Un jeu pour smartphone, “En Marche vers l’Elysée“, donne la possibilité d’incarner Emmanuel Macron en pleine campagne pour l’élection présidentielle 2017. La raison à son personnage “parfait pour la politique fiction“.

Vous souhaitez vous glisser dans la peau d’Emmanuel Macron en mettant en place une stratégie, en recevant les conseils de Brigitte Macron, en communiquant par sms avec Gilles Bouleau, ou bien encore en envoyant quelques tacles bien sentis à François Fillon ou à quelques sondeurs trop pressés ? Ne cherchez plus ! L’application “En marche vers l’Elysée“, créée par la start-up française Celestery et disponible sur iOS et Android, permet tout cela.

Libre à vous donc d’incarner, dès à présent, le fondateur du mouvement En marche ! dans sa course à la fonction suprême. Mais pourquoi Emmanuel Macron ? Pierre Lacombe, fondateur de Celestory l’a expliqué à nos confrères du journal L’Express : “Notre choix s’est très rapidement porté vers Emmanuel Macron car il est parfait pour la politique fiction. Son programme n’est pas encore bouclé et son positionnement est donc difficile à anticiper. Cela laisse beaucoup de possibilités aux joueurs“.

Le dirigeant, conscient que cette application est surtout un moyen de mettre en valeur la technologie de “narration interactive“ mise au point par sa société, souligne également n’être aucunement en contact avec l’homme politique : “Nous sommes complètement déconnectés des équipes de Monsieur Macron mais s’il veut essayer l’application, peut-être cela l’aidera-t-il à être vraiment élu…“.

En attendant, le jeu repéré par le site Numérama se révèle dans son ressenti – à en croire le média de référence de l’informatique et du numérique sur le net – “vite barbant…notamment à cause des réponses qui mettent des plombes à s’afficher“.

Le créateur de l’application promet toutefois “plusieurs jours“ de jeu aux utilisateurs avant d’arriver – ou pas – rue du Faubourg Saint-Honoré: “Chaque décision, chaque dialogue a une influence importante sur les chances du candidat de parvenir à ses fins. Le but est vraiment de procurer l’expérience la plus riche possible“. À noter que vous ne pourrez pas danser le zouk comme vient de le faire Emmanuel Macron en Guadeloupe, le jeu n’étant pas encore disponible pour les casques de réalité virtuelle.

Click Here: mochila fjallraven

Natalie Portman et son baby bump étaient de sortie ce mercredi 15 février, à Los Angeles. L’occasion de constater que le petit Aleph va très bientôt être grand-frère.

Dès qu’elle a une heure de pause, Natalie Portman part entretenir ses formes qui, c’est peu de le dire, ont rarement été aussi arrondies. Baskets aux pieds et lunettes de soleil, elle se rend alors à Griffith Park, dans le quartier de Los Feliz pour se détendre un peu les jambes et goûter au grand air pur du parc. Un écrin préservé dans lequel elle apparaît souvent, consciente que des paparazzi y ont presque élu domicile.

Aussi hier en balade avec sa mère, l’actrice (qui mesure 1,60 m) a donné l’impression que l’accouchement était vraiment imminent et pourtant il y aurait encore quelques toutes petites semaines à tenir. Un calendrier intime qui pourrait bien rentrer en collision avec son agenda professionnel puisque le 26 février prochain se tiendra la 89ème cérémonie des Oscars, cérémonie où elle est nommée dans la catégorie meilleure actrice pour son rôle dans le biopic Jackie. Alors pourra-t-elle y assister ? Réponse dans douze petits jours maintenant. En attendant, visionnez grâce à notre diaporama, les photos de Natalie Portman très enceinte lors d’une balade avec sa maman, ce mercredi 15 février.

Click Here: Cheap France Rugby Jersey

A high-profile debate over President TrumpDonald John TrumpProfessor fired for Facebook post suggesting Iran should tweet out list of American cultural sites to threaten NY judge denies Trump request to dismiss lawsuit by E. Jean Carroll Rep. Omar: ‘War trauma never leaves you’ MORE’s war powers is fueling a feud among Senate Republicans.

