Go Back   Ukraine.com Discussion Forum > Society > Politics


The Trump Era

LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
  #36 (permalink)  
Old 17th November 2016, 18:21
Hannia Hannia is offline
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 27,520
Hannia will become famous soon enough
Trump’s world - The new nationalism
With his call to put “America First”, Donald Trump is the latest recruit to a dangerous nationalism
Nov 19th 2016 THE ECONOMIST

WHEN Donald Trump vowed to “Make America Great Again!” he was echoing the campaign of Ronald Reagan in 1980. Back then voters sought renewal after the failures of the Carter presidency. This month they elected Mr Trump because he, too, promised them a “historic once-in-a-lifetime” change.

But there is a difference. On the eve of the vote, Reagan described America as a shining “city on a hill”. Listing all that America could contribute to keep the world safe, he dreamed of a country that “is not turned inward, but outward—toward others”. Mr Trump, by contrast, has sworn to put America First. Demanding respect from a freeloading world that takes leaders in Washington for fools, he says he will “no longer surrender this country or its people to the false song of globalism”. Reagan’s America was optimistic: Mr Trump’s is angry.

Welcome to the new nationalism. For the first time since the second world war, the great and rising powers are simultaneously in thrall to various sorts of chauvinism. Like Mr Trump, leaders of countries such as Russia, China and Turkey embrace a pessimistic view that foreign affairs are often a zero-sum game in which global interests compete with national ones. It is a big change that makes for a more dangerous world.

My country right or left
Nationalism is a slippery concept, which is why politicians find it so easy to manipulate. At its best, it unites the country around common values to accomplish things that people could never manage alone. This “civic nationalism” is conciliatory and forward-looking—the nationalism of the Peace Corps, say, or Canada’s inclusive patriotism or German support for the home team as hosts of the 2006 World Cup. Civic nationalism appeals to universal values, such as freedom and equality. It contrasts with “ethnic nationalism”, which is zero-sum, aggressive and nostalgic and which draws on race or history to set the nation apart. In its darkest hour in the first half of the 20th century ethnic nationalism led to war.

Mr Trump’s populism is a blow to civic nationalism (see article). Nobody could doubt the patriotism of his post-war predecessors, yet every one of them endorsed America’s universal values and promoted them abroad. Even if a sense of exceptionalism stopped presidents signing up to outfits like the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), America has supported the rules-based order. By backing global institutions that staved off a dog-eat-dog world, the United States has made itself and the world safer and more prosperous.

Mr Trump threatens to weaken that commitment even as ethnic nationalism is strengthening elsewhere. In Russia Vladimir Putin has shunned cosmopolitan liberal values for a distinctly Russian mix of Slavic tradition and Orthodox Christianity. In Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan has turned away from the European Union and from peace talks with the Kurdish minority, in favour of a strident, Islamic nationalism that is quick to detect insults and threats from abroad. In India Narendra Modi remains outward-looking and modernising, but he has ties to radical ethnic-nationalist Hindu groups that preach chauvinism and intolerance.

Meanwhile, Chinese nationalism has become so angry and vengeful that the party struggles to control it. True, the country depends upon open markets, embraces some global institutions and wants to be close to America (see Banyan). But from the 1990s onwards schoolchildren have received a daily dose of “patriotic” education setting out the mission to erase a century of humiliating occupation. And, to count as properly Chinese you have in practice to belong to the Han people: everyone else is a second-class citizen.

Even as ethnic nationalism has prospered, the world’s greatest experiment in “post-nationalism” has foundered. The architects of what was to become the EU believed that nationalism, which had dragged Europe into two ruinous world wars, would wither and die. The EU would transcend national rivalries with a series of nested identities in which you could be Catholic, Alsatian, French and European all at once.

However, in large parts of the EU this never happened. The British have voted to leave and in former communist countries, such as Poland and Hungary, power has passed to xenophobic ultranationalists. There is even a small but growing threat that France might quit—and so destroy—the EU.

The last time America turned inward was after the first world war and the consequences were calamitous. You do not have to foresee anything so dire to fear Mr Trump’s new nationalism today. At home it tends to produce intolerance and to feed doubts about the virtue and loyalties of minorities. It is no accident that allegations of anti-Semitism have infected the bloodstream of American politics for the first time in decades.

