Author Archives: Hue White

It’s time for that 6 week checkup on DJT, stock symbol for Trump Media & Technology Group Corp., I seem to indulge in. What progress has President Trump’s attempt at running a company based solely on his personal appeal made? Here’s its one month chart of stock prices:

Six weeks ago, February 21, 2025, the price of DJT was $27.80; DJT‘s price is is down 32% since. It’s fair to say DJT is paying the same price as the stocks of nearly all the other public companies on the market, due to President Trump’s deficient understanding of historical incidents and/or financial maneuvering.

For those who haven’t kept up, I refer to his imposition of tariffs on every bit of land in sight, including islands only occupied by penguins, using Congressional powers delegated to the office of President by Congress many years ago. A legislative branch controlled by rational folks would have withdrawn this delegation almost immediately; this provincial collection of dependent wusses? We’ll have to see if they remain a pack of dogs competing frantically for Trump favors, or if they’ll be growing up anytime soon. Long-time readers know about the Earl Landgrebe nominations on this blog, but I fear I have not kept up with the veritable shitstorm of potential nominations. Here’s an example for the curious.

Back to our subject, DJT‘s valuation (stock price X #outstanding shares) remains a bit over $4 billion, a mystifying fact in the face of a corporation with a primary, and even sole, offering of also-ran social media platform Truth Social, featuring Donald J. Trump. I am glad I was not one of those naive fools who were initial investors in this venture, or con if you prefer. My expectation is that’s lost money.

For those foreign leaders looking to bribe the President of the United States, perhaps offering and consummating a buyout of DJT at twice the price would be effective.

But DJT is not a proxy for President Trump’s popularity or respect accorded to him, or lack thereof; I think it’d be a mistake to use DJT for projecting political futures or maneuvers. Its price reflects the judgment of professionals of various disciplines: analysts of corporate ventures, financial advisors, and investors. These are modulated by market manipulators, who are naturally of a dishonest nature, and usually of foreign origin. At the moment, given DJT‘s valuation, the latter retain an advantage, along with that portion of the honest investing public who do not understand the essential nature of DJT and its principal. That advantage, however, is leaking away.

I expect DJT to move with the market. If the President abandons tariffs, it’ll move up with the balance of the market, and if he’s stubborn and insists that tariffs are, somehow, taxes on foreigners, it’ll move down, again with the market.

But I’m no financial guy. I’m a broken down software engineer, and this is just my view of DJT.

From Maddowblog: a few days ago:

* While much of the attention in the April 1 elections has focused on the Wisconsin Supreme Court election and the congressional special elections in Florida, Bolts’ Daniel Nichanian highlighted some of the down-ballot contests that election waters will be keeping an eye on.

Evolution improves H₂O? Steve Benen of Maddowblog has the story soon, I’m sure.

From CNN/Politics:

Kilmar Abrego Garcia was mistakenly deported. In a tense hearing, DOJ wouldn’t say where he is. What happens next?

Does the Administration realize that failure to do one’s defined duty …

Less than a day after the Supreme Court said the Trump administration had to “facilitate” the return of a man mistakenly deported to El Salvador, the case appeared headed for even murkier waters.

… shall result in dismissal and possible criminal trial? The Presidency is not a safe space for Mr Trump to hide; it is a position of responsibility and exposure to the worst metaphorical winds a civilian might face.

And the fact that he’s C-in-C makes it worse. We’re not talking bankruptcy or Mr Trump living on the streets. We’re talking about trial followed by execution.

And members of MAGA had best pay attention. If Mr Trump can break the law and ignore SCOTUS, why does any MAGA-head think they’re safe?

Following a couple of links last night I ran across this, from United24 Media:

Ukrainian forces have found an effective counter to Russia’s long-range glide bombs, particularly the notorious UMPK  kits used to convert conventional bombs into guided munitions, said Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Oleksandr Syrskyi in an interview with Ukrainian media outlet Lb.ua on April 9.

“We have a sufficient number of electronic warfare systems that disrupt the guidance of enemy glide bombs,” said Syrskyi.

“It was flying in one direction, and then for some reason veered off in another. The battle between guidance systems and electronic warfare is constant—just like the contest between drones and EW.”

Syrskyi confirmed for the first time that electronic warfare (EW) systems are now Ukraine’s primary defense against Russian glide bombs, including KABs equipped with UMPK kits. These bombs rely heavily on satellite navigation, which can be jammed or spoofed to mislead them off course.

I’ve not heard of this news site before, but I quote it only for context, because we know: Ukraine perseveres.

