Frazier is an assistant professor at the Crump College of Law at St. Thomas University. He previously clerked for the Montana Supreme Court.
The holiday season lends itself to wishful thinking. With that spirit in mind, I’m asking Santa to help the American people identify and elect a candidate willing to deliver this speech:
My fellow Americans,
I don’t have all the answers. The problems we face today cannot be solved by a couple of tweets nor by a single party. From artificial intelligence to zoonotic diseases, the threats to our well-being have picked up speed, increased in complexity and spread across borders. I wish simple solutions existed. I admit that I’m often as puzzled and surprised by the size and scale of the problems we face as you.
So, though I cannot promise you answers, I can make the following pledges: We will recruit the brightest experts from across America to help us monitor and understand the risks we face; we will collaborate and coordinate with our allies to ensure that the global community is acting in unison; and, we will update you quickly and honestly along the way.
You should also know that I’m going to make mistakes. Although I’m confident that we’re going to increase our capacity to study and solve problems, these policy issues are like Jenga pieces – moving one piece can have significant and unpredictable effects on the larger structure. In an ideal world, I could prevent my team from causing any structural instability; in our current world, wobbles and shakes are inevitable. I won’t hide those from you. Instead, I’ll let you know about missteps as quickly as I let you know about steps forward. In return, I plead for your patience. I know that’s a lot to ask for in an age of drone-delivered pizzas. Nevertheless, your trust is essential to this approach to governance.
I’m also going to have to make trade-offs – to pick winners and losers. This is the roughest part of my job. Though some decisions will have uncertain results, others will very clearly impact certain communities more so than others. Again, I’d much prefer to only make choices that increase the well-being of everyone. We don’t live in that world. I’ll tell you now that when I confront those trade-offs, I’m going to err on the side of our kids. Decisions made decades ago have fudged up the future. This generation and the ones that follow it will need all the help they can get to overcome the potholes we created and failed to cover.
At this point, I know I’ve lost some of you. For those still reading, thank you for bravely considering a different kind of politician. This campaign faces stiff headwinds; it’s akin to a sailboat launching in the middle of a hurricane. There’s a route through the storm, but getting there will require a lot of teamwork and a lot of discipline. I hope you’ll join my crew. I need you and I believe America needs our commitment to a better approach to solving our collective problems.
If you’re still on the fence about whether to join this cause, I urge you to consider how much the status quo has cost us. Our inclination to pick sides means we’re constantly operating at less than full speed. Our bias toward certainty means we’re failing to recognize the substantial uncertainty we face. Our acceptance of a stagnant system means we’re making complex policy problems even more difficult to address.
Let’s dare to learn together, to work together and to bring about a better future together.
Happy holidays.
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio speaks with U.S. President Donald Trump during a Cabinet meeting in the Cabinet Room of the White House on May 27, 2026 in Washington, D.C. Trump met with his Cabinet days after saying a peace deal with Iran was“ largely negotiated” amid expectations around the re-opening the Strait of Hormuz.
The worst deal in the history of deals
As a former Republican, sometimes it’s fun to look back on the things we — I was part of a “we” at one time — criticized Democrats for, and not all that long ago.
Remember, if you will, when Republicans condemned former President Bill Clinton for pardoning his brother and his corrupt donor friend Marc Rich?
Or, remember when Republicans wagged their fingers at former President Barack Obama’s golf outings? Or his executive orders? Or his Syrian “red line”?
Or all the times Republicans went after former President Joe Biden’s gaffes?
While those criticisms may have been justified at the time, they look patently ridiculous next to our current president’s cartoonish and downright dangerous offenses.
Offenses like pardoning Jan. 6 insurrectionists — nearly 100 of whom have gone on to be arrested for, charged with, or convicted of crimes separate from the events of that day.
Or wreaking havoc on the global economy by instituting reckless tariffs on friends, neighbors, and enemies alike?
Or taking a proverbial sledge hammer to countless government agencies that have put every American in danger, whether on airplanes, in hospitals, at job sites, or in natural disasters.
That’s just a few, but nothing looks worse next to his predecessors than Donald Trump’s supposed Iran deal, at least as it’s outlined in the Memorandum of Understanding, the details of which Trump was loath to share.
And for good reason — they are shockingly bad and humiliating for the U.S.
I remember Obama’s Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPOA from 2015 very well. I, along with many Republicans as well as a cadre of foreign policy experts, criticized that deal for its obvious and problematic concessions to a very bad actor who we’ve long known could not be trusted. But trust was what we gave the Iranian regime, as well as sudden access to a boatload of cash — $100 billion, to be exact.
All of Obama’s provisions were temporary, which would allow Iran to restart enriching uranium upon their sunset; the deal didn’t address Iran’s ballistic missiles, or its funding of terrorist proxies like Hezbollah and Hamas; the supposed “anytime, anywhere” inspections came with a 24-day delay, if Iran so chose, giving them ample time to hide any suspect materials; and it didn’t require any congressional authority.
In short, I’d argue it wasn’t a great deal. But as bad as it was, it looks like the Magna Carta next to Trump’s.
Trump’s deal would give Iran immediate sanction relief and access to $300 billion, presumably to use to fund terror proxies; it doesn’t secure any upfront limits on uranium enrichment or missile development; it allows Iran to charge for safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz in the future; and it calls for Israel to stop its attacks on Hezbollah, another win for Iran.
Neither Americans nor the Middle East are safer than we were 100-plus days ago when Trump decided to pursue this folly. And in fact, our economy is weaker for it. But Iran is unquestionably stronger and more emboldened.
They’ve seen Trump’s weakness, unseriousness, and frighteningly limited appreciation for history. They’ve seen him retreat on most of his core threats to the regime, from bombing their cultural sites to ending a civilization overnight. And they’ve taken notice as he’s abandoned the promises that were supposedly central to his justification for war in the first place — regime change, liberating the Iranian people, and removing Iran’s nuclear materials.
What a waste of blood and treasure, not to mention American might and power, only so that our enemies can watch us limp desperately toward a conclusion that’s being described — by the right — as “unthinkable,” “appeasement,” and “the worst foreign policy blunder in decades.”
S.E. Cupp is the host of "S.E. Cupp Unfiltered" on CNN.