The fallout from a closed-door briefing on the U.S. air strike that killed Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani has put a spotlight on the divisions among two of President Trump’s biggest congressional allies: Sens. Rand PaulRandal (Rand) Howard PaulThe lawmakers who bucked their parties on the war powers resolution House passes measure seeking to limit Trump on Iran Democratic lawmaker says Trump ‘doesn’t have full command’ on Iran MORE (R-Ky) and Lindsey GrahamLindsey Olin GrahamSarah Sanders says she ‘can’t think of anything dumber than’ having Congress run foreign policy Fox’s Baier defends reference to ‘Trump derangement syndrome’ Senate GOP resolution calls Pelosi’s impeachment delay a ‘flagrant violation’ MORE (R-S.C.).

“If I had an eye problem, I would go to him. If I had a constitutional question, he would be the last guy I would pick,” Graham said on Thursday when asked about Paul, who is an ophthalmologist.

ADVERTISEMENT

The two lawmakers are butting heads after Paul and Sen. Mike LeeMichael (Mike) Shumway LeeThe lawmakers who bucked their parties on the war powers resolution House passes measure seeking to limit Trump on Iran Democratic lawmaker says Trump ‘doesn’t have full command’ on Iran MORE (R-Utah) emerged from Wednesday’s classified briefing deeply critical of what they characterized as a warning from senior administration officials against debating Trump’s war authority and their use of a 2002 authorization as the basis for last week’s drone strike in Baghdad that killed Soleimani.

Appearing together before a gaggle of reporters and TV cameras, Lee called the presentation “the worst briefing I’ve seen, at least on a military issue.”

Paul added that he found the briefing “less than satisfying” and that it was “absurd” and “insane” to use the 2002 Iraq war authorization as the basis for an air strike against an Iranian general.

“I see no way in the world you could logically argue that an authorization to have war with Saddam Hussein has anything to with having war with people currently in Iraq,” Paul told reporters.

The anti-intervention stance aligns Paul and Lee with Trump’s 2016 campaign, when he consistently struck an isolationist tone and pledged to end the country’s “forever” wars.

But Paul and Lee are now at odds with most of their GOP colleagues on matters of military authority, making them outliers in the caucus. Most Senate Republicans hold views in line with the party’s foreign policy establishment, and Graham has in many ways taken over the mantle of top hawk following the death of Sen. John McCainJohn Sidney McCainThe 5 most vulnerable senators in 2020 Poll: Democrat Mark Kelly leads incumbent McSally in Arizona Senate race Poll: Trump tied with Biden in Arizona MORE (R-Ariz.).

ADVERTISEMENT

Graham fired the opening shot Wednesday when he said he thought Paul and Lee were “overreacting” with their criticism of the administration’s stance on the war powers debate.

“I’m going to let people know that at this moment in time to play this game with the War Powers Act … whether you mean to or not, you’re empowering the enemy,” Graham told reporters.

That prompted Paul, during a CNN interview, to argue that Graham hasn’t “even read the history of the Constitution.”

“He insults the Constitution, our Founding Fathers and what we do stand for in this republic by making light of it and accusing people of lacking patriotism. I think that’s a low, gutter type of response,” Paul said.

Paul has taken issue with Graham’s argument that Congress’ only way to rein in a president’s war powers is to defund the military conflict. Over the years, Paul has tried several times to sunset both the 2001 and 2002 authorizations for the use of military force.

It’s hardly the first time Paul and Graham have clashed.

In 2015, a clip of Graham went viral after he rolled his eyes at Paul on the Senate floor as the Kentucky Republican spoke during a debate over the Patriot Act. Paul, who was running for president at the time, fired off a fundraising email that labeled Graham and other surveillance-minded senators as members of the “eye roll caucus.”

Two years later, Paul called Graham a “warmonger” because the South Carolina senator couldn’t remember how many U.S. troops there were around the world.

