Wednesday, November 12, 2025

Kitchen Table, Kitchen Sink

By Nick Catoggio

Tuesday, November 11, 2025

 

Watching the president scramble to address the cost of living after last Tuesday’s election drubbing is like watching a lost tourist try to get directions from the locals in their native tongue.

 

He might know a few words, possibly even enough to get his point across. But most of the communication will happen through bold, largely inscrutable gestures.

 

Take the following vignette from Politico describing a meeting last weekend between Donald Trump and Bill Pulte, his henchman in charge of investigating political enemies for mortgage fraud. If you had tasked me with writing a Never Trump satire of how policy ideas gain traction in this administration, I promise that it would have been subtler and more respectful of the president’s intelligence than this:

 

On Saturday evening, Pulte arrived at President Donald Trump’s Palm Beach Golf Club with a roughly 3-by-5 posterboard in hand. A graphic of former President Franklin Roosevelt appeared below “30-year mortgage” and one of Trump below “50-year mortgage.” The headline was “Great American Presidents.”

 

Roughly 10 minutes later, Trump posted the image to Truth Social, according to one of the people familiar, who was with the president at the time.

 

Trump was asked about the idea on Monday in a friendly interview with Fox News, giving him a chance to play it off as a joke or spin it as proof that he’s open to any suggestion to reduce housing costs, no matter how silly. And a 50-year mortgage is silly. It would make home purchases a de facto lifelong obligation, add hundreds of thousands of dollars in interest payments over the term of the loan, and leave homeowners with far less equity when they sell than a 30-year borrower would have.

 

All that, just to reduce the average monthly mortgage payment by a few hundred dollars. It’s preposterous—but not to Trump, who proceeded to defend the scheme to Fox. “It's not even a big deal,” he told Laura Ingraham. “You go from 40 to 50 years. And what it means is you pay something less. From 30, some people had a 40, and now they have a 50. All it means is you pay less per month, you pay it over a longer period of time. It's not like a big factor."

 

If only we had a president with a background in real estate.

 

Get used to idiotic proposals like this being kicked around over the next year, though. In the week since the election, two things have become clear: The White House is very nervous about its political exposure on affordability and plainly hasn’t the foggiest idea of how to address the subject in a serious way. Which means American voters are about to spend the next 51 weeks being courted with one desperate, facile, unworkable cost-of-living Trump gimmick after another.

 

The president is going to take a kitchen-sink approach to kitchen-table issues. He has little choice.

 

Two populisms.

 

Broadly speaking, left-wing populism concerns itself primarily with economics while right-wing populism concerns itself primarily with culture.

 

Bernie Sanders can and will mouth the requisite “woke” platitudes needed to keep him in the good graces of progressives, but his heart clearly isn’t in it. He’s a class warrior, not a culture warrior. Redistribution is what gets him out of bed in the morning.

 

Trump is the opposite. He’s enough of an economic populist to oppose slashing entitlements, but his approach to taxes and spending is fairly standard country-club Republicanism. He’s a culture warrior, not a class warrior. Rounding up illegal immigrants is what puts a spring in his step.

 

No doubt to the president’s horror, it looks likely that economics, not culture, will decide the 2026 midterms.

 

Granted, it was economics more so than culture that decided the 2024 presidential election—and Trump did okay in that one. But the advantage he enjoyed last November no longer obtains: Voters at the time compared the painful inflation of the Biden era to the strong pre-pandemic 2019 economy and decided to bring back the previous guy to hopefully work his magic again. A year later, they’ve discovered that there is no magic. Inflation persists, tariffs are a brake on growth, and—until last Tuesday—the president barely seemed to care.

 

Now he has no choice but to care—and as a culture warrior forced to play class warrior, he lacks a Bernie-esque off-the-shelf suite of policy proposals designed to make life more affordable for lower- and middle-class voters. Like the lost tourist, he’s a non-native speaker trying to communicate with voters in an unfamiliar tongue, so he’s doomed to a series of bold yet largely inscrutable gestures in hopes of signaling intelligibly that he feels their pain.

 

Those gestures have already begun.

 

Bold gestures.