Abroad, as other countries take their cue from a more inward-looking United States, regional and global problems will become harder to solve. The ICC’s annual assembly this week was overshadowed by the departure of three African countries. China’s territorial claims in the South China Sea are incompatible with UNCLOS. If Mr Trump enacts even a fraction of his mercantilist rhetoric, he risks neutering the World Trade Organisation. If he thinks that America’s allies are failing to pay for the security they receive, he has threatened to walk away from them. The result—especially for small countries that today are protected by global rules—will be a harsher and more unstable world.

Isolationists unite
Mr Trump needs to realise that his policies will unfold in the context of other countries’ jealous nationalism. Disengaging will not cut America off from the world so much as leave it vulnerable to the turmoil and strife that the new nationalism engenders. As global politics is poisoned, America will be impoverished and its own anger will grow, which risks trapping Mr Trump in a vicious circle of reprisals and hostility. It is not too late for him to abandon his dark vision. For the sake of his country and the world he urgently needs to reclaim the enlightened patriotism of the presidents who went before him. The new nationalism | The Economist
Americans do not want the hard rocky path to reality, when Trump, a demagogue, offers the simple, easy painless path to an imaginary utopia.

æ, !

Hannia - Hania - Mighthelp
Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)  
Old 17th November 2016, 18:21
Hannia Hannia is offline
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 27,520
Hannia will become famous soon enough
Gallup poll shows Americans' satisfaction after election
Nov 17th 2016 5:38AM

A new Gallup poll shows that Americans are now less satisfied with the state of the U.S. than they were in the days before the election.

While the rating had been at a recent high of 37%, it dropped to 27% in the days following Donald Trump's victory.

Not surprisingly, Democrats reported the greatest declines.

Prior to November 8, satisfaction among party members was polling as high as 62%.

That number has since dropped to 34%.

he outlook among Independents took a hit as well, falling from 34% to 27%.

Republicans remained largely displeased, but were slightly less so after Election Day.

Between November 1 and 6, 14% expressed contentment.

That number rose to 17% in the survey conducted from November 9 to 13.

The poll was conducted by phone and involved 1,019 randomly sampled adults.
Gallup poll shows Americans' satisfaction after election* - AOL News

æ, !

Hannia - Hania - Mighthelp

Last edited by Hannia; 17th November 2016 at 18:45.
Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)  
Old 17th November 2016, 18:33
Hannia Hannia is offline
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 27,520
Hannia will become famous soon enough
The Trump administration - The tower of silence
Donald Trump appears to be unsure whether or not to govern as he campaigned

AT THE close of “The Candidate”, an Oscar-winning movie released in 1972, the protagonist, played by Robert Redford, marks his surprise election to the Senate by turning to his campaign chief and asking: “What do we do now?” Donald Trump, the state of the president-elect’s transition effort suggests, has had a few such moments since his victory over Hillary Clinton on November 8th.

To assume control of an administrative machine that employs 4m people, he and his advisers must select, vet and hire around 4,100 people, over 1,000 of whom require confirmation by the Senate, and several hundred of whom—including his White House staff and the heads of around 100 federal departments and agencies—must be in place by the time of his inauguration on January 20th. Mr Trump’s immediate predecessors set a high bar for readiness. Mitt Romney, the losing candidate in 2012, assembled around 700 people to work on his transition—including “agency-review teams”, snooper squads ready to be deployed across the government so that Mr Romney could hit the ground running. Mr Trump, despite public assistance for the transition afforded to him and Mrs Clinton by Congress, and counsel from Romney campaign veterans, is less ready. On election day he had assembled a transition team of around 100, whose leadership he has since purged, throwing many of its existing preparations into disarray.

He replaced the former head of his transition team, Chris Christie, the governor of New Jersey, on November 11th with his vice-president elect, Governor Mike Pence. He also announced a new committee of senior transition advisers, including three of his adult children and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner. Further purges of people close to Mr Christie, including Mike Rogers, a former congressman, and Matthew Freedman, a lobbyist, both of whom were working on national security, have ensued. This is believed to be either because Mr Christie is dogged by an abuse-of-power scandal back home, or at the personal behest of Mr Kushner. One of Mr Trump’s closest advisers, the 35-year-old property heir is alleged to have an animus against Mr Christie who, as a federal prosecutor in New Jersey, was instrumental in sending his father, Charles Kushner, a property developer, to jail for making illegal campaign contributions and other crimes. Mr Pence has also launched a separate purge of some 20 corporate lobbyists assembled by Mr Christie, whose presence seemed at odds with Mr Trump’s pledge to “drain the swamp” of government corruption.

