Senior Writer @NRO. author of My Father Left Me Ireland. Making sense of the disruptive politics of the 21st century.

Joined November 2007
Michael Brendan Dougherty retweeted
I appreciate the level of both innumeracy and ignorance needed to reject this chart on grounds that IEEPA tariffs were struck down in Feb 2026. Innumeracy: If you look at the first derivative (i.e., month over month change), most of the shift occurs by February. > 2024 rate: (-15k)/mo > 12/25-2/26 rate: level > 7/26-9/26 rate: +12k/mo Or, put another way, acceleration in job growth after IEEPA ruling accounts for less than one-third of the job gain over 2024 baseline rate. Ignorance: Trump administration immediately replaced IEPPA tariffs with Section 122 tariffs and then Section 301 tariffs. The average tariff rate at time of Court ruling was 5.1x pre-Trump level. Average tariff rate since has been 4.2x pre-Trump level (source: Yale Budget Lab). If your point is that an effective tariff rate of 13.8% is a policy disaster but a rate of 11.3% is great trade policy that drives manufacturing employment higher... I mean, 🤷‍♂️
Good chart from this week's The Real Economy @commonplc:
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
Supreme Court struck down IEEPA tariffs on February 20, 2026. The employment gains above trend shown in the chart occurred after the ruling. scotusblog.com/2026/02/suprem… fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MANEMP
18
8
6
61
12,753
Michael Brendan Dougherty retweeted
This was an argument advanced to great acclaim by Norman Angell in his book The Great Illusion. His thesis was that economic interdependence would guarantee peace, and it was published in 1909.
9
4
97
5,715
Michael Brendan Dougherty retweeted
Good chart from this week's The Real Economy @commonplc:
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
Supreme Court struck down IEEPA tariffs on February 20, 2026. The employment gains above trend shown in the chart occurred after the ruling. scotusblog.com/2026/02/suprem… fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MANEMP
87
56
34
334
182,733
Michael Brendan Dougherty retweeted
.@michaelbd said this is a monster from from why liberalism failed, I’ll go him one better- it’s straight out of Peter Mair’s Ruling the Void, a state trying to pass micromanagement of private behaviour off as governance because it’s all they’ve got left
🇮🇪 The Irish state has published an advert discouraging grandparents from hugging their grandchildren, as part of a campaign designed to promote "consent".
10
31
2
195
6,353
Michael Brendan Dougherty retweeted
The domestic foundation of American global power is crumbling. Trump is less the cause than a symptom and an accelerant. Since the Cold War ended, the United States has pursued global primacy under an implicit bargain with the public: dominance would come cheap. Today Americans are no more willing to bear serious costs for foreign policy than they were in the 1990s. But a far more competitive world is driving up the price of upholding U.S. commitments. No matter who wins the White House in 2028, this gap will constrain American power around the world. In a new @CarnegieEndow paper, I trace the U.S. foreign-policy consensus from the Cold War to the present and outline three scenarios for the future:
5
66
12
165
15,961
Michael Brendan Dougherty retweeted
Unfortunately, the Right has spent years promoting the notion that dialogue or diplomacy --- any dialogue or diplomacy --- is tantamount to "appeasement." And pretending that every moment we live through is the 1930s redux.
SECRETARY RUBIO: People need to grow up when it comes to foreign policy a little bit. I don't think it's unusual for the three most powerful, nuclear-armed nations on Earth to have their leaders communicate with each other.
9
14
116
10,599
Michael Brendan Dougherty retweeted
"Efficiency," as every libertarian knows, is when a statist command economy subsidizes its producers and manipulates its currency enough to underprice competitors burdened by the need to generate a market return, building enough capacity in the process to satisfy 100% of global demand for advanced manufactured goods. Of course we must accept those goods duty-free - doing anything else would be socialism. I think I read that in Hayek. Back in reality, China's global trade surplus is growing *because* we're tariffing them. Our tariffs put pressure on Chinese producers, which employ Chinese consumers. Producer stress is consumer stress, which means the Chinese domestic market ends up generating less and less demand. Producers can only survive by increasing exports to make up for anemic domestic consumption. But the US market is no longer available to them - so they have to flood everyone else. If a tidal wave of Chinese imports were so efficient, they would unlock growth in receiving countries who would count their blessings and laugh at our mistake. Nope - other countries are freaking out about the deindustrialization these imports are unleashing. They're following our lead by rushing to develop their own tariffs on China. Now that US tariffs have redirected the fire hose of Chinese exports toward everyone else, a natural anti-China trade bloc is forming because of the impact of these distorted, subsidized exports. Maybe the Cato people can let the Europeans know they're making a big mistake. I'm sure there's an Adam Smith quote that covers this. At root, the libertarian error is to see free trade with China as capitalism and tariffs as socialism. It's exactly the opposite. Importing Chinese goods means importing their subsidies, their currency manipulation, and their industrial policy, letting these distortions determine prices in our country. Tariffs preserve our capitalist system by ensuring that prices reflect free competition between firms rather than Beijing's decision to subsidize a strategic industry. The real socialists are the ones who want a socialist state to determine who wins and who loses in the American economy.
