure of several states," said Joshua Landis, director of the Center for Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma.

"In some places such as Libya, Syria and Yemen, Obama's diplomacy and military actions made the situation worse," he added. "More aggressive action would probably have backfired, but liberal interventionism did not help."

Barnett Rubin, associate director of the Center on International Cooperation at New York University, agreed that "its fair to say that President Trump inherited a mess in Syria." He added, though, that whether Obama is to blame for this is "unknowable."

"Was there something Obama could have done and failed to do that would have made the situation better?" Rubin said. "There are reasonable arguments for both answers. I lean toward no, but I respect those who think otherwise."

Anthony Clark Arend, a professor of government and foreign service at Georgetown University, agreed, saying, "Perhaps if the Obama Administration would have provided support to Syrian rebels early, (Syrian President Bashar) Assad may not have been able to survive. Perhaps if the Obama administration had acted forcibly, the conflict might not have escalated. But we will never know. There are a lot of ifs here."

Meanwhile, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict "seems to have worsened over the past eight years, with no immediate prospects for progress," Arend said. And several experts said Obama was slow to recognize the threat posed by the Islamic State, or ISIS, although some give him credit for slow, steady progress against the group in recent years.

As for other parts of the world, several experts highlighted a deterioration in the U.S.-Russia relationship.

It was a "mistake" by Obama to goad Russian President Vladimir Putin by calling Russia a "regional power," Rubin said, and Obamas relative inaction against the annexation of the Crimean region of Ukraine "was a tragic mistake on his part," said John Pike, director of globalsecurity.org.

In Asia, Obama had to grapple with increasing Chinese militarism in the South China Sea, said Lance Janda, a Cameron University military historian. "Our fault? No," he said. "Critics would say we should have reacted more strongly, and that our unwillingness to do so helped push Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte toward the Chinese." But Duterte is a loose cannon, he said, "and I dont think fighting the Chinese over the Spratly Islands would have made sense."

In a few places, experts said, relations were generally better at the end of Obamas term than at the beginning, particularly South Asia, Latin America and sub-Saharan Africa. Obama also moved to repair ties with such authoritarian states as Iran and Cuba, though such developments were -- and remain -- highly controversial. And Obama -- to a greater degree than Trump so far -- generally maintained cordial relations with U.S. allies.

More quietly, Arend said, great strides have been made in combating global poverty and disease, while international laws have protected human rights and the environment in many nations and, by historical standards, fewer people today are dying in armed conflict.

Of course, its also true that a number of foreign policy hotspots were problematic at the end of Obamas term, just as they were at the beginning of his term. These include Afghanistan, Iraq and North Korea. (Trump specifically mentioned North Korea during his press conference.)

Ultimately, Trump may have a point that the world is a "mess" today -- but experts emphasized that it has almost always been thus.

"In foreign affairs, every president inherits a mess," Rubin said. "It's the nature of the international order. I don't think that the current mess is so different from other messes."

Share the Facts

6

"To be honest, I inherited a mess."

a press conference

Thursday, February 16, 2017

02/16/2017

Go here to read the rest:
Did Donald Trump inherit 'a mess' from Barack Obama? - PolitiFact

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

In a February 17 article, NPRs Ron Elving claimed that the American people are tired of presidential campaigns that last too long, but Now, they are confronted with one that refuses to end even after reaching the White House.

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

Elvings attack on Trump came in response to the Presidents often combative February 15 press conference that the NPR Washington correspondent described with a simpleWow.

After notingthe criticism of the presser published by various news outlets, Elving then complained that Trump used I or me or the royal we too often during his presentation.

The NPR staffer then went on to say, The president often seemed to be responding in the manner of a candidate. He added, The campaign mode continues this weekend, with the president again rallying like its 2016.

Elving suggested that Trump might be being using this permanent campaign as a tactic to keep his policy ideas at the front of the political discussion.

Or perhaps the campaign continues because it continues, Elving said as he wrapped up. The president does not yet seem comfortable in his new office with all the crosswinds and complications of divided powers and shared responsibilities.

PerhapsElving has been in a coma since 2007, when Obama launched a campaign for president that didnt end until he left office on January 20, 2017. Obama spent eight years being hit with charges that he never stopped campaigning, It was one of the most common criticisms of the Obama presidency.

In fact, Obama kept his campaign apparatus, Organizing for America, in operationeven after what he claimed would be his last election. In December of 2012, for instance,The Observer remarkedthat OFA was still soliciting contributions months after Obama won his second term.

Indeed, OFA is up and running today, aiming to undermine Donald Trump and many are making noteof it.Obamacontinues to issue tweets using the OFA Twitter account,and gives marching orders to his OFA army, even in reputed retirement.