Transitions are always chaotic; even Mr Romney’s would have been. And Mr Trump, who campaigned as an outsider with disdain for his fellow Republicans, started his with obvious disadvantages. Some are now being corrected; Mr Pence, for example, has the confidence of many of the mainstream Republican policy wonks Mr Trump will need to hire. Indeed, compared with many earlier transitions, his effort doesn’t look too bad. According to Max Stier of the Partnership for Public Service, a non-partisan NGO that advised the Trump and Clinton campaigns on their transition groundwork, both started it early and, by historical standards, made fair progress. So Mr Trump has time to get back on track. Yet his quirks, including a highly informal and personalised management style and seemingly little interest in the details of the vast, complicated system he has sworn to overhaul, are causing alarm.

Foreign governments have been getting to the president-elect through the switchboard at Trump Tower in Manhattan, where Mr Trump (above, with Reince Priebus), holed up with his family and aides, has been chatting to them, seemingly in random order, without the customary benefit of a State Department briefing. During a meeting with Barack Obama to discuss the presidency, on November 10th, he was reported by the Wall Street Journal to have been surprised at the extent of its scope. The president-elect’s Twitter habit is also causing disquiet. “Very organised process taking place as I decide cabinet and many other positions. I am the only one who knows who the finalists are!” he tweeted on November 15th, which seemed to recall his former life as a reality-TV star.

In the days after the election, some anti-Trump Republicans declared themselves willing to get off their high horse and serve. But some are already changing their mind. Eliot Cohen, a former national-security official for George W. Bush, tweeted on November 15th that he had “changed my recommendation” to muck in after being contacted by Trump transition officials, whom he called “angry, arrogant”.

As The Economist went to press, Mr Trump had made only two senior hires: Steve Bannon, his former campaign chief executive, as chief strategist, and Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, as his chief of staff. This seemed an obvious expression of Mr Trump’s Janus-faced political persona. Mr Bannon, a maverick, tear-up-the-system right-winger, and former boss of a news website, Breitbart News, known for its offensively chauvinistic headlines, reflects his bomb-throwing on the trail. Mr Priebus, a plain-vanilla conservative, whose embrace of Mr Trump arguably did more to get him elected, reflects the pragmatism of the successful businessman Mr Obama claimed to have encountered in his meeting with Mr Trump.

Some of Mr Trump’s post-election pronouncements reinforce that impression. He no longer means to eject 11m illegal immigrants and their offspring, as he once promised to. He says he will merely deport two or three million criminals among them (it is not clear there are so many). He also says he no longer plans to wall off America’s southern border; some parts of it, he says, will be fenced. Yet even if Mr Trump were to drop all his outrageous promises, which his appointment of Mr Bannon does not augur, he must still run a competent administration. And the state of his additional hiring plans does not seem to promise that.

Most of the people mooted for his main cabinet positions, including Rudy Giuliani and John Bolton as possibilities for secretary of state, Senator Jeff Sessions as a possible defence secretary and Myron Ebell as a possible Environmental Protection Agency boss, have in common loyalty to Mr Trump, reputations for being deeply divisive and little experience of running a federal agency. Since Senate confirmation can be obtained for cabinet posts by a simple majority, which the Republicans have, the Democrats could not block such appointments. But they might well try to delay them, which is within their power, and that would risk making a messy transition even worse.

Paradoxically, this also casts doubt on the seriousness of Mr Trump’s ambition to bring the disruptive change he promises. Even with a willingness to rewrite Mr Obama’s executive orders and the powers of a unified government, he would still need to win the confidence of the bureaucracy and, to some degree, the forbearance of Democrats to pull that off. This argues for at least some degree of bipartisanship and institutional care. Stocking his cabinet with Mr Giuliani, who has no diplomatic experience, Mr Bolton, who failed to get confirmed as Mr Bush’s ambassador to the UN by a Republican-controlled Senate, and Mr Ebell, a climate-change denier with no scientific background, would not provide much of either. The tower of silence | The Economist

æ, !

Hannia - Hania - Mighthelp
Reply With Quote
  #39 (permalink)  
Old 17th November 2016, 23:19
Hannia Hannia is offline
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 27,520
Hannia will become famous soon enough
The Kremlin is in contact with Trump's team over Syria
UAWIRE ORG November 18, 2016 8:26:00 AM

Moscow has begun establishing contacts with the representatives of the team of the US president-elect, Donald Trump, over Syria, stated the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, Mikhail Bogdanov, while speaking to journalists on Thursday, reported Russia's Interfax news agency.

