So you could read Tuesday night’s remarks (a better idea than listening to their somewhat soporific delivery) in part as an attempt to hit the reset button, to pitch himself as a centrist dealmaker rather than a predictable ideologue, to leave the legislative struggles of his first year behind and get back to selling people on things they actually want.Thus even as he touted his tax cuts, Trump effectively buried further efforts at Obamacare repeal by suggesting that the repeal of the unpopular individual mandate sufficed as health care policy.There was no mention of deficit reduction or spending cuts, nor of the entitlement reforms dear to the heart of the House speaker just behind him.Apart from a long riff on immigration and a nod to judicial nominations, the conservatism of the speech was heavy on generalities about flag, faith and family, with more polarizing issues like abortion mentioned only by implication.Apart from the Islamic State, North Korea and Guantánamo Bay, the foreign policy section was … strikingly empty. America First, it seems, means not having to bore viewers by bringing up anything about the world beyond our shores except our enemies.And then for domestic policy there was a list of ideas that Bernie Sanders might campaign on in 2020: cheaper prescription drugs, a $1.5 trillion gusher of infrastructure spending, even a promise to pursue paid family leave.Not conservative ideas, these — but mostly popular ones. Categories: Editorial, OpinionWhere policy was concerned, the story of Donald Trump’s first year in office was simple.The populist of the campaign trail, the man who won the Republican nomination and the White House by ignoring conservative orthodoxy and promising the moon, was replaced by a president who essentially conceded control of his agenda to Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell.It was characterized by a president who spent down his limited political capital pursuing conventionally right-wing policies — unsuccessfully on health care, successfully on taxes, but in each case without much moderate or bipartisan support.There are many reasons — one for almost every tweet — that Trump arrived at his first official State of the Union address as a wildly unpopular president despite a reasonably strong economy, but his failure to follow through on his campaign’s populist promises is high on the list. In this sense, and also in the canny and sometimes moving choices of inspirational figures in the balconies, I suspect the speech was effective, that it might help lift Trump temporarily upward from his mean of 38 percent approval toward the “we’re holding the House by our fingernails” promised land of 44 percent.But an effective speech is not the same thing as an effective agenda, and right now there are no prospects for Trump’s popular ideas getting enacted or even really considered in Congress.His party’s ideologues don’t want them, the opposition party doesn’t want to make a deal with Trump to get them, and his White House doesn’t actually have any detail behind the rhetoric.The ideas are just things that the president would probably like to do but that someone will talk him out of, or that he’ll forget about, or that he’ll offer in a halfhearted way and that Congress will never bother to take up.The only exception, the only issue where he does actually have some details to offer, is immigration reform.But here the speech’s appeal to the assembled legislators to make a version of the deal he’s offering on DACA — essentially an amnesty and path to citizenship now in exchange for future immigration reductions — was undercut by all the fearmongering about immigrant crime that Trump wrapped it in.For Democratic politicians whose base doesn’t want to compromise and whose own political interest isn’t served by any kind of major immigration deal, the bloody-shirt business with MS-13 murders was a permission slip for intransigence: Why make a bargain with a president who talks like half your immigrant constituents are gangbangers? So this State of the Union both showed what a more successful version of the Trump presidency would look like — still conservative on many fronts but more genuinely populist, less same-old GOP — and why the possibility of that success has probably already slipped from this administration’s grip.There were ideas here that could make Trump’s second year more successful than the first, but there was no plan to actually enact them, no sign that Trump is prepared to build bridges where he’s burned them, no plan for getting more out of this speech than just a temporary polling bump.What there was instead was something you can expect to hear a lot of between now and November 2020: “If you like this economy, you should like me, too.”Politicians have won re-election with that sort of messaging.But few of them have had as far to climb to reach even basic likability as President Donald Trump.Ross Douthat is a blogger and columnist with The New York Times.More from The Daily Gazette:EDITORIAL: Urgent: Today is the last day to complete the censusEDITORIAL: Thruway tax unfair to working motoristsEDITORIAL: Beware of voter intimidationEDITORIAL: Find a way to get family members into nursing homesFoss: Should main downtown branch of the Schenectady County Public Library reopen?