 

The first gesture after Election Day came last Friday when Trump demagogued the meat-packing industry for inflation at the supermarket by accusing it of price gouging. If that sounds familiar, it’s because the Biden administration did the same thing when the cost of living began to bite Democrats politically in the fall of 2021. Americans need someone to blame for why things are expensive, it seems, and intangible market forces like supply and demand ain’t gonna cut it. Our last two presidents have offered up greedy corporations as a scapegoat to appease voters in hopes that they won’t be scapegoated themselves.

 

Trump’s next gesture on affordability came the following day when he addressed the key issue in the shutdown saga, the cost of health care. What if, he said in a Truth Social post, we took the billions in Obamacare subsidies that the federal government currently pays to insurance companies and gave that money to Obamacare customers instead, to buy their own health care plans? Wouldn’t it be better if consumers suddenly had thousands of dollars in their pockets?

 

“Consumer choice” is a fine conservative principle, but there are a lot of moving parts in that reform. For instance, would recipients be required to spend the money on health insurance or would they be free to spend it how they like? If the latter, some are destined to remain uninsured and end up suffering expensive medical emergencies that bankrupt them. Even if we do require them to buy cheap, catastrophic insurance (the return of the mandate!), would those low-premium plans provide insurers with enough revenue to offset the cost of covering Americans’ preexisting conditions, as the law currently obliges them to do?

 

Or are Republicans planning to repeal that very popular aspect of Obamacare?

 

Sunday then brought two more splashy gestures on the cost of living: first, the cockamamie 50-year mortgage scheme, followed by a proposal to pay every American below an unspecified income threshold a $2,000 “dividend” out of tariff revenue collected by the administration. That’s stupid for all sorts of reasons—the Supreme Court might soon hand most of that money back to importers; even if it doesn’t, the government hasn’t raised nearly enough from tariffs to cover the cost of the “dividend”; even if it had, you can imagine what sort of inflationary effect a stimulus of hundreds of billions of dollars might have. (Actually, you don’t have to imagine.)

 

It’s an ideological mess, too. If Trump wants to collect money from American businesses and redistribute it back to the average joe, he might as well go full Bernie by hiking the corporate income tax and using the proceeds to fund new welfare programs. Be the socialist that you are, buddy.

 

Amid all of these bold gestures over the last week, the president has resorted more than once to a talking point that’s tone-deaf at best and politically suicidal at worst, insisting that the supposed affordability crisis is … mostly a figment of voters’ imaginations. That’s another echo of the Biden era, when many Democrats parried complaints about inflation by arguing that the economy’s fundamentals were strong. But Trump has taken the “your lying eyes” approach a step further by simply denying that the cost of living keeps rising.

 

“I don't want to hear about the affordability,” he told reporters last Thursday, alleging that, “Our energy costs are way down. Our groceries are way down. Everything is way down.” On Monday, Fox’s Ingraham asked him if there was a “perception” problem with the economy or if Republicans should be doing more to address voters’ frustrations. “More than anything else, it’s a con job by the Democrats,” the president glibly replied, accusing the media of trying to poison public opinion against him.

 

This is what it looks like when culture warriors are forced to play class warriors, and what it’s going to look like all the way until Election Day 2026.

 

The tool kit.

 

Populists are destined to be bad at policy for the same reason they’re destined to be authoritarians, I think. They believe that social problems result from failures of will, not failures of imagination. If America is bedeviled by some ill, it’s not because the incentive structure created by policymakers to remediate it is flawed. It’s because policymakers lack the nerve to deter the villains behind the problem by inflicting enough pain on them to make them stop.

 

Through a populist lens, every complex problem is simple. According to progressives, for instance, the wealth we need to make America equitable and prosperous for all already exists. It’s just being hoarded by the rich. Muster the will to seize it, and our problems will supposedly be solved.

 

The right’s cultural populism is even simpler: Whatever the problem might be, the solution is to get rough. Deter drug dealing by blowing up boats in the Caribbean. Deter illegal immigration by letting ICE go rogue. Deter resistance to the administration by threatening critics or indicting them. Win wars by letting American soldiers commit war crimes. With enough ruthlessness, any impediment to asserting one’s will can be overcome with ease. It’s not a coincidence that Trump won the 2016 Republican nomination running on a message as elementary as “build the wall.”

