Points for the resistance:

New ban, same result

After a federal judge struck down Trump’s first Muslim – err, travel – ban, the president signed a fresh executive order he promised would withstand scrutiny from any “so called judge” who came across it.

With one fewer country on the list, respect for existing visas and explicit religious tests removed, plus a “smoother” implementation, Travel ban 2.0 initially looked like it might stand. But just hours before the ban was scheduled to take effect, Hawaii US District Court Judge Derrick Watson issued a temporary restraining order on the grounds that it violated the constitution’s establishment clause. A judge in Maryland also blocked it.

For evidence the ban was designed to discriminate based on religion, Watson pointed to statements Trump himself and others (cough, cough, Rudy Giuliani) made on the campaign trail, noting they “betray the executive order’s stated secular purpose” by showing the ban’s true motive was “temporarily suspending the entry of Muslims.” That’s federal judge-speak for “congratulations, you played yourself.”



1 point

CBO? More like CB “No”

In the midst of the Republican party’s Obamacare replacement rollout (working nickname: TrumpDon’tCare), the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office dropped a report detailing just how many steps in the wrong direction this plan would take us: An estimated 24 million fewer people would be insured ten years down the line than would be under Obamacare.

The poor, the sick and the elderly would especially suffer due to rising premiums and cuts to Medicare and Medicaid. Subsidies would be replaced by tax breaks, which only help you buy insurance if you’ve got cash on hand to begin with. All in all, it’s a $600bn tax relief package for those earning $250,000/year and up.

In response, the White House released a statement via HHS Secretary Tom Price saying “we disagree strenuously” with the CBO’s analysis and that the ACHA would “cover more individuals at a lower cost” (#alternativefacts), but the report was enough to give moderate Republicans the fear. Seeing as only two Republican senators need turn against the bill to kill it, its future is far from certain.



1 point

Ivanka’s star falls

When last we checked in with the Donald’s favorite child, she was watching in horror as the #GrabYourWallet campaign caused her brand to be dropped from high end store after high end store. Gone were the days when she could use her father’s political career to shill product without being held accountable for her complicity. A month later, the boycott is still going strong, and Ivanka Trump has announced the end of her fine jewelry line. Guess that “free commercial” from Kellyanne Conway could only take her so far.

While the company’s press release said they did this to focus on their “commitment to offering solution-oriented products at accessible price points,” it’s no coincidence this happened amid mounting pressure on retailers to drop the Ivanka Trump brand from stores. And while it’s good that they’re making jewelry that non-heiresses can afford, make no mistake: Ivanka comes from a family that worships ostentation. This downscaling hurts.



1 point

Points for Trump:

No soup for you

When President Trump unveiled his first proposed budget Thursday, it was about as bad as expected, with $54bn in cuts to everything but defense spending, which naturally went up. From housing to transportation to the arts to education to, of course, the environment, Trump would cut funding to programs large and small, eliminating many entirely. Some Republicans might be criticizing it for its failure to cut Social Security and Medicaid, but on the whole, it’s a conservative’s wet dream.

In addition to Trump’s usual punching bags, the cuts would be devastating for solidly red voting blocs like rural folk, veterans, and the elderly, Meals On Wheels being just one of many cruel casualties. This point may yet become an own-goal, should these people realize their man has stabbed them in the back.



1 point

Nancy, Nancy, Nancy

Just when it was starting to look like opposition to Trumpcare might outweigh support, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi gave an interview to NPR in which she claimed of the Democrats, “We have a responsibility to the American people to find as much common ground as we can” with Republicans on healthcare law. (Fact check: No, they don’t.)

She also claimed the Affordable Care Act brought us out of “a time where [some people] wouldn’t even be able to have any insurance.” (Fact check: Ten years from now, 28 million people still wouldn’t even be able to have any insurance under the ACA.)

She then said the ACA was a “private sector initiative” that “contains many Republican ideas” like that was a good thing, and not the direct cause of that 28 million figure she did not care to acknowledge.

This kind of reverence for capital, triangulation and insistence America is already great was much of what lost the Democrats the election. No wonder single-payer advocate Bernie Sanders is currently enjoying approval ratings far higher than Pelosi or the Democratic Party.



1 point (own goal)