The two also routinely battle over the annual defense policy bill because Graham opposes Paul’s amendment related to indefinite detention.

“This is not about me. This is about one senator from South Carolina who so much objects to the Bill of Rights that he doesn’t want it to apply to people accused of a crime,” Paul said in 2018 as their fight held up the defense bill.

But there are signs that both camps are trying to paper over the rift that opened up this week.

Lee appeared to soften his criticism slightly, telling Breitbart, a conservative publication popular with Trump’s base, that the worst briefing he ever attended was during the Obama administration. Lee had specified Wednesday that the Iran briefing was the worst on military issues.

ADVERTISEMENT

“The worst briefing I ever got in that room was on a slightly different issue back in 2012 right after the Benghazi attack, where we were told repeatedly by then-Secretary of State Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonTrump seeks to make case for strike on Iranian general in address to Ohio supporters DOJ inquiry tied to Clinton, touted by Trump winds down with no tangible results: report The Hill’s 12:30 Report: Pelosi says impeachment articles coming ‘soon’ as pressure builds MORE that the attack on the Benghazi consulate was based on a reaction to a video. So, fortunately, this was not that,” Lee said.

Graham also referred to Paul and Lee as “patriots,” before pivoting to stress that he thinks they are on the wrong side of the war powers fight.

“What I’ve been trying to convince Sen. Paul of, and I have failed miserably, is there is a delicate balance in the Constitution,” Graham said. “The constitutional founders never envisioned 535 commenders in chiefs. The ability to direct military forces is in the hands of the president of the United States.”

Click Here: Cheap Golf Drivers

Former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg on Friday released a plan to boost voting rights and election security, becoming the latest 2020 presidential candidate to address how votes are counted.

Bloomberg’s plan vowed to enhance voting rights through steps such as reinvigorating enforcement of the Voting Rights Act to stop discriminatory state laws and allowing convicted felons to vote after leaving jail.

He would also launch a federal campaign to educate the public about voting rights, work to prevent partisan gerrymandering, and require that every state provide online and same-day voter registration, along with automatic voter registration the first time a citizen interacts with a state agency. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Click Here: Cheap Golf Drivers

“The right to vote is the fundamental right that protects all of the others, but in states around the country, it is under attack,” Bloomberg said in a statement on Friday. “That’s a disgrace to our Constitution and an insult to generations of people who fought and marched to win the right to vote. We need to end voter suppression once and for all.”

Bloomberg also addresses election security in the plan, a hot-button issue over the past few years following Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

Bloomberg promised to ensure a “regular, reliable federal funding stream” to upgrade and maintain election equipment and said he would require the use of standardized paper ballots counted either by hand or by secure devices. 

He also vowed to provide funding to states to conduct audits prior to election certification and would require the Department of Homeland Security to assess cyber threats prior to an election. 

Almost all of the other Democratic presidential candidates have already released plans aimed at securing U.S. elections and ensuring voting rights and access.

Welcome to Friday’s Overnight Health Care. 

The Trump administration has responded to Democrats’ request for an expedited decision in the ObamaCare lawsuit. A study links Medicaid expansion to a decline in opioid deaths, and high drug prices threaten to be a political liability for Republicans in 2020.

Let’s start with an update in the ObamaCare lawsuit…

ADVERTISEMENT

 

Trump administration wants Supreme Court to delay hearing ObamaCare case 

In a move that surprises nobody, the Trump administration is arguing that it would be premature if the Supreme Court decided to expedite a review of a lawsuit seeking to overturn ObamaCare. 

The Democratic-led House and a group of blue states argue that speed is necessary to remove the uncertainty hanging over the health care system and the millions of people who get health insurance from ObamaCare by resolving the case soon.

The administration, however, argued that since the appellate court declined to rule on the rest of the law, there is no urgency or immediate threat that needs to be resolved. 

“The Fifth Circuit’s decision itself does not warrant immediate review because it did not definitively resolve any question of practical consequence,” Solicitor General Noel Francisco wrote.