Twins: Trevor Larnach (No. 93), Blayne Enlow and Stephen GonsalvesThe Twins have more than enough position-player talent to entice the Giants, but it’s very farfetched to believe they’ll give up either Royce Lewis or Alex Kirilloff, who might be a better prospect tandem than Byron Buxton and Miguel Sano. But they could part ways with Trevor Larnach, who has been very good this year and is emerging as a very good prospect himself.Blayne Enlow has a ton of upside and Stephen Gonsalves still hasn’t gotten a chance in the rotation for whatever reason. He is hurt right now but if he is healthy he can be a guy you could put right into a rotation as the team rebuilds. What will it take to land Madison Bumgarner?Yankees: Jonathan Loaisiga (No. 97 MLB Pipeline), Albert AbreuThe Giants might not want to settle on a deal for Bumgarner, but if they want to trade him to the Yankees they might have to. While the Giants need a lot of everything, they really need position players because Evan Longoria, Joe Panik, Brandon Crawford and Brandon Belt are all 28 or older — and three are older than 30. The Yankees, though, don’t have a ton of position player talent in their minor-league system and they likely won’t give up Clint Frazier on a rental.But, if San Francisco has its heart set on dealing Bumgarner to the Yankees it could get back some good pitching with Jonathan Loaisiga, who could start in a lot of rotations now, and Albert Abreu, who has ace potential if he puts it all together. This deal will probably take a third piece too and it could come in the form of a lower-level prospect who few people have heard of. Also, take into account this deal will probably run something pretty similar to what Yu Darvish did in 2017. It will take a higher-level prospect and two more medium-level prospects to complete it.Astros: J.B. Bukauskas (No. 97), Freudis Nova and Abraham ToroThe Astros have almost exactly what the Giants need though they might not be aching to get Bumgarner. They have top-level pitching talent in J.B. Bukauskas, who will either be a good starter or a great reliever, and they have underrated mid-level talent in the infield with guys like Freudis Nova and Abraham Toro. Nova is probably going to be knocking on the door of the top-100 prospect list going forward and Toro is only at the Double-A level because Houston is stacked at Triple-A. He dominated the Arizona Fall League this year and is still only 22 years old.Braves: Drew Waters (No. 44), Kolby Allard and Joey WentzThe Braves could decide to move Christian Pache but that’s doubtful. Drew Waters would probably be the more likely guy to move, and while the Giants need position players, they also need lefties. Atlanta has an assortment of them. Kolby Allard is a former top-100 prospect and Joey Wentz is a raw and projectable lefty who could be very good very soon.Brewers: Corey Ray, Mauricio Dubon and Drew RasmussenThe Brewers don’t have quite as much high-end pitching talent as the Giants may want, but they have some good depth they could play with. They have some good position players at the top of their system with Corey Ray possibly being the best of the bunch aside from Keston Hiura, who Milwaukee will not move. Ray has speed and some power and could be a very good leadoff man in the future at AT&T Park.Mauricio Dubon is an older prospect but he has played very well of late. As for Drew Rasmussen, he could be a closer going forward, but he has been productive so far as a starter so until it is proven he can’t do it, he is a starting pitching prospect and a hard-throwing one at that. MLB trade rumors: Here’s who the Tigers could want from teams targeting Matthew Boyd Madison Bumgarner will likely be traded, but the Giants don’t want to give him up for nothing.However, it is unclear if they actually have that luxury. While San Francisco has been better this year than some might have thought, the Giants still need to rebuild due to the team getting up there in age. Right now, Bumgarner is likely to net the best return in a deal. Maybe Jeff Samardzija could too, but due to his age and the amount of money left, he probably won’t get quite as much as MadBum.So, what will it take from teams interested to get him in a deal? We take a look at what the Yankees, Braves, Brewers, Twins and Astros might have to give up to get him. Related News MLB trade rumors: What could Yankees, Astros, Padres offer for Noah Syndergaard? MLB trade rumors: Here’s who the Yankees could want from teams targeting Clint Frazier