"We are at a crucial point; the new team of the president-elect, Donald Trump, is taking over. We are beginning to establish contacts with people who will most likely be helping the new president," he stated.

"We are hoping that both outgoing and incoming Administration will understand that it is not possible to solve Syrian issue without Russia and will be ready to an open and sincere dialogue," stated the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Earlier this week, Donald Trump and Russian President Putin had a telephone conversation during which they, among other things, reportedly discussed the issue of settlement in Syria.

At the time of the US election, the Russian Ministry of Foreign affairs stated that they were skeptical about Donald Trump’s statements regarding the possible cooperation between Russia and the United States in Syria.

"It is common to give certain promises in the heat of the presidential election. And even though they might be sincere, we should apply a 'correction factor' to them," said Ilya Rogachev, Director of the Department of New Challenges and Threats Issues of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. UAWire - The Kremlin is in contact with Trump’s team over Syria

æ, !

Hannia - Hania - Mighthelp

Last edited by Hannia; 18th November 2016 at 14:49.
Reply With Quote
  #40 (permalink)  
Old 17th November 2016, 23:20
Hannia Hannia is offline
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 27,520
Hannia will become famous soon enough
A Trump presidency must also be a laughing matter
Nov 17th 2016, 11:08 by E.W. THE ECONOMIST


COMEDIANS and politicians once delighted in the idea of a Trump presidency. Seth Meyers, host of “Late Night”, noted that “Trump owns the Miss USA Pageant, which is great for Republicans, because it will streamline their search for a vice president.” At the 2011 White House Correspondents’ Dinner, Barack Obama joked that Donald Trump “certainly would bring some change to the White House,” as the screen flashed to an image of the “Trump White House Resort and Casino” replete with gold pillars and neon purple signs. Two years later, John Oliver urged Mr Trump to run: “Do it. Do it,” he said on the “Daily Show”. “I will personally write you a campaign check now, on behalf of this country, which does not want you to be president, but which badly wants you to run.”

Now the joke has mutated into reality. In the immediate aftermath of Mr Trump’s victory, laughter has proved difficult. Judd Apatow, a comedy behemoth involved in such films as “Anchorman”, “Knocked Up” and “Bridesmaids”, tweeted on election night: “One thing I do not want to watch right now—comedy about any of this. That’s how terrifying and disappointing this is.”

Many shows opted for anger or grief instead. “I don’t know if you’ve come to the right place for jokes tonight,” Trevor Noah, the host of the “Daily Show”, began (though he sneaked one in with a comment about “****ting [his] pants”). Kate McKinnon, dressed as Hillary Clinton, opened “Saturday Night Live” (“SNL”) with a performance of Leonard Cohen’s “Hallelujah”. It was moving and fitting; it seemed to sum up the anguish of a stunned nation. Meanwhile, on “Last Week Tonight”, John Oliver unleashed liberal fury, with a video of people yelling “**** 2016” and the image of a giant “2016” sign going up in flames. He also turned activist, calling on his viewers to “stay here and fight” by donating to NGOs that defend the rights Mr Trump has threatened to attack.

In time, though, the moratorium on jokes will fade. The Trump administration will make plenty of laughable mistakes (which no politician can avoid, least of all a swaggering political novice). But satirising the Donald on late-night television is a slippery business: the fusion of entertainment and politics is part of what made his rise possible in the first place. Shows like “SNL” and Jimmy Fallon’s “Tonight Show” were criticised during the campaign for going too easy on the candidate. “SNL” had him host and take part in silly sketches; Mr Fallon affectionately ruffled his comb over. This briefly made him seem acceptable—even likable—rather than dangerous.