“The prospect that the parties challenging the law may prevail does not justify intervening before the district court has ruled.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Red states respond: In a separate filing, the coalition of Republican attorneys general– led by Texas AG Ken Paxton– who brought the initial lawsuit echoed the administration’s arguments.

“There may come a day when this Court’s review is appropriate, but it is after the issue of severability is decided,” they wrote. “There is no emergency justifying that departure from the ordinary course. The district court has stayed its judgment, and that stay remains in place today. If this were really an emergency, petitioners would not have waited 16 days to bring it to this Court’s attention.”

What’s next: It takes only four votes at the Supreme Court to grant review and five to expedite an appeal, but legal experts aren’t sure if the court will defy its usual precedence and take up a case that isn’t final.

Most experts say the case will not be decided until after the 2020 election.

Read more here.

 

Study: Medicaid expansion linked to 6 percent decline in opioid overdose deaths

Medicaid expansion was linked to a 6 percent reduction in opioid overdose deaths, according to a new study. 

The study in an online version of the Journal of the American Medical Association finds that counties in states that accepted the Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) had a 6 percent lower rate of opioid overdose deaths compared to counties in states that did not expand Medicaid. 

The study finds the data indicates that Medicaid expansion may have prevented between 1,678 and 8,132 deaths from opioid overdoses between 2015 and 2017. For comparison, there were 82,228 total opioid overdose deaths in that time period, the study states.  

Big picture: The study could provide fodder for Democrats who are pushing for more states to accept the expansion of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. 

There has been some momentum on that front, including a deal announced Thursday by bipartisan leaders in Kansas to allow the state to expand Medicaid. 

Read more here.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Drug price outrage threatens to be liability for GOP

The GOP’s reluctance to challenge rising prescription drug costs could be a political liability for the party in 2020. 

Outrage over increasing prices has propelled the issue to the top of voters’ minds heading into the November elections when Republicans hope to keep control of the Senate and retake the House. 

But proposals that would limit what drug companies can charge for their products face opposition from Republicans, presenting an obstacle to congressional passage. 

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellOvernight Health Care: Trump officials want Supreme Court to delay ObamaCare case | Medicaid expansion linked to decline in opioid deaths | Drug price outrage threatens to be liability for GOP Voters see slightly more GOP partisanship on impeachment: Poll Collins says she’s working with other GOP senators to allow impeachment witnesses MORE (R-Ky.) has said he won’t hold a vote on a House-passed bill supported by Democrats that would require the federal government to negotiate lower prices for some drugs covered by Medicare. 

He is also reluctant to hold a vote on a separate bipartisan bill, sponsored by Sen. Chuck GrassleyCharles (Chuck) Ernest GrassleyOvernight Health Care: Trump officials want Supreme Court to delay ObamaCare case | Medicaid expansion linked to decline in opioid deaths | Drug price outrage threatens to be liability for GOP It’s time to provide needed reform to the organ donation system Democratic groups launch ad campaign attacking Trump, GOP on drug pricing MORE (R-Iowa), that would limit the price increases drug companies typically make every year.

But as Republicans fight to keep control of the Senate, doing nothing on an issue of vast importance to voters is also a gamble. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“I made it very clear, just strictly from a political standpoint, that every one of these senators is hearing the same thing I am in Iowa: People are fed up with big increases in drug prices,” said Grassley, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee. 

Why it matters: Once again, Republicans find themselves divided on a health care issue. House Democrats have already passed their drug pricing bill and plan to run on it in 2020, giving them the upper hand on this issue. Meanwhile, Republicans are divided on Grassley’s bill and will put themselves at risk if they do nothing on drug prices before November. 

Read more here. 

 

And, as if on cue, the attack ads have already started.

 

Democratic groups launch ad campaign attacking Trump, GOP on drug pricing

ADVERTISEMENT

A new advertising campaign spearheaded by Democratic strategists aims to excoriate congressional Republicans and the Trump administration for opposing Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiOvernight Health Care: Trump officials want Supreme Court to delay ObamaCare case | Medicaid expansion linked to decline in opioid deaths | Drug price outrage threatens to be liability for GOP Impeachment trial weighs on 2020 Democrats Voters see slightly more GOP partisanship on impeachment: Poll MORE‘s (D-Calif.) drug pricing legislation.