What does this mean?

In standard evolutionary biology, the individuals of a species face challenges as each, in their own way, tries to perpetuate the species. When most of the members of a species are facing the same, new challenge, this is an evolutionary pressure on the species, and it can be existential.

That is, find a way to survive it, or the species goes extinct. Evolve a defense against that new predatory species, or learn to metabolize oxygen, for example.

The thing is, the surviving species often move from weak sister to big brother. If & when Ukraine survives Putin’s War, what will most likely emerge is a stronger, tougher nation, a nation that knows how to make war – and, with thanks to Professor Turchin, why to avoid going to war.

They survived the first week of Putin’s War, when Putin expected them to collapse in a few days. That was 24 February 2022. More than three years later, they continue to survive. They’ve learned how to deal with allies, with Russian meat attacks, Russian tanks, use and defend against drone warfare, and now glide bombs.

They’ll have some skills that no one else has, if they survive. That’s something to remember.

Plimsoll mark:

The Plimsoll line is a reference mark located on a ship’s hull that indicates the maximum depth to which the vessel may be safely immersed when loaded with cargo. This depth varies with a ship’s dimensions, type of cargo, time of year, and the water densities encountered in port and at sea. Once these factors have been accounted for, a ship’s captain can determine the appropriate Plimsoll line needed for the voyage[.] [NOAA]

Noted in the video “How Exactly Is A Ship Weighed?” by Oceanliner Designs:

You know, the one that uses an overhead projector and uses sand to make pictures. The movie on Spaceweather.com today reminds me of that.

Go on, hit the link. I’ll not steal the video. Someone made it for Spaceweather, so I shan’t interfere. And I do think it’s real cool.

On the hoof:

From last week’s Wisconsin Supreme Court race:

As the first news outlets began calling the Wisconsin Supreme Court election for the liberal candidate Susan Crawford, her opponent called her — to concede.

Minutes later Tuesday night, the conservative-backed Brad Schimel took the stage at his watch party to acknowledge the loss. Angry yells broke out. One woman began to chant about his opponent: “Cheater.”

Schimel didn’t hesitate. “No,” he responded. “You’ve got to accept the results.” Later, he returned to the stage with his classic rock cover band to jam on his bass. [AP]

Schimel is a classy dude when it comes to the basics of democracy. While the Wisconsin Republican Party has conducted itself extremely poorly over the last decade or so, there are still Republicans who know how this is supposed to go.

One of those Republicans who’ve been less than gracious was Michael Gableman, a lawyer and former judge and occasional subject of this blog. He seems to received a dose of comeuppance:

Former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman, who led a widely derided review of the 2020 presidential election,  searching for evidence for baseless accusations of fraud, will have his law license suspended for three years, according to a stipulated agreement between him and the state Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR).

Law Forward, the progressive voting rights focused firm, filed a grievance against Gableman with the OLR in 2023. The OLR filed a complaint against Gableman in November that alleged, among other counts, that he had failed to “provide competent representation” and to “abstain from all offensive personality” and of violating attorney-client privilege. [Wisconsin Examiner]

Perhaps the officials of the Wisconsin Republican Party will pay attention to this object lesson and stop acting like idiots.

This morning the markets reflect the tariff war with which President Trump is afflicting the world, but there’s an outcome that I worry about. Here’s CNN/Business:

Trump also threatened to slap an extra 50% tariff on China if the country doesn’t back down from its retaliatory tariffs it announced Friday. China’s Commerce Ministry on Tuesday said the country would “fight to the end” of the trade war and would continue to stand up to Trump.

The escalating trade war between the two largest economies is turning into a high-stakes game of chicken. China may be staring down a midnight deadline to avoid tariffs surging over 100%, but it so far it is standing up to Trump, with no signs of blinking.

China has squashed deals that Trump wants – including a US company taking control of ports on both sides of the Panama Canal and a deal to sell TikTok to a US-based company. Both countries’ economies would be hurt in a trade war – and given the massive trade imbalance with the United States, China could very well be hurt worse.

Here’s the thing about autocracies like China – leaders, especially those who attain lifetime positions, like Xi Jinping, tend to leave only when dead – and rarely voluntarily. They become victims of their failures or their rivals.

And, knowing that, thrusting China and, therefore, Xi into a crisis like this may have existential overtones for Xi. This could lead to violence.