That was unfortunate. Comedy can be an important medium for political resistance. It is no coincidence that satire is heavily suppressed in Russia, North Korea and China. “The only worse thing for a dictator than being criticised is being laughed at,” a Russian journalist told Samantha Bee. In fact, there has been plenty of laughter at Mr Trump’s expense—like John Oliver’s campaign to “Make Donald Drumpf Again”, the most-viewed segment on his show. The name “Trump”, Mr Oliver pointed out, was changed by a “prescient ancestor” from “Drumpf”: “And ‘Drumpf’ is much less magical. It’s the sound produced when a morbidly obese pigeon flies into the window of a foreclosed Old Navy. It’s the sound of a bottle of store-brand root beer falling off the shelf in a gas station minimart.” Then came Alec Baldwin’s impressions on “SNL”. He lectured Ms McKinnon’s Clinton on the correct pronunciation of China (“It’s Gina”), and warned viewers that he was “going to be so good tonight…so calm and so presidential that all of you watching are going to cream your jeans.” It irritated Mr Trump to the extent that he called for “SNL” to be cancelled.

So why wasn’t it enough to sway voters? Jonathan Coe, an English writer, suggests that laughing at politicians has lost its edgy nature. “Anti-establishment comedy was a product of a more naive and deferential age,” he writes, “when to stand on a West End stage and make fun of the prime minister could be seen, briefly, as a radical act.” Now politicians are predictable targets: to poke fun at them is about as original as poking fun at mothers-in-law. The public’s laughter, instead of being subversive, is merely “an unthinking reflex…a tired Pavlovian reaction to situations that are too difficult or too depressing to think about clearly…a substitute for thought rather than its conduit”.

There is another reason comedy’s political power has faded. Satirists’ power to undermine the system depends on their position as outsiders, calling out the corruption and failures of the ruling class through laughter. But as Heather LaMarre of Temple University says, many political comedians are no longer the little guy picking on the big guy; they’re celebrities—part of the liberal urban elite.

This dynamic may shift once Mr Trump is inaugurated. Come January, Democrats will have little power in Washington. So, says Ms LaMarre, comedians, nearly all of them with hearts beating on the left, will start to look like outsiders again. If Mr Trump tries to censor or sue critics, as he has talked of doing, this will only heighten the effect. But comedians would be wise, Ms LaMarre says, to go after the politicians—not their voters. This may have been a fatal mistake during the 2016 campaign: comedians began making fun of Trump supporters, trying to shame Americans away from Mr Trump. This makes people push back, and it gave Mr Trump further evidence that comedians had joined the hated elite, while he, the billionaire son of a millionaire, was a fed-up outsider.

Comedians should look to the example of Jon Stewart. Though a paid-up member of the media elite during the George W. Bush years, he kept his status as a contrarian because he almost never went after supporters of Mr Bush, keeping his outrage for the administration and its policies, in defence of the people. This is as it should be. Juvenal, a Roman satirist, asked “Who will watch over the watchmen?” His implicit answer is the satirist. As Mr Trump and his cadre become the establishment they railed against, comedians will have the chance to inhabit their proper role. In his post-election monologue, Mr Myers put the Trump administration on notice: “We here at ‘Late Night’ will be watching you.”
In defence of comedy: A Trump presidency must also be a laughing matter | The Economist

æ, !

Hannia - Hania - Mighthelp
Reply With Quote
  #41 (permalink)  
Old 19th November 2016, 04:54
Hannia Hannia is offline
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 27,520
Hannia will become famous soon enough
Trump Names CIA Director, National Security Adviser, And Attorney General

U.S. Representative Mike Pompeo listens as former U.S. Secretary of State and Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton testifies before the House Select Committee on Benghazi in Washington, D.C., in October 2015.

U.S. President-elect Donald Trump has moved to fill some of the top positions in his government by selecting a Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) director, a national security adviser, and an attorney general.

Trump said in a statement he had chosen Representative Mike Pompeo (Republican-Kansas) to be CIA director, retired General Michael Flynn for the post of national security adviser, and Senator Jeff Sessions (Republican-Alabama) as the country's top prosecutor.

Pompeo and Sessions require confirmation by a majority vote in the Senate; Flynn does not.

Trump said Pompeo will be a "brilliant and unrelenting leader" as chief of the CIA.

Pompeo is a member of the Republican Party's conservative wing, the Tea Party, having been elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 2010.

He graduated top of his class from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point and graduated from Harvard Law School before spending five years in the army.

Pompeo, 52, has been critical of the deal that the United States and five other world powers signed with Tehran to curb Iran's controversial nuclear program.

He said on November 15, after the passage of a bill extending sanctions on Iranian weapons programs, that he voted for the legislation to keep "Americans safe" and to stand "against Iranian aggression."

Trump said he was happy to have Flynn by his side to "defeat radical Islamic terrorism."

Flynn, 57, served as the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency from 2012 to 2014, a position he was nominated for by President Barack Obama.