The Patients Over Pharma campaign is run by Accountable.US, an umbrella organization of progressive watchdog groups that attacks the Trump administration’s apparent conflicts of interest and ties to industry groups.

Lowering drug prices polls consistently as one of the top issues for voters, and the ad campaign is an example of how Democrats and progressive groups plan to spotlight Pelosi’s sweeping bill as the central piece to their health messaging in 2020.

The group declined to say how large the budget was for the project, which will include running ads throughout the election season. 

The new campaign “will focus on exposing the deep ties between the Trump administration and the pharmaceutical industry, the revolving door between Big Pharma and the federal government, and how this corruption is hurting patients and preventing any meaningful progress toward reducing the cost of prescription drugs,” Kyle Herrig, president of Accountable.US, said in a statement.

Read more here.

 

What we’re reading

The ghosts of JPMs past: How 20 years of deals, scandal, and science have shaped health care (Stat News)

High-Deductible Plans Jeopardize Financial Health Of Patients And Rural Hospitals (Kaiser Health News) 

Unusual flu virus is hitting children hard, and this season’s vaccine is a poor match (The Washington Post)

 

State by state

A Cheaper Alternative to ObamaCare Is a Hit in Idaho (Bloomberg)

Texas Surprise Billing Law now in effect: What you should know (News4 San Antonio)   

New Jersey bill to remove religion as reason not to vaccinate kids has enough support to pass (NJ.com)

Click Here: Cheap Golf Golf Clubs

Medicaid expansion was linked to a 6 percent reduction in opioid overdose deaths, according to a new study. 

The study in an online version of the Journal of the American Medical Association finds that counties in states that accepted the Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) had a 6 percent lower rate of opioid overdose deaths compared to counties in states that did not expand Medicaid. 

The study finds the data indicates that Medicaid expansion may have prevented between 1,678 and 8,132 deaths from opioid overdoses between 2015 and 2017. For comparison, there were 82,228 total opioid overdose deaths in that time period, the study states.  

ADVERTISEMENT

“These findings add to the emerging body of evidence that Medicaid expansion under the ACA may be a critical component of state efforts to address the continuing opioid overdose epidemic in the United States,” the study states. 

The study could provide fodder for Democrats pushing for more states to accept the expansion of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. 

There has been some momentum on that front, including a deal announced Thursday by bipartisan leaders in Kansas to allow the state to expand Medicaid. 

Thirteen other states have not expanded Medicaid, with some Republicans objecting to the cost of the program and saying it should not be extended to able-bodied adults who have the ability to work. 

Oman’s former culture minister Haitham bin Tariq Al Said has been named the country’s new sultan, a state-owned news agency reported Saturday, following the death of the previous ruler.

Haitham was sworn in by the ruling family’s council hours after the death of his cousin, Qaboos bin Al Said, the longest-reigning Arab ruler. 

Click Here: Cheap Golf Golf Clubs

During his 50-year rule, Qaboos was widely credited with implementing positive reforms in Oman, transforming a nation torn by civil war into a stable, oil-exporting country that was able to make peace with its neighbors. 

Under Qaboos’s rule, Oman became the first Gulf country to create trade ties with Israel while maintaining peaceful ties with the U.S., Saudi Arabia and Iran, despite the three countries’ dueling interests.

Haitham’s first public remarks to Omanis and the world stressed that he would continue down the path laid by Qaboos as a beacon of peace in the Middle East. 

“We will follow the same line as the late sultan, and the principles that he asserted for the foreign policy of our country, of peaceful coexistence among nations and people, and good neighborly behavior of non-interference in the affairs of others,” he said, according to state news outlets. 

A U.S. Army general refused a request by an officer who was pardoned by President Trump to have his Special Forces tab reinstated.