In August of 2009, former George W. Bush political advisor Karl Rove charged that Obama was continuing to use divisive, and permanent campaign tactics despiteeasily winning his election. The Washington Timesobserved the same thing.

The claim was not made only by disgruntled conservatives or center-right news sources, either.

In 2013 The New York Times wrote that Obamas campaign without end was fundraising in an unprecedented manner.

Before that, the Washington Posts Dana Milbank commented on the issue in May of 2012, saying that Obama had embraced the permanent campaign and was flying all across the country leading campaign-style rallies to push his agenda.

To a greater extent than his predecessors, Obama has used the trappings of his office to promote his reelection prospects even while handling taxpayer-funded business, Milbank wrote.

In addition, several left-wing websites and commentators actually celebrated Obama for using campaign tactics to continue to sell his ideas. MSNBC praised Obama for putting the permanent campaign to good use, and The Atlantic marveled that Obamas permanent campaign was using his reelection playbook to change Washington.

With all this, it is interesting that today NPRs Ron Elving seems to have only just noticed that a president is perpetrating a permanent campaign to keep his policieson track to completion.

Finally, it was rathertone deaf for Elving to criticize Donald Trump for using I and me too much, coming off the last eight years ofa president famous for his narcissistic references to himself in every appearance. Despite mocking the penchant of the center-right press for keeping count of his self-referential habits, The Washington Post recently published a piecenoting just how often Obama talked about himself.

After all, Barack Obama was the president so enthralled with himself that he gave the Queen of England the dubious gift of an iPod filled with Barack Obama speeches.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston or email the author at igcolonel@hotmail.com.

The rest is here:
After 8 Years of Campaigner-in-Chief Obama, NPR Accuses Trump of 'Permanent Campaign' - Breitbart News

Related Coverage

NEW HAVEN, Conn. (AP) Democratic members of Congress from Connecticut are meeting with constituents to discuss the impact of former President Barack Obamas health care law.

Congressional Republicans and President Donald Trump have pledged to repeal and replace the 2010 law.

Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro plans to host a round table discussion Saturday with those who have pre-existing medical conditions. Obamas Affordable Care Act prohibits insurers from denying coverage to those with pre-existing conditions.

The event is scheduled to begin at 1 p.m. at the Manjares Restaurant in New Haven.

Congressman Joe Courtney is also hosting a 12:30 p.m. forum Saturday with patients, small business owners, and local health care experts to discuss what a repeal of the Affordable Care Act could mean for eastern Connecticut families at Generations Family Health Center in Willimantic.

Like Loading...

WTNH NEWS8 provides commenting to allow for constructive discussion on the stories we cover. In order to comment here, you acknowledge you have read and agreed to our Terms of Service. Commenters who violate these terms, including use of vulgar language or racial slurs, will be banned. Please be respectful of the opinions of others. If you see an inappropriate comment, please flag it for our moderators to review. Also, you can now block any inappropriate user by simple selecting the drop down menu on the right of any comment and selection "Block User" from there.

Follow this link:
Democrats holding forums on impact of Obama health care law - WTNH Connecticut News (press release)

President Donald Trump speaks Feb. 17 at the Boeing South Carolina facility in North Charleston, South Carolina. Photo by REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque .

WASHINGTON Presidents since Franklin Delano Roosevelt have loved to tour Boeing factories. The lessons they draw from their time on the factory floor and the inevitable photo opportunity beside shiny new airplanes can differ wildly.

President Donald Trump on Friday touted the latest Boeing 787 Dreamliner as proof of a coming American manufacturing renaissance. He toured the South Carolina facility and hailed it as a sign of steps toward generating more U.S factory jobs.

Nearly five years ago, President Barack Obama made a similar visit to the facility in Everett, Washington. His message: America needs to prepare for the loss of factory jobs to automation and retool its economy.

The contrast speaks to the fundamental difference between Trump and Obamas economic policies. Where Trump promises a return to a brawny America full of factory jobs, Obama sought to increase exports and manufacturing output to help support job creation elsewhere in the services sector.

Trump blames factory job losses on cheap foreign labor and trade pacts. His speech at the Boeing plant in North Charleston, South Carolina, never once touched on the increasing role of robots on assembly lines. It glossed over Boeings own statement that 30 percent of the parts for the 787 fleet come from foreign factories.

WATCH LIVE: Trump talks jobs in visit to SC Boeing plant

Our goal as a nation must be to rely less on imports and more on products made here in the USA, Trump said. Were going to fight for every last American job.

