Ground Game: Trump's tariff uncertainty, transactional diplomacy and Bernie Sanders leadership
This newsletter was originally sent out via email to our Ground Game subscribers on March 10. You can subscribe at any time at apnews.com/newsletters.
By Meg Kinnard
President Donald Trump is dismissing business concerns over the uncertainty caused by his planned tariffs on a range of American trading partners and the prospect of higher prices. We take a look at his latest comments.
Welcome to this week's edition of AP Ground Game.
Policy changes, but facts endure. AP delivers accurate, fact-based journalism to keep the world informed in every administration. Support independent reporting today. Donate.
THE HEADLINES
Trump downplays business concerns about uncertainty from tariffs
The president last week imposed and then quickly paused 25% tariffs on imports from Mexico and Canada that sent markets tumbling over concerns of a trade war. Trump said in a taped interview with Fox News Channel's 'Sunday Morning Futures' that his plans for broader 'reciprocal tariffs' will go into effect April 2, raising them to match what other countries assess.
Asked about the Atlanta Fed's warning of an economic contraction in the first quarter of the year, Trump seemingly acknowledged that his plans could affect U.S. growth. Still, he claimed, it would ultimately be "great for us.'
The comments came after a week on Wall Street with wild swings dominated by tariff uncertainty and worries about the economy.
When questioned whether he was expecting a recession in 2025, Trump responded: 'I hate to predict things like that. There is a period of transition because what we're doing is very big. We're bringing wealth back to America. That's a big thing.' He then added, 'It takes a little time. It takes a little time.
Trump brushed aside concerns from businesses seeking stability as they make investment decisions. He said that 'for years the globalists, the big globalists have been ripping off the United States" and that now, "all we're doing is getting some of it back, and we're going to treat our country fairly." Read more.
Of note:
More tariffs are coming this week, with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick telling NBC's 'Meet the Press' that 25% tariffs on steel and aluminum imports will take effect Wednesday. Lutnick said Trump's threatened tariffs on Canadian dairy and lumber though would wait until April.
Tens of thousands of Mexicans rally with president to celebrate US decision to delay tariffs
Trump's transactional diplomacy is a driving force on the world stage
Politics and presidents to a certain degree are all transactional. But Trump, who helped make himself a household name by burnishing an image as an intrepid real estate dealmaker, is taking it to another level.
Money talks, and Trump on Thursday told reporters that he has decided to make Saudi Arabia the first overseas visit of his new term because the oil-rich kingdom has agreed to make a huge investment in the United States over the next four years.
'They've gotten richer, we've all gotten older. So I said, 'I'll go if you pay a trillion dollars, $1 trillion to American companies,'' Trump said. He also made the kingdom his first overseas stop during his first White House term after the Saudis promised $450 billion in U.S. investment.
Trump is also keeping his eye on who appears to have the upper hand among other countries. In his dealings with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Russian President Vladimir Putin, Trump repeatedly said Putin has 'the cards' and Zelenskyy does not.
Zelenskyy appeared to be making some strides in assuaging Trump after their recent rocky meeting in the Oval Office ended with Trump and Vice President JD Vance criticizing the Ukrainian leader for what they said was insufficient gratitude for the tens of billions of dollars in U.S. assistance provided in the three years since Russia invaded. Read more.
China learned from Trump's first trade war and changed its tactics when tariffs came again
Trump will lead task force preparing for 2026 World Cup
Bernie Sanders steps into leadership of the anti-Trump resistance
At 83 years old, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is not running for president again. But the stooped and silver-haired democratic socialist has emerged as a leader of the resistance to Trump's second presidency.
In tearing into Trump's seizure of power and warning about the consequences of firing tens of thousands of government workers, Sanders is bucking the wishes of those who want Democrats to focus on the price of eggs or 'roll over and play dead.' For now, at least, Sanders stands alone as the only elected progressive willing to mount a national campaign to harness the fear and anger of the sprawling anti-Trump movement.
He drew a crowd of 4,000 in Kenosha, Wisconsin, on Friday and faced another 2,600 or so the next morning a few hours away in Altoona, Wisconsin, a town of less than 10,000 residents. And Sanders' crowd of 9,000 in suburban Detroit exceeded his own team's expectations, each stop intentionally designed in a swing U.S. House district represented by a Republican.
Of note:
Sanders' team waited in the early weeks of the Trump presidency to launch what they are now calling his 'stop oligarchy tour' to see if a high-profile Democrat would fill the leadership void.
'I'm not running for president and this is not a campaign,' Sanders told The Associated Press. 'You gotta do what you gotta do. The country's in trouble and I want to play my role.'
House Republicans unveil bill to avoid shutdown and they're daring Democrats to oppose it
Why should America worry about Trump? Try the price of eggs, say some Democrats
IN PHOTOS
U.S. Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-NY, U.S. Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., Rev. Al Sharpton, Rev. Jesse Jackson and NAACP President Derick Johnson, from left, march across the Edmund Pettus bridge during the 60th anniversary of the march to ensure that African Americans could exercise their constitutional right to vote, Sunday, March 9, 2025, in Selma, Ala. (AP Photo/Mike Stewart)
According to Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, 25% tariffs on steel and aluminum imports take effect Wednesday.
2025 COUNTDOWN
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
17 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Americans are questioning the value of a college degree. Trump is joining the debate.
President Donald Trump wants to tweak a traditionalfeature of the American dream: a college degree. Trump has continued to escalate his battle with Harvard University, threatening to cut off the Ivy League school from federal funding if it does not meet the administration's demands, which include eliminating diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives and cracking down on campus activism. The latest threat against Harvard, however, floated shifting funding to trade schools, an alternative path to a four-year college degree. "I am considering taking Three Billion Dollars of Grant Money away from a very antisemitic Harvard, and giving it to TRADE SCHOOLS all across our land," Trump wrote in a May 26 post on Truth Social. "What a great investment that would be for the USA, and so badly needed!!!" The White House's press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, added onto the president's comments in an interview with Fox News: "Apprenticeships, electricians, plumbers, we need more of those in our country, and less LGBTQ graduate majors from Harvard University. And that's what this administration's position is." Over the past few years, a growing number of Americans have started to question the value of a college degree due to high costs and a tough labor market, making trade schools and apprenticeships a favorable alternative. It marks a shift in the standard American dream, in which a four-year college degree had been viewed as a step to middle-class success. However, Jon Fansmith, assistant vice president of government relations at the American Council on Education, told Business Insider that taking funding away from Harvard and other research institutions isn't the answer to boosting investment in trade schools. "The money that he is talking about withholding from Harvard is money that Congress provided to research agencies to perform advanced scientific and biomedical research," Fansmith said, adding that Harvard earned grant money because "they had the best researchers, the best laboratory facilities, the best understanding of how to advance that science," he continued. "You can't simply take that money and use it for another purpose." Madi Biedermann, deputy assistant secretary for communications at the Department of Education, told BI that "American universities that are committed to their academic mission, protect students on campus, and follow all federal laws will have no problem accessing generous taxpayer support for their programs." 'Two very separate stories' Higher education doesn't have the same draw that it once did. Some Gen Zers previously told BI that despite being taught that college was the primary path to success, they felt they could make a living by directly entering the workforce or going to trade school. Please help BI improve our Business, Tech, and Innovation coverage by sharing a bit about your role — it will help us tailor content that matters most to people like you. What is your job title? (1 of 2) Entry level position Project manager Management Senior management Executive management Student Self-employed Retired Other Continue By providing this information, you agree that Business Insider may use this data to improve your site experience and for targeted advertising. By continuing you agree that you accept the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy . That's why Trump's push to invest more in trade schools is important, Fansmith said — they help Americans get a stable career to support themselves and their families, and the federal government can help support those schools by asking Congress to approve more funding, not redirecting the funding unilaterally. "There are two stories here. One is this administration's attack on Harvard, and the other is, what is the role of trade schools, and is there a need for more support for trade schools? And as much as the president's trying to conflate the two, those are two very separate stories," Fansmith said. While Trump's big spending bill proposes some provisions to expand Pell grant eligibility to short-term programs, it does not detail a significant funding increase for trade schools. The Trump administration's rhetorical focus on trade schools isn't new. Before he won the 2024 election, Linda McMahon, now Trump's education secretary, wrote an opinion piece in The Hill advocating for the expansion of Pell Grant eligibility to workforce training programs. "Our educational system must offer clear and viable pathways to the American Dream aside from four-year degrees," she wrote. Trump also signed an executive order on April 23 to strengthen and expand workforce development and apprenticeships programs, which McMahon called a "significant step in ensuring every American can live their American Dream." Congress' role in rethinking education For years, Democratic lawmakers have been pushing for greater access to postsecondary education options, like free community college, and there has been bipartisan agreement on the need to boost apprenticeships and workforce programs without redirecting funding from higher education institutions. Amid the heightened focus on alternatives to a four-year college degree, the New York Federal Reserve said in a recent report that college still pays off; the median worker with a college degree earns about $80,000 a year, compared to $47,000 for a worker with just a high school diploma. Trump hasn't yet implemented his idea to redirect Harvard's federal funding to trade schools, and it's unclear how, or if, he will attempt to follow through. While he has already withheld billions of dollars from Harvard and other schools across the country for failing to meet his administration's political demands, the moves have been met with lawsuits, and Fansmith said it's likely more legal action would ensue should Trump attempt to move around funding without congressional approval. "We're talking about spending money that Congress said would go to support really critically needed research into things like cancer and Alzheimer's and diabetes, and other things that impact everyday Americans' lives, and give it to trade schools," Fansmith said. "Trade schools are great schools. They have lots of benefits. They deserve a lot of federal support, but not just to make a political point at the expense of Harvard." Jason Altmire, president and CEO of Career Education Colleges and Universities — a group that represents for-profit colleges — said in a statement that Trump's focus on trade schools "is an investment in America's workforce." "The best way to support trade schools is to reduce the regulatory burden facing private career schools while increasing funding that allows students interested in the trades to choose the highest quality school," Altmire said.