Lt. Gen. Francis M. Beaudette — commander of U.S. Army Special Operations Command — denied the request by retired Maj. Mathew L. Golsteyn on Dec. 3, The Washington Post reports.

The statement released by the Army on Thursday said that an administrative panel would review whether Golsteyn should have his Special Forces Tab and the Distinguished Service Cross — the military’s second-highest valor award — reinstated. The panel will also review a letter of reprimand Golsteyn received in connection with his case, according to the Post.

ADVERTISEMENT

Golsteyn was scheduled to go on trial this year for the killing of a Taliban bomb maker in Marja, Afghanistan, in February 2010.

The killing first became known during a CIA polygraph test that Golsteyn took in 2011, as the agency was considering him for a job. He had his Special Forces Tab and valor award stripped in 2014 and was charged with murder by Army officials in 2018.

In November, Trump pardoned both Golsteyn and former Army 1st Lt. Clint Lorance, who had been convicted of murder in Afghanistan. The president also reinstated the rank of Navy SEAL to Chief Petty Officer Edward Gallagher, who was acquitted of murder in 2019, but convicted of posing with the corpse of an ISIS fighter in Iraq.

“I’m disappointed, but I’m not surprised,” Golsteyn told the Post. “I was really hoping they would do the right thing.”

Beaudette’s move mirrors what the Navy’s actions in November, when it decided to convene a board that would determine whether or not to expel Gallagher from the SEALs. This move was blocked by Trump, who eventually pardoned Gallagher. Navy Secretary Richard V. Spencer was ousted from his post, after butting heads with Trump over the matter.

New York state officials offered Amazon nearly $1 billion more in incentives than was previously known to convince the tech behemoth to build its second headquarters in New York City. 

Documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, which were obtained through a Freedom of Information Act FOIA request, showed that the state offered to provide up to $2.5 billion in incentives to Amazon and was also prepared to pay part of some employees’ salaries. 

The first offer also included $1.4 billion in tax credits contingent on the number of employees hired and $1.1 billion in various grants. The total was ultimately $800 million more than the state initially agreed to in a memorandum of understanding.

ADVERTISEMENT

The final agreement included $1.2 billion in tax credits, $505 million to reimburse some construction costs and another $1.3 billion through two programs available to any company.

The state told the Journal that its initial offer was higher to reflect the earlier plans for a larger Amazon campus than was ultimately agreed upon.

“Throughout the negotiating process, we sharpened our incentive package and ultimately secured a better return on investment for the state and the biggest economic development opportunity in New York’s history,” said Matthew Gorton, a spokesperson for Empire State Development, the state’s economic development authority. 

At the end of the bidding process, Newark, N.J., ultimately offered the largest proposal to Amazon, putting up $7 billion, while officials in Maryland offered $5 billion.

The tech company ultimately announced plans to lease a space in Manhattan for 1,500 employees.

While critics of the move said Amazon’s HQ2 will raise the cost of living for the area’s residents, supporters have said the new campus is estimated to increase city and state tax revenue by as much as $27.5 billion over 25 years.

“They demonstrated to Amazon that New York City and state cared about the project and that they had skin in the game,” Kathryn Wylde, president of the Partnership for New York City, a business group, told the Journal of the state’s incentives. “That’s really the point when you’re trying to attract major headquarters operations.”

President TrumpDonald John TrumpUS troops knew about attack on al-Asad airbase, were able to take shelter: report Democrats expand ground game to woo Latinos in Nevada Trump tweets message of support to Iranian protesters: ‘Your courage is inspiring’ MORE is heading into the final year of his first term with a strong job market that could boost his chances of winning another four years in office.

The U.S. added jobs at a steady clip in 2019, powering through the rising costs of Trump’s trade battles, a global economic slump and myriad geopolitical crises.

Fears of a recession that dominated the summer have faded, and the stock market has shattered record highs through the first days of 2020 — with the Dow Jones rising above 29,000 for a time on Friday.