For all the bluster from both sides, neither wants to take this to the next level. Neither leader can afford to have the citizenry become restive, Trump moreso than Xi. After all, Xi can spin a brutal response as Being necessarily tough, but here in the States, while such a claim would gain some supporters, the substantial opinion to a brutal response will be to place Trump in an inferior position to most other leaders, domestic and foreign.

If you have to oppress your citizens, you’re not a strong leader. You’re weak and a bit of an idiot – and in danger of being run out of town.

So watching this play out should prove very interesting.

Spaceweather.com has a warning for folks with associations to objects in orbit around Mercury, Venus … Earth:

THE CENTENNIAL GLEISSBERG CYCLE: You’ve heard of the 11-year sunspot cycle. But what about the Centennial Gleissberg Cycle? The Gleissberg Cycle is a slow modulation of the solar cycle, which suppresses sunspot numbers every 80 to 100 years. It may have been responsible for the remarkable weakness of Solar Cycle 24 in 2012-2013. New research published in the journal Space Weather suggests that the minimum of the Gleissberg Cycle has just passed. If so, solar cycles for the next 50 years could become increasingly intense. Read the paper here.

Along with the phenomenon causing the cycle, folks like Elon Musk, sponsor of the StarLink family of satellites, should have long term concerns about those objects in orbit for which they have responsibility. A big CME could burn out the electronics of those objects.

No fingerpointing, please.

Force majeure:

Force majeure is a clause included in contracts to remove liability for unforeseeable and unavoidable catastrophes interrupting the expected timeline and preventing participants from fulfilling obligations. These clauses generally cover natural disasters like hurricanes, tornadoes, and earthquakes, and human actions, such as armed conflict and human-made diseases. [Investopedia]

Noted in this article title: Tariffs: Howmet Declares Force Majeure; Nintendo, Jaguar Impact, from Investor’s Business Daily, via yahoo! finance.

That’ll tickle President Trump’s … fancy.

The crocuses are blooming.

Last night my Arts Editor and I saw Lettice and Lovage at Theatre In The Round in Minneapolis. This production was quite long, 3+ hours, so be prepared if you go.

The first Act was a bit stodgy, although it did end on a high note; the second Act moved along at a faster, more interesting clip.

The third Act was the best, as various loose ends and what we considered to be throwaway elements came back to haunt the characters. Although bits of it seemed forced, the actors do forget the necessary bonds between the other characters and the audience.

Definitely a mixed bag, as a few audience members disappeared during the intermissions; this production doesn’t appeal to all temperaments. But it may appeal to your’s! A bit of whimsy and an appreciation for characters who find society lacking in graceful aesthetics, and the consequences thereof, is necessary.

Good luck.

“How it got into the hotel bar, I’ll never know.” With apologies to Grouch Marx.^[1]

Sorry. Not really. What triggered some pleasant silliness in this time of shock & unhappiness?

Indeed, many AI scientists are increasingly of the view that LLMs aren’t a route to the lofty goal of artificial general intelligence (AGI), capable of matching or exceeding anything a human can do – a machine that can think, as Turing would have put it. For example, in a recent survey of AI researchers, about 76 per cent of respondents said it was “unlikely” or “very unlikely” that current approaches will succeed in achieving AGI.

Instead, perhaps we need to think of these AIs in a new way. Writing in the journal Science this week, a team of AI researchers says they “should not be viewed primarily as intelligent agents but as a new kind of cultural and social technology, allowing humans to take advantage of information other humans have accumulated”. The researchers compare LLMs to “such past technologies as writing, print, markets, bureaucracies, and representative democracies” that have transformed the way we access and process information. [“Should governments really be using AI to remake the state?” NewScientist (22 March 2025)]

I’ve expressed my opinion that generative AI is little more than a party trick for quite a while, as long-time readers may recall. Its use as a summarizer, however, may be of use in certain situations – although generative AI’s propensity for fallaciousness must give users pause.

But I also wonder why this took so long. Could it be caused by the marketing magic of the artificial intelligence industry? Ask most any AI researcher, and reportedly they will tell you that that what is popularly called artificial intelligence isn’t. It’s better known as machine learning. It even has a well-known acronym, which is ML.

In case you’re wondering, the mythical artificial intelligence is that which can pass the famous Turing Test,

… is a test of a machine’s ability to exhibit intelligent behaviour equivalent to that of a human. In the test, a human evaluator judges a text transcript of a natural-language conversation between a human and a machine. The evaluator tries to identify the machine, and the machine passes if the evaluator cannot reliably tell them apart. The results would not depend on the machine’s ability to answer questions correctly, only on how closely its answers resembled those of a human. Since the Turing test is a test of indistinguishability in performance capacity, the verbal version generalizes naturally to all of human performance capacity, verbal as well as nonverbal (robotic). [Wikipedia]

Or, in other words, think of your friends and being able to depend on an AI to be as conceited and self-centered as them while spouting mathematical proofs of arcane propositions.