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why Viasat Stock Floated Higher Today
It benefited from a growing dispute between President Trump and Elon Musk. If the latter loses federal government business for Starlink, Viasat could potentially poach such clients. 10 stocks we like better than Viasat › Satellite stocks were in vogue in late trading on Thursday, thanks to a rapidly escalating spat between two of the most high-profile individuals in the world. A beneficiary of this was Viasat (NASDAQ: VSAT), which ended up booking a 2.6% gain in its share price on the day. That made it an outperformer in light of the S&P 500 index's 0.5% decline. Earlier in the day, a social media war of words erupted between President Trump and former Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) head Elon Musk. That occurred just after Musk, on his X (formerly Twitter) platform, leveled criticisms against Trump's One Big, Beautiful Bill currently making rather jagged progress through the Senate. In one of several responses on Trump's favored social media platform, Truth Social, the president made what can easily be taken as a direct and unambiguous threat to Musk's various businesses. He wrote that "The easiest way to save money in our budget, billions and billions of dollars, is to terminate Elon's governmental subsidies and contracts." Among Musk's businesses, which of course include Tesla, are SpaceX and Starlink. The latter company counts federal government agencies such as the Departments of Defense and Commerce as its clients. If such revenue sources were indeed to be cut off suddenly, the move would have quite a detrimental effect on Space X. Its loss would surely be rivals' gain; hence the interest in Viasat. The company provides satellite services that rival those of Starlink. Of course, so far there have been tough words but no action in regards to shutting off the federal taps that flow to Musk's business. Personally, I wouldn't trade Viasat or any potential beneficiary on rhetoric alone right now, but this is a rapidly developing story that's worth monitoring for anyone invested in satellite or space stocks presently. Before you buy stock in Viasat, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Viasat wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $668,538!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $869,841!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 789% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 172% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 2, 2025 Eric Volkman has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Tesla. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Why Viasat Stock Floated Higher Today was originally published by The Motley Fool Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
Boston Globe
33 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
My father helped create public media. He'd say we need it now, more than ever
Now the Trump administration is not only trying to end public media but also attempting to claw back more than $1 billion in public media funds that Congress has already approved. Those who support this move Advertisement But there are problems with that argument. First, commercial media executives understand that attention is currency, and Advertisement Second, paid subscriptions are expensive, and many Americans simply can't afford them. Public media is a bargain by comparison. Third, commercial media companies don't have the incentive to operate in the public's best interest; they do have the incentive to convert eyeballs into revenue sources. For example, in youth programming, the focus is often on the commercials, selling toys and sugary snacks to kids. And content for kids on platforms such as YouTube can range from vapid to dangerous at a time when busy parents often use screen time to supplement entertainment or education. For these parents, it has become exhausting to choose what's OK for their children, and even more exhausting to know which platforms are trustworthy. The truth is, at a time when half of kids don't have access to preschool, federally funded, responsible content is a great investment in the next generation. Lastly, the commercial market has also collapsed for news. According to the Advertisement Access to reliable information is crucial in a democracy. As Bill Moyers once Like libraries and schools, public media offers access to knowledge and critical thinking, which is essential for learning and for democracy. The government should strengthen — not undermine — nonprofit educational media, especially now. I hope that my Dad's call for 'public interest' media prevails, rather than the alternative: an expensive wasteland even more vast — and dangerous — than he could have ever imagined.