 

You can understand, then, why the affordability crisis would leave him feeling at sea and sounding like a lost tourist. Unlike the type of cultural fracas in which he typically involves himself, it’s not a problem that lends itself to a dopey “get rough” solution. High grocery prices, expensive homes, and sky-high health insurance premiums are three complicated and distinct challenges, and Republicans don’t have the ideological luxury that Democrats do of shouting “tax the rich!” or “Medicare for all!” to address them.

 

I doubt the president ever imagined having to be proactive about such issues in a second term, in fact. My guess is that he believed devoutly in his own hype about having an economic Midas touch, in which merely putting him back in charge of America would unleash optimism, ignite job growth, and lower prices. He ran on securing the border and “retribution”; the economy and the rising cost of living were things that would either take care of themselves or be healed through the divine power of tariffs.

 

Now here he is, forced to grapple with serious economic discontent and without the slightest idea of what to do about it—especially health care, a notoriously byzantine system that the GOP has yet to formulate a plan for reforming despite having had 15 years to do so. Is it any surprise that he’s fallen back on the same ol’ demagogic populist tool kit that’s served him well in other political disputes?

 

One tool is blame shifting. This isn’t just part of his kit, of course, but more like his defining personality trait. It’s also the approach he’s taken with meat-packing companies to explain the high cost of beef, not coincidentally.

 

Another tool is bribery. A Trump specialty, the president understands better than most the primal satisfaction of having a fat envelope slipped into your hand. “No tax on tips” was a sneak preview during last year’s campaign of the sort of fiscally goofy gimmickry aimed at buying votes that we’re now seeing with his plan for $2,000 tariff refunds and subsidy payouts to Obamacare consumers.

 

A third is denial. It’s hard to fault Trump for thinking he might persuade Americans that they’re imagining their economic hardship after he spent the last 10 years successfully persuading right-wingers to abandon every conviction they ever had. He convinced enough voters that his coup attempt in 2021 was no big deal that they returned him to office last November, didn’t he? Go figure that he believes he can talk his way out of the basic day-to-day reality of what things cost, too.

 

The fourth tool is ruthlessness. We haven’t yet reached the point where Trump seeks to lower prices by executive order, but it’s a cinch that we will. The populist imperative to “get rough” with problems will eventually lead him to market-distorting authoritarian interventions like price controls to show voters that he’s pulling out all the stops to try to make life easier for them. And no, of course it won’t matter that he blasted Kamala Harris as a “communist” during the campaign for proposing something similar. He’s already warmed up to Harris-style “communism” in other respects.

 

Hucksterism.

 

Beyond all of that, insofar as there are serious solutions to affordability problems available to the White House—like incentivizing states to make it easier to build housing—those reforms would take years to pay political dividends even if implemented today. For a civic-minded president, that would be fine; for Trump, it’s a nonstarter because it doesn’t solve the electoral problem that’s looming for him in November of next year.

 

Never has America had a leader who cares less about what happens after he’s gone and his personal reputation no longer depends on the country’s success. A long-term plan to boost the supply of housing can’t be his main proposal on the cost of living because it fails to answer the question that guides all of his actions. What’s in it for him, electorally or otherwise?

 

When you elect a huckster, you’ll get policy “solutions” that appeal to a huckster. The president’s instant attraction to 50-year mortgages is almost a parody of that: It’s a quick, simple fix to reduce monthly housing payments, never mind its many deleterious consequences, and quick, simple fixes are just what a salesman would offer when he’s desperate to make a sale to voters by next November. The fact that Bill Pulte’s inane idea allegedly went from posterboard mock-up to presidential statement in 10 minutes perfectly captures the “here’s something I just thought of” unseriousness with which Trump will approach the cost of living over the next year.

 

He’s going to throw every half-baked huckster-ish idea he hears about how to make life cheaper at the proverbial wall and force Democrats to explain to voters why it can’t or shouldn’t be enacted. In the past, the right always struggled to “outbid” the left in promising free stuff to Americans, restrained by conservative principles and a basic tether to fiscal reality. Trump is restrained by neither. He’ll say anything to sell Americans a monorail.

 

And this electorate might buy it. He’s president for a reason, you know.

No comments: