roadblock

From the outside looking in, Gov. Gavin Newsom unofficially announced he was running for president on Thursday, March 30, 2023, the day he transferred $10 million from his state campaign funds to launch his PAC, Campaign for Democracy, along with a nationwide tour. Newsom unofficially suspended his campaign a month later, on April 25, the day President Biden announced he was seeking reelection.

This timeline is important when it comes to talking about Kamala Harris. Newsom, like Harris, has been in the wings for years as part of the next generation of Democratic national leaders — and, like Harris, he was ready for the spotlight when Biden decided to stick around instead.

The title of Harris’ upcoming book, “107 Days,” is in reference to the amount of time she had to launch a campaign, write policy, secure the nomination and fundraise after Biden bowed out in the summer of 2024. An excerpt from the memoir titled “The Constant Battle” was published this week in the Atlantic. In it, Harris suggests some of the foes she was battling during her time in the White House were Biden loyalists who did not want to see her succeed as vice president.

It’s a rather scathing critique given the stakes of the 2024 election. The excerpt in its entirety is an uncomfortable glimpse into one of the most chaotic moments in American politics. Unsurprisingly there have already been reports of pushback from former Biden aides with one being quoted as saying: “No one wants to hear your pity party.”

Which is why it is important to remember the timeline.

In March 2020, while campaigning in Detroit, a 77-year-old Biden stood next to Harris, Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey and Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and told his party that he viewed himself “as a bridge, not as anything else,” adding: “There’s an entire generation of leaders you saw stand behind me. They are the future of this country.” Recognizing his age was a concern for voters back then, the message Biden sent that day suggested he was running for only one term.

And then more than three years later, Biden changed his mind and his message. In doing so, he did not just go back on a campaign promise, he prevented the future of his party — like Newsom, Whitmer, Booker and Harris — from making a case for themselves in a normal primary.

That’s why the book is called “107 Days.” That’s how much time he gave his would-be successor to win the presidency.

Biden was a tremendous public servant whose leadership steered this nation out of a dark time. He also was conspicuously old when he ran for president and considered a short-timer. The first woman to be elected vice president didn’t decide to run for the top job at the last minute. But Biden went back on his word in 2023 and drained all the energy out of his party. It was only after the disastrous debate performance of June 2024 that the whispers inside the Beltway about his ability to win finally became screams.

“Joe was already polling badly on the age issue, with roughly 75 percent of voters saying he was too old to be an effective president,” Harris writes. “Then he started taking on water for his perceived blank check to Benjamin Netanyahu in Gaza.”

That’s not slander against Biden; that’s the timeline. It may not be what some progressives want to read, but that does not mean the message or messenger is wrong.

Legend has it James Carville, key strategist for Bill Clinton’s 1992 presidential run, once went to a white board at the campaign’s headquarters in Arkansas and wrote three key messaging points for staffers. The catchiness and humor of one, “the economy, stupid,” elevated it above the other two: “change vs. more of the same” and “don’t forget health care.” Clinton’s victory would later cement “the economy, stupid” as one of the Democratic Party’s most enduring political quips — which is really too bad.

Because the whole point of Carville going to the white board in the first place wasn’t to come up with a memorable zinger, it was to remind staffers to stay on the course. The Democrats’ 2024 chances were endangered the day Biden changed direction by running for reelection, not when he stepped aside and Harris stood in the gap.

That’s not to suggest her campaign did everything right or Biden staying in for as long as he did was totally wrong. But there’s a lot to learn right now. Democrats are extremely unpopular. Perhaps instead of dismissing the account of the party’s most recent nominee, former Biden aides and other progressives should take in as much information as they possibly can and consider it constructive feedback.

In 2020, Biden had one message. In 2023, it was the opposite. I’m sure there are things to blame Harris for. Losing the 2024 election isn’t one of them.

YouTube: @LZGrandersonShow

Since President Donald Trump stared enacting tariffs earlier this year, everyone from Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell to the average retail investor has been trying to figure out how they will affect the economy and whether they will reignite inflation.