ADVERTISEMENT

The December jobs report released the same day showed the U.S gaining 145,000 jobs and maintaining an unemployment rate of 3.5 percent, the lowest in more than 50 years. And some economists say the labor market has plenty of room to expand in the new decade.

“The economy is pretty damn good for the vast majority of Americans,” said Claudia Sahm, director of macroeconomic policy at the Washington Center for Equitable Growth, a D.C. think tank.

“This year was good news. We could have a lot more good news.”

The resilience of the economy bodes well for Trump, who will be the first president ever impeached to run for reelection. He’s already arguing that electing a Democrat could cause the economy to turn south.

“And just in case you didn’t know it, Ohio just had the best year economically in the history of your state,” Trump said Thursday during a rally in Toledo, even though the state lost jobs in 2019. “That’s not bad. That’s not bad. And this year is going to be even better. Maybe much better.”

Few economists see significant risks to the economy.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Federal Reserve is forecasting a pause on rate cuts after slashing rates three times during an anxious mid-year stretch for global markets. And while the economy is expected to slow, few see a significant dip or recession on the horizon.

Still, there are weak spots beneath the headline numbers that could make Trump vulnerable.

Trump’s promise to revive U.S. manufacturing and mining jobs was central to his appeal in Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania — four industrial states that could make or break his reelection.

Hiring in those sectors surged in 2018 but fell flat last year amid the rising toll of Trump’s tariffs and the retaliation they drew from China and Europe. 

Manufacturing employment rose by just 46,000 workers in 2019 after rising by 264,000 in 2018. 

Employment in transportation and warehousing rose 57,000 last year, just one quarter of 2018’s gain of 216,000 jobs. And mining employment dropped 24,000 in 2019 after rising by 63,000 in 2018.

Economic downturns in Europe and Asia also cut into global demand for U.S. goods, driving a decline in hiring. The interest rate cuts issued by foreign central banks boosted the value of the U.S. dollar, making American goods less affordable in countries with limited buying power

The mix of trade blowback and global sluggishness stunted Trump’s mission to revive American production. U.S. manufacturing activity has been negative for every month since August and contracted in December to its lowest level since June 2009, according to the Institute for Supply Management’s Purchasing Managers Index (PMI).

“2019 was one of the weakest years we’ve seen for manufacturing jobs over the last decade,” said Scott Paul, president of the Alliance for American Manufacturing, a trade group representing manufacturers and the United Steelworkers.

Paul also cited a decline in U.S. auto sales as a drag on manufacturing overall, citing the industry’s wide supply network and hefty demand for steel as Trump’s tariffs push its prices higher.

“The pricing mechanisms that caused steel and aluminum to be in dire straits in the first place, weren’t fundamentally altered by the tariffs,” said Paul, who pointed to U.S. Steel’s recent closure of a Detroit plant that resulted in 1,500 layoffs.

Closures at steel plants, auto factories and other manufacturing hubs across the Midwest are red flags as Trump attempts to reassemble his winning industrial coalition. Even so, Republicans in key states for Trump’s success say the president will have little issue pitching his record. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“His tone and tenor has made it a little harder in some of those more traditional Republican areas. But, I mean, I’ve got everything from pastors to plumbers telling me, ‘Okay, I maybe don’t like the tone, but you’ve got to look at the results,’” said Rep. Bill Huizenga (R-Mich.).

Sahm said declines in manufacturing employment are closely connected to pockets of industrial states that have lagged behind the country. She also pointed to the paltry increase in wages as proof that the labor force has ample room to expand in 2020.

Wages grew just 2.9 percent between December 2018 and 2019 despite unemployment remaining at or below 4 percent. While economists once assumed joblessness at that level would spur massive inflation, Sahm said an influx of workers from the sidelines could help tighten a booming labor market.

“These are the kind of workers that employers just hadn’t been willing to hire … if an employer is willing to hire them, they’re willing to work at a low wage,” Sahm said. 

“If employers can keep going and getting more people,” she added, “we’ve got more hours to give. And that means we’re not at full employment.” 

Click Here: true religion jean short