He proudly referenced the evolution of airplanes as proof of U.S. competitiveness. The Wright brothers invented a small wooden plane that first flew in 1903, Trump said, a far cry from the use of carbon fiber in the newest 787, which has room for 330 passengers.

The threat to U.S. workers comes not from advanced technology but from factories that have moved manufacturing overseas, Trump said something he pledged to stop, saying, There will be a very substantial penalty to be paid.

WATCH: Trump says Boeing deal for Air Force One is too expensive

Obama, too, highlighted the advancements of the 787 when speaking at a Boeing factory in 2012. But what he saw was new technology and computers making companies more efficient, allowing them to rely on fewer workers and set up shop almost anywhere with an internet connection.

The hard truth is a lot of those jobs arent going to come back because of these increased efficiencies, Obama said from the factory floor. We cant bring every job back. Anybody who says we can, theyre not telling you the truth.

The key, Obama said, was to increase the manufacturing output of high-quality products and sell those goods abroad, something that would require fewer workers than in the past. But the profits from a stronger manufacturing sector would have a spillover effect and create jobs at restaurants, stores and other parts of the economy.

The prospect of more retail jobs did little to inspire voters in November, who turned to Trump even though Obama delivered job gains of 11.5 million during his eight years in office.

But the Boeing 787 being celebrated by Trump also helps to validate Obamas description of changes in U.S. manufacturing. Subcontractors that contribute parts to the fleet of planes include firms in Japan, South Korea, France, Canada, Turkey, Australia and China, according to a report by aviation consultant Teal Group.

Jet makers are basically looking for best technology, Teal consultant Richard Aboulafia said. In the case of low-tech parts, theyre looking for lower cost, but the strong majority of components come from high-skill, high-wage countries.

___

AP airlines writer David Koenig contributed to this report.

Follow this link:
Trump's Boeing speech shows differences with Obama - PBS NewsHour

A grizzly bear eats a fish in Alaska in October 2016. Danny Green / REX/Shutterstock/AP

Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, is behind the resolution to strip away some of the federal government's control over Alaska's 76 million acres worth of federal wildlife refuges. Under the federal law, hunters are prohibited from shooting or trapping wolves while at their dens with cubs, using airplanes to scout for potential grizzly bear targets, trapping bears with wire snares and luring bears with food to get a point-blank kill.

But essentially, hunters could once again kill such predators from the air or in dens if the law is overturned.

Aerial shooting has been deemed necessary in the past in order to curb predator populations that eat moose, deer and other animals that some Alaskans consume for food.

Young argued in the House that the rule seized authority away from the state of Alaska and is a clear violation of federal law.

"We have to recognize this is not about the little polar bears, the little grizzly bears or wolves on television, this is about the state's right to manage not allowing the federal government to do so," Young said. "We want to be able to take and manage our fish and game for the sustainable yield so that our fish and game will be there forever."

The House resolution H.J. Res. 69 is set to advance to the GOP-controlled Senate, and then will be given to President Donald Trump to sign into law. His administration has not commented on the issue.

The office of Alaska Gov. Bill Walker, a political independent, said they filed a lawsuit in January challenging the federal law because it impacted the "basic means of [their] survival."

"As Alaskans, we have a unique relationship with our land especially in the most rural parts of our state where residents rely on hunting and fishing to put food on the table," Walker said in a statement. "Alaskans must be able to provide for their families, and the rules that have been put forward by the federal government do not support that."

Animal rights group The Humane Society aired a TV commercial in the Washington, D.C., area on Wednesday and Thursday in an effort to urge lawmakers to vote against Young's resolution.

"What the House did today should shock the conscience of every animal lover in America," Wayne Pacelle, The Humane Society's CEO, said in a statement. "If the Senate and President concur, we'll see wolf families killed in their dens [and] bears chased down by planes."

Prior to the hearing on the resolution, multiple House members took sides on Twitter, denouncing the resolution or celebrating the reversal of an Obama-era policy.

The Fish and Wildlife Service said last year the rule will help maintain sustainable populations of bears, wolves and coyotes on national wildlife refuges in Alaska, The Associated Press reported.

For instance, Denali National Park in Alaska's interior wilderness released data showing wolf populations declined substantially up until Obama's law was instituted.

In 2015, Denali had 112 wolves a steady decline from the average mean of 200 wolves, according to park officials. In 2016, the number rose slightly to 127 wolves.

But it was unclear whether the federal law played a role in the uptick. Still, Denali officials have asked to extend buffer zones around its park to better protect wolves outside the federal refuge.

Read more:
House Overturns Obama-Era Law to Protect Alaskan Bears and Wolves - NBCNews.com