ML? Sure, here’s the Wikipedia definition, but I like mine better. Problem solving is the process of moving from state A (“my car won’t start!”) to state B (“my car started!”). If you know how to get from A to B, you don’t need ML (or AI, either). But if you don’t know how to get from A to B, nor does anyone else, then ML may be applicable. ML has proven reasonably good at discerning rules for taking a set of data (“This set of data represents a breast X-ray”) and discovering its implications (“You have breast cancer!”), if shown what similar sets of data implies.

I’m a bit off the beaten track, so let me get back to marketing. I’ve been somewhat fascinated by the thought that some of our current social chaos is caused by sloppy thinking. For example, those who want socialized medicine, aka single-payer healthcare, will occasionally make the argument that the citizenry deserves free healthcare. They make that statement with great sincerity.

And it’s just total bullshit. If my reader discards the well-meaning but lazy Well, I know what they mean filter, and turns on their literal interpretation capability, the “argument,” such as it is, collapses in a cloud of dust.

And if I continue on along this abstract track, I soon ask if such bad rhetorical devices are actually infecting their reasoning with bad consequences. Our example is certainly unconvincing, but rather than finding more effective arguments, it functions as a placeholder, a checkmark: I made an argument, one that is approved by my fellow enthusiasts. In that sense, the bad rhetorical argument binds together a disparate collection of individuals into a group, which implies social bonds, social hierarchies, and the whole bit of what Western Civilization pursues. It helps accomplish an unstated goal while actually hindering the putative goal.

As I said, it’s better to think of AI as ML, but if we call it AI, a phrase which comes with certain implications consequent of its parts, then certain expectations, beneficial to the patrons of the marketers, will come into play, while the limitations (or advantages, if you think about it) of ML fade from the consciousness.

And so the subtle contamination of the reasoning mind continues.

¹ Yeah, yeah, I know, mine doesn’t depend on the ill-advised lack of punctuation to bring forth the ambiguity; for me, of late, the odd, unrelated multiple meanings of many English words has been striking. Why they went on strike … English is all about confusion masquerading as communication. Yes, the cat tricked me into getting up early this morning, and I’m grumpy about it.

This time around we have Rep Victoria Spartz (R-FL) at a townhall:

“Will you demand the immediate resignation of Pete Hegseth, Michael Waltz, and the rest of the group chat”Spartz: No Crowd: Booo

— Acyn (@acyn.bsky.social) 2025-03-28T23:59:47.425Z

“Will you demand the immediate resignation of Pete Hegseth, Michael Waltz, and the rest of the group chat”

Spartz: No

Crowd: Booo

Only unspeakable, if understandable, loyalty to the President explains such a refusal to do her duty. She could have made a satisfactory answer out of I’m considering it, but she didn’t.

But long-term readers will be considering the possibility that voters of a conservative tilt, long trained to make judgments solely on issues, and not to pay attention to experience, competency, moderation, and ability to negotiate compromises – even to loathe such attributes – may now be reconsidering these metrics by which to judge Republican candidates. That’s a drum I’ve been beating for a while.

The fact that a candidate can do the abortion jig, the gun rights yodel, even the anti-tax howl, may soon become burdens for Republican candidates, rather than advantages. The more Congress sits on its hands as President Trump’s actions, whether by his mistaken view of the world or on purpose, convert the nation from the leading country on Earth to a quivering lump of sodden gelatin, the more likely there will be a mass replacement of Republican Congresspeople in 2026.

Not that the replacements will necessarily be Democrats. The Democrats, for all of their anticipation at the recent gains in elections since the 2024 Election, have yet to demonstrate significant attempts at reform, although efforts by Governor Newsom (D-CA) and Rep Moulton (D-MA) can be viewed with some optimism by those who are conscious of the errors imputed to Democrats – and their allies. Along with mismanaging the transgender issue, they need to deal with the charges of anti-semitism, the lack of a primary for VP Harris’ ascension to the top of the 2024 ticket after Biden left the race, a general sense of an autocratic inclination, and a few other issues, and, internally, their turn to identitarianism, and what to do about the DEI issue, which currently seems to have become a loser with the citizenry. Oh, and much like the Republicans, the arrogance.

I offer no solutions. I’m an independent. I observe that, against a pathetic group of group of pathetic Republican candidates, the Democrats lost. That observation, if they’re honest, and willing to kick out those who stubbornly cling to positions designed to preserve their positions in the power hierarchy in the Party, should help guide them towards success.

And if they can’t? Then both Parties deserve to be replaced, not just the Republicans. Both Parties are a discouragement.

Some more State level elections took place today yesterday, for those who try to predict the future. Over in Wisconsin, a seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court was up for grabs, and WaPo projects a victory for the liberal candidate:

In a state as evenly split as Wisconsin, it’ll be tempting to read the tea leaves into confirmation bias.

Republicans may discuss, if only in private conversation, how this election was not in the context of a larger election. Only those with a special interest in it might attend. Wisconsin has a population of six million, though, so attendance of, guessing here, maybe two million 2.3 million is not a bad turnout; this point may be invalid.

Democrats may be excited if margins hold, but, truth be told, given the disaster in Washington and in State capital Madison, where the Wisconsin Republican Party has made an absolute joke out of itself, I think Democrats should have expected better results.

They may have to commit to self-examination, to listening tours, to understand why they didn’t absolutely cream the conservative candidate, Mr. Schimel. No offense to Mr. Schimel, but those who have associated themselves with him cast a pall over him.

Meanwhile, in Florida two special elections for US House seats took place in Republican-controlled districts, and were won by the Republicans, but a writer on Daily Kos points out that victory margins are going to have shrunk, considerably.

But it still looks like a definitive loss to me.

All that said, Rep Elise Stefanik (R-NY), who had been nominated for UN Ambassador, is no longer the nominee. Speculation has it that the Trump Administration worried that the race to replace her in the House would result in a Democratic win and decided not to risk it, and the cited link more or less officially confirms it. This suggests that the Republican epistemic bubble of old is leaking, that telling themselves they’re popular isn’t entirely working.

And I figure Rep Stefanik inadvertently dodged a bullet. It’s not hard for the President to fire a diplomat, but it’s well-nigh impossible to fire a member of Congress. Given the President’s misogyny and Stefanik’s former moderate positions, it’s not hard seeing it as a maneuver to put a man in her current seat.

Erick Erickson tries for that profound observation, but I think it’s hollow:

But the larger issue is that we as a people have abdicated our responsibility of taking care of the poor to the federal government. Instead of sending kids on “mission trips” to picture-perfect beaches in third-world countries, perhaps we’d be better off if they took a shift at the local soup kitchen or volunteered at the local homeless shelter. When Jesus references the poor, he undeniably puts the burden of support on me and you, not the federal government.

The problem? He’s bought into a long-time propaganda point of those who’d prefer to have more influence over there community and will obscure important points to get there. What is that? Let me state it as a negation of the propaganda point.

The federal government is us.

That’s the delight and glory of the United States of America. In monarchies and autocracies, government is thrust upon the populace by force, whether that force be exogenous or endogenous. I’ll leave the question of theocracies to the reader.

But not only do we pick our leaders, we can be those leaders. If we’re a citizen, we can put ourselves forth as candidates for positions from little town council member to President. For those who bang away with hammers and wedges to alienate the people from the very government we select, I say Cease! To demand the government change its goals, despite your opinion being a minority, is to not understand how our way of life works.

Are we subject to limitations when it comes to that participation? Of course; logistics demands it. But that doesn’t mean we, individually, cannot be part of the government.

So when Mr Erickson says feeding the desperately hungry is not the federal government’s responsibility, he’s ignoring one of the most important and fundamental truths of our Constitution, as well as a practical matter of feeding folks so we don’t have food riots.

We, not them, but emphatically we are the federal government. If you win an election with the purpose of stopping food bank support, you’re against Jesus. Says the agnostic.

During my unexpected but restful sojourn away from the computer, I did some revelating, and it was all banal. Nevertheless,

Writing is the process of moving from the complete ambiguity of the unexamined void to the precision of the nanometer.

Just something to keep in mind during your next composition. Since I haven’t time to compose myself.

From a donation solicitation from the Democrats:

→ 1. Early polling shows Democrats have a THREE-POINT lead in the race to control Congress.

→ 2. We only need to flip THREE seats to flip the House blue.

→ 3. Now that extreme MAGA Republicans know how close we are to defeating them, they’re holding big-ticket fundraisers to salvage their razor-thin majority.

Against that pack of fourth-rate clowns put forth by the Republicans, and it’s this close?

Just when will the Democrats get a clue that they are less popular than snakes and need to correct something?

30 hour ago we were snow-free. Temperatures in the 70s F.

Then we received nearly 3 inches of rain.

And then a couple inches of snow.

My oh my.

I took my computer to the repair shop, expecting to be out of action for a day or two.

That was a week ago today.

Apparently, keeping an old computer as your primary means repairs, such as finding a replacement CPU fan, takes a while.

Apologies.

When your typos are homonym-istic.

Thousands of years ago, Jews were bringing law and order to civilization. They inhabited the land of Canaan and created the Kingdom of David. They were conquered, disbursed, returned home, conquered again, and then ultimately driven out by the Romans in AD 136 after a series of rebellions. The Romans changed Judea, derived from the Kingdom of Judah, into Palestine. Now, disparate Arab tribes and antisemites use “Palestine” to lay claim to an area where both Biblical and historical archeological claims show the Jewish people lived before the Romans forcibly dispersed them through the Roman Empire. — Erick Erickson

Please pay only in American currency. Legitimate currency. No DitzCoin, please.

When applying archaeology to the intangible there can be some amazing results that can strain credulity. Try this on for size:

Today, COBOL is no longer the language of choice for computer programmers. It does, however, retain a small but important role in some software. [COBOL Cowboys founder Bill] Hinshaw estimates there are 800 billion lines of COBOL running today. [“The critical computer systems still relying on decades-old code,” Matthew Sparkes, NewScientist (8 March 2025, paywall)]

Worse yet, billion’s not even well defined in this context; the Wikipedia page for billion left me feeling like I needed a secret decoder ring, or membership in the Masonic Temple. I particularly like the references to milion^[1] in that page, as the milion page didn’t seem relevant. Or is this a systematic misspelling?

But that’s all irrelevant; we can all agree that 800 billion is a big number when counting lines of code, and I have my doubts that so many lines of code, in all the computer languages of the world, have been written by the human hand.

For one thing, the hospitals would be overrun by emergency patients suffering from psychoses, neuroses, neck injuries, and carpal tunnel.

I checked the next issue of NS but saw neither corrections nor errata nor complaints in the letters column.

This reminds me of the Soviet programmer a recruiter tried to sell to my employer of the moment decades ago. He made a claim as to how much code he’d written, and I think, to satisfy the claim, we calculated he’d have to write 10,000 lines per day for … his entire life? No weekends off. It was crazy.

So I think I’ll just be boggled.

¹ Nor had I ever encountered the word before, but there is such a word, presumably Latin or of Latin origin:

The Milion (Ancient Greek: Μίλιον or Μίλλιον, Mílion; Turkish: Milyon taşı) was a marker from which all distances across the Roman Empire were measured. Erected by Septimius Severus in the 3rd century AD in the city of Byzantium, it became the zero-mile marker for the empire upon the re-founding of the city as Constantinople in 330 AD. …

Its relevance to billion, however, is obscure to me.

That’s what struck me while reading Steve Benen’s summation of our top diplomat, Secretary Rubio, and his role, or lack thereof, in this Administration:

The lack of message discipline is an obvious problem, but just as notable is the apparent fact that the secretary of state, roughly two months into his beleaguered tenure, is struggling to remain on the same page as Team Trump.

I’m reminded anew of a recent Vanity Fair report, which noted, “Rubio is privately frustrated that Trump has effectively sidelined him. According to four prominent Republicans close to the White House, Rubio … has told people he is upset by his lack of foreign policy influence despite being, on paper at least, the administration’s top diplomat.”

The article from Gabriel Sherman added that Rubio “is often the last to know when foreign policy decisions are made in the White House.” …

It dovetails with a recent Politico report that noted members of Congress who believe Rubio “does not have the president’s ear.”

If you cast your mind back to the 2015 campaign, the tension between Trump and then-Senator Rubio (R-FL) was quite palpable, and their verbal exchanges were more the sort of thing that belonged in a wrestling ring than political debates.

I would not be surprised if President Trump, well known for his lack of political skills when it comes to running an Administration, decided to remove from Rubio the honor of being a Senator by luring him into a position where Trump can fire him at any time, and then letting him twist in the wind.

I don’t know if Rubio recognizes this possibility. Whatever you thought of him as a Senator, and he had, or has, a lot of political flaws, he is still an old-fashioned politician. Trump is not.

If Rubio should be fired, or resigns, in the near future, don’t be surprised.