So far, the economy and inflation seem to be OK. However, it’s still early, and the tariffs are constantly changing, which makes understanding the longer-term impact even more difficult.

The Trump administration and many in support of tariffs have said that they will not lead to higher inflation and have been lobbying Powell to lower interest rates. But make no mistake: President Trump has a tariff problem that could be a roadblock for a stock market hovering around all-time highs.

Somebody is going to have to bear the cost

Tariffs are a tax on imported goods, intended to make foreign goods more expensive, therefore aiding the competitive position of domestically made goods. So far, Trump’s tariffs have brought in significant revenue, including more than $29 billion in customs and excise taxes in July. In prior years, the monthly customs and excise taxes have amounted to less than $10 billion.

Official White House Photo by Tia Dufour.

However, most economists and other experts point out that someone has to foot the bill, which is why they are concerned about an eventual rebound in inflation. Up until now, inflation has remained subdued, or at least not risen like some expected, although core inflation rose in both June and July.

But the biggest indicator that higher inflation could be cooking came after a recent Producer Price Index (PPI) report. Although the PPI is not as widely followed as the Consumer Price Index (CPI), the July PPI certainly moved markets this month.

That index looks at the change in producer prices across industries and essentially serves as a gauge of wholesale inflation. What investors should think about is that if manufacturers are seeing price increases, how long until those funnel down and eventually hit consumers?

The July PPI increased 0.9% from the prior month, significantly higher than the consensus estimate of 0.2%. It was the biggest monthly increase since June of 2022, a period of extremely high inflation in the U.S.

CalBay Investments Chief Market Strategist Clark Geranen recently told CNBC: “The fact that PPI was stronger than expected and CPI has been relatively soft suggests that businesses are eating much of the tariff costs instead of passing them on to the consumer. Businesses may soon start to reverse course and start passing these costs to consumers.”

Prior to the PPI report, traders betting on changes in the federal funds rate had placed a nearly 99% chance that the Fed would cut interest rates at its September meeting. As of this writing on Aug. 19, that percentage had dropped to about 85%, according to CME Group‘s FedWatch tool.

The stock market is pricing in significant rate cuts

President Trump’s problem, in my view, is that the market is pricing in significant interest rate cuts. Between now and the end of 2026, the forward curve indicates there will be five cuts. While the market doesn’t necessarily want the Fed to have to make cuts due to some kind of severe recession or economic downturn, incremental cuts to support the economy and keep it on sound footing are expected to bolster the market, which seems to be a contributor in driving it to new all-time highs on numerous occasions this year.

Powell won’t cut rates five times if the Fed sees inflation moving higher, because that could put the economy in a stagflation scenario, where unemployment and inflation are both moving higher, making it more difficult for the Fed to achieve its dual mandate of stable prices and maximum employment.

I think the tariffs at the very least will keep the market and the Fed in a period of uncertainty, making it potentially difficult for the Fed to cut rates as much as the market hopes. With the stock market hovering near all-time highs and with a stretched valuation, I believe this dynamic could create a roadblock for the market.

The proposed Dodger Stadium gondola hit a major roadblock Thursday, when a state appeals court rejected Metro’s approval of the environmental impact report for the project.

The project, proposed in 2018 by former Dodgers owner Frank McCourt, requires approval from Metro, the Los Angeles City Council, Caltrans and the state parks agency.

None of the other approvals have been obtained, and the court decision Thursday requires Metro to “set aside its certification of the EIR” and “set aside its approval of the project” until a revised environmental impact report can be completed.

The gondola would run from Union Station to Dodger Stadium and would cost $385 million to $500 million to build and another $8 million to $10 million per year to operate and maintain, according to the report. Those costs, it said, could be covered by private bond financing, sponsorships, naming rights and fares — although fans have been promised free rides to Dodger games.

Metro approved the environmental impact report 15 months ago. The California Endowment and the Los Angeles Parks Alliance sued to throw out the report, on the basis Metro had not properly followed state environmental laws in approving it. The bid was denied by the Los Angeles Superior Court last August, but the plaintiffs won their appeal Thursday.