He served in the military from 1981 to 2014, including tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, before retiring with the rank of lieutenant general.

Flynn graduated from the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College as well as the Naval War College.

He says he considers radical Islam the greatest threat to global stability and has been critical of the Obama administration's policies in fighting the Islamic State (IS) group.

Flynn has said Washington could work with Russia to fight IS and other Islamic extremists. His appearance at a dinner in Moscow -- sitting next to President Vladimir Putin -- honoring the state television station RT alarmed many who noted his previous accommodating views of Russia's role in Ukraine.

Mike Flynn's appearance (left) at a dinner in Moscow -- sitting next to President Vladimir Putin (right) -- honoring the state television station RT alarmed many who noted his previous accommodating views of Russia's role in Ukraine.

Trump said Sessions, his pick for attorney general, was "greatly admired by legal scholars" and possesses a "world-class legal mind."

Sessions, 69, has been a senator since 1996, running for the seat after serving as attorney general of his home state of Alabama.

One of the most conservative members of the Senate, Sessions upholds a tough line against illegal immigrants and on border security.

He failed to gain a federal judgeship in 1986 after allegations he had made racist comments to African-Americans while attorney general.

Sessions was the first U.S. senator to pledge his support to Trump as a Republican candidate for president and was considered by Trump as a vice-presidential candidate.

He served in the army reserve before getting his law degree from the University of Alabama.
With reporting by AP, Reuters, and The New York Times
Trump Names CIA Director, National Security Adviser, And Attorney General

æ, !

Hannia - Hania - Mighthelp
Reply With Quote
  #42 (permalink)  
Old 19th November 2016, 13:24
Hannia Hannia is offline
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 27,520
Hannia will become famous soon enough
Donald Trump’s New York: The City of the ‘Bonfire of the Vanities’ Set

When he ventured out of Trump Tower for a meal with his family on Tuesday, President-elect Donald J. Trump went to the “21” Club, a former speakeasy on West 52nd Street where cast-iron lawn jockeys line the balcony above the front door. It is all of four blocks from Trump Tower.

But convenience was not necessarily the reason. The place is one of Mr. Trump’s regular hangouts. He has long had a favorite table there, one strategically placed for maximum visibility. His father was a regular, too, and has a plaque at what was his preferred table. “The Apprentice,” the reality television show that greatly elevated Mr. Trump’s celebrity, included a scene shot in the wine cellar.

The restaurant is a stop on the see-and-be-seen circuit that has helped define Mr. Trump’s New York City for more than 40 years. It is a circuit shaped not so much by discriminating taste as by celebrity culture — the right nightspots and parties, Broadway openings, red carpets, paparazzi with their cameras and flash guns.

In some ways, Mr. Trump’s New York is the city of the “Bonfire of the Vanities” set. In the 1970s, he spent late nights at Studio 54, the notorious disco for the rich and famous. More recently, when he treated Sarah Palin, the former governor of Alaska, to pizza, he took her to a Famous Famiglia on Broadway, a chain restaurant where most pizza-savvy New Yorkers would be unlikely to dine.

Mr. Trump is a New York power broker, but he has tended to shun the kinds of places that power brokers are known to frequent.

He is not likely to be seen digging into a $26 omelet at the Loews Regency, the Park Avenue way station for the power-breakfast crowd. “He was never in that group, although he’s friends with many of the people who go there,” said Matt Rich, a publicist who worked for many years as a consultant for Mr. Trump’s Miss Universe pageant.

Nor will the next president of the United States be spotted pushing a fork into a $34 niçoise salad at Michael’s, the West 55th Street restaurant for power-lunch types “I don’t know that he’s ever crossed the threshold,” Mr. Rich said.

What Mr. Trump appreciates as much as anything is an entrance. “He’d go out to be seen for maximum impact,” said Jonathan Marder, a publicist with a long list of A-list connections. “Don’t expect him to find an out-of-the-way little restaurant, unless it’s some place he owns.”

Like many New Yorkers and visitors to the city, Mr. Trump enjoys Broadway, but he has yet to see one of the most highly regarded and popular shows of recent years — “Hamilton,” the hip-hop-infused take on the nation’s founding. President Obama has attended two Broadway performances of the musical.

Mr. Trump went to a different kind of show, “Kinky Boots,” in 2013, early in its run. He was photographed at “Come Fly Away” on Broadway in 2010, and he and his wife, Melania, were seen at “American Idiot,” also in 2010, to name just two Broadway openings he attended.