The US has been running a real-life experiment to test this theory since 2018. Higher tariffs on Chinese goods have coincided with rising, not falling, Chinese trade surpluses. So you're just raising taxes on Americans and creating inefficiency for no reason.
1
6
1
14
2,442
Michael Brendan Dougherty retweeted
Houellebecq's dig at the left was to present them as irrelevant losers. The insult to the right was arguably more devastating, since he presented them as being outdone at their own project of civilizational renewal by their primary nemesis, Islam. xitter.cf/g_shullenberger/status…
Houellebecq’s “Submission” was hated by the left, but seems like its real joke is at the expense of postliberal Christian “civilizationists.” The Muslim leader Ben Abbes turns out to be the only one capable of delivering a postliberal order; Christians end up superfluous.
3
7
2
120
18,518
Michael Brendan Dougherty retweeted
MBD makes a case for a political party as a *political* party--not an ideological one.
Everybody wants a read on whether Donald Trump is dragging the GOP to simple disaster or utter doom in the midterms. But in @nytopinion, I argue that by smashing the grip of any one faction on the GOP, Trump has put the party in position to grow as a baggier, more ideologically-incoherent coalition. nytimes.com/2026/10/19/opini…
7
10
55
16,039
Michael Brendan Dougherty retweeted
Philippe has been very calm and level-headed in his analysis for two days now. So this more alarmed tone I take seriously.
Philippe Lemoine
@phl43Oct 18
Just a few hours after Macron spoke on TV about the situations, promising that the government would be inflexible with people who engage in violence, groups of looters are freely roaming Paris and breaking into stores. There are even videos where you see them breaking into residential buildings and the police seem totally overwhelmed and in many places are nowhere to be seen. This is completely surreal and I don't think anything like that has ever happened before.
6
40
2
720
171,151
Michael Brendan Dougherty retweeted
It struck me recently that people who support the endless Ukraine-Russia was because they "want to punish the aggressor" make the same mistake as people who during the Vietnam war supported the endless war "because if Vietnam falls, all of SE Asia will be communust". In both cases they were wrong because they failed to look at a broader picture and at the future.
275
80
52
536
196,024
Michael Brendan Dougherty retweeted
This is exactly right. Insofar as it seems human, that is because (in the case of LLMs) it's trained on human generated text, fine tuned by humans, and provided with a user interface that produces text based on the same.
Fireside Alpha
@firesidealphaOct 15
Ben Affleck says AI is simply matrix multiplication, linear algebra and floating point calculations, and however convincingly it sounds like a person, it has nothing to do with thought, humanity or feeling “Nor do I believe, and I think it’s important to draw the distinction between what AI does, which is simply predict the next token or the next word in a sentence, then add that word on, run it back to the machine, do a lot of computation and pick the next word." "That is a very different thing than sentience or thought. And I think we need to be really clear about that because it can be convincingly, in an illusory way, sound like thought or like a person." "But let’s be real clear. This is matrix multiplication. This is linear algebra. These are floating point calculations. It has nothing to do with thought, humanity, or feeling.”
6
12
2
87
7,603
Michael Brendan Dougherty retweeted
Who is going to end up more wrong: the foreign policy experts who said a trade war would push our allies into China's arms, or the economic experts who said it would crush American manufacturing?
37
73
15
435
40,542
Michael Brendan Dougherty retweeted
Nate. I'm literally a class plaintiff in an AI Class Action. How is it "politically incomprehensible" for me to call out the obvious mathematical/physical impossibility of getting from "phase 1" (LLM based AI) to "phase 3" (recursive self improving SuperIntelligence). Since when do my political beliefs limit me from calling out a dangerous lie stoking a panic? I was a mathematician at one time and you are statistician. I know better. You should also know better also. At least ask the right questions. Here I made you a helpful meme.
I've been covering politics since 2008. The anti-AI-regulation takes from the left (by no means all/most of the left; Bernie disagrees!!!) might be the most literally incomprehensible political position I've ever encountered.
32
22
4
177
118,890
Michael Brendan Dougherty retweeted
Josh Hawley
@HawleyMOSep 15
No antitrust exemptions for AI. Not a chance.
253
129
32
2,202
317,237