“They’re both New Yorkers, and he likes the razzle-dazzle,” said Daryl Roth, the lead producer of “Kinky Boots.” (Mr. Trump named her husband, the real estate developer Steven Roth, an economic adviser to his campaign in August. Mr. Roth was quoted in September as saying he had not spent time on the campaign.)

The composer Andrew Lloyd Webber said in a BBC interview this week that he had persuaded Mr. Trump not to attend the opening of “School of Rock” last December, as his presidential campaign was accelerating. The show’s publicists had already issued a news release naming him as one of the first-nighters expected to be there. The list also included the musicians Sting and Stevie Nicks; the actress Helen Mirren; and William J. Bratton, the city’s police commissioner at the time. The concern was that Mr. Trump’s presence would prove distracting.

In the days since he was elected president, with potential cabinet picks marching into Trump Tower every day, Mr. Trump is not getting out much. He really does not have to: Everything he needs is in his own building.

“This is not like a normal situation,” said the celebrity photographer Patrick McMullan. “Here you have a person who was a regular New Yorker and did New York things and now he is the president-elect, which at best is an interim thing. Can he be random and go to ‘21’? Yes. But as far as a gala tonight at the Plaza, I wouldn’t expect it. Perhaps before, he would have gone, but now it’s all different.”

But from images taken over the years by photographers like Mr. McMullan, Mr. Trump’s New York seems confined within a limited circle — places in Midtown Manhattan with which he is closely identified, like the Plaza Hotel, a property he once owned. And restaurants like “21.”

Shaker Naini, who has greeted guests at “21” for 40 years from his post by the front door, remembered Mr. Trump’s arrival on Tuesday, just as he remembered the first time he arrived, in the early 1980s.

On that occasion, Mr. Naini said, another regular made the introduction — Roy M. Cohn, a widely feared lawyer who represented Mr. Trump for more than a decade before his death from AIDS in 1986. Mr. Cohn “walked in the door and said, ‘This is Mr. Trump,’” Mr. Naini recalled. “We already knew his father. Table 53.”

Table 53, also a favorite of the singer Andy Williams and the actor Alan King, is in the “17 section.” The restaurant has sections for each of the three brownstones it occupies. The “17 section” is “what is known as the quieter side of the dining room,” said Avery A. Fletcher, the restaurant’s director of sales and marketing.

Donald Trump found his place in the “21 section,” across the room — “where,” Mr. Naini said, “he’d see everyone, and everyone would pass him.”

“It’s the movers and shakers,” he said. “The same crowd that’s here one day, the next day they’re at the Four Seasons or Le Cirque.”

But the Four Seasons restaurant closed in July, and Mr. Trump’s last appearance at Le Cirque was in October, when he attended a fund-raiser for his campaign.

Carlo Mantica, a chief executive of the company that owns Le Cirque and other restaurants, said that Mr. Trump was partial to the Dover sole, listed at $80 on the menu, and the pasta primavera, which, because of a tradition dating to the 1970s, is not listed at all. Those who know simply ask for it.

At the “21,” Table 11, Mr. Trump’s favorite, was too small for the president-elect’s party for dinner on Tuesday, and he was seated instead at Table 14. The restaurant’s website says that Table 14 was a favorite of Frank Sinatra, Mayor Edward I. Koch and Nancy Reagan. To that list, Mr. Naini added Presidents John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon.

No one at the restaurant would say how far in advance the Trumps had made their reservation for that night. Mr. Naini said that Mr. Trump’s daughter Ivanka and her husband, Jared Kushner, had arrived first. Like Mr. Trump’s father, Mr. Kushner’s father “was a regular, too,” Mr. Naini said.

Mr. Trump arrived a few minutes later with his wife; his daughter Tiffany; and two of his sons. Other diners said the president-elect had a burger with fries.

Mr. Naini said that as Mr. Trump left, the president-elect tapped him on the arm and said, “I left a tip for you guys on the bill.”

That raised an after-the-fact question: Did Mr. Trump get Mr. Naini’s vote?

Mr. Naini, in an interview on Thursday, would not say. “That’s a personal thing,” he said. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/19/ny...-set.html?_r=0

æ, !

Hannia - Hania - Mighthelp
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 20:30.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC4 © 2006, Crawlability, Inc.
You Rated this Thread: