Editorial Roundup: United States

Excerpts from recent editorials in the United States and abroad:

Aug. 30

The Dallas Morning News on the upcoming RNC convention amid “anxiety and uncertainty”

As President Donald Trump’s midterm convention at the American Airlines Center approaches, the political mood in America is, to put it mildly, divided and uneasy.

As the host city, it’s hard to know how to take such a gathering. These things have a long history of courting trouble — sometimes of the good, democracy-is-messy variety, and sometimes of the bad 1968-Chicago-cops-beating-the-crowd-with-truncheons style.

We would like to look back for guidance on the last time we held a GOP convention, in 1984, when President Ronald Reagan was on his way to a historic romp of Walter Mondale.

But that feels as irrelevant to today as Lincoln’s Wigwam in 1860.

Sure, there are similarities between the GOP platform of the ’80s and the Republican Party today.

But there’s also a yawning gap in the politics of that time and what Dallas can expect now.

Reagan came here with a tough argument about conservatism versus liberalism. He didn’t mix words in his acceptance speech about which represented a path to prosperity and strength and which led to impoverishment and dependence. His wasn’t all sunshine and promise. He clearly delineated a policy vision that marked a departure from the progressivism of the early 20th century, and he criticized his opponents for representing weak and failed policies.

“By nearly every measure, the position of poor Americans worsened under the leadership of our opponents. Teenage drug use, out-of-wedlock births, and crime increased dramatically. Urban neighborhoods and schools deteriorated,” he said.

Reagan arrived in Dallas with an approval rating that was well above 50% throughout 1984 and that kept climbing after he left, according to the American Presidency Project. The secret to his success was not only a strong economy we credit to conservative policies but an abiding sense of optimism and a deep desire to convince people who didn’t agree with him that his ideas were the best ideas, not that his opponents were stupid or unpatriotic or evil because they disagreed.

So what we can expect in September?

Under President Donald Trump, the Republican Party has narrowed. Political rhetoric has become poisonous everywhere, and the sense that the nation can be united in the way Reagan so often described has been extinguished. No longer is there an optimistic and forward-looking vision. Instead, there is a persistent amplification of division, demonization and disregard for those who dare to disagree.

When Trump took office in 2025, he had the approval of 47% of the country, according to Reuters Ipsos. His approval rating last week was 33%.There is no reason to believe it will climb significantly before he gets to Dallas.

At no point in his latest term has he sought to draw in those who might disagree.

His political personality is rooted in schoolyard insults: “sleepy Joe,” “crooked Hillary” and “Ron DeSanctimonious,” to name a few of the nasty nicknames he’s tacked on his opponents. Shortly before the November 2024 election, Trump called then-Vice President Kamala Harris “slow” and “lazy” and said she had a “low IQ.” We could go on.

We must acknowledge his way of campaigning has been highly effective, and it’s changed politics broadly, on both the right and the left. Michelle Obama’s idea that “when they go low, we go high” has become a punchline about a quaint, innocent and bygone day.

The GOP today mostly reflects Trump’s communication style, even as its leaders struggle to keep up with his shifting versions of conservatism. Isolationist yesterday. In a war of choice today. Free trade for me but not for thee. Data centers? Yes! Maybe? No.

Reagan was promoting a complex political and economic philosophy that he genuinely believed would pull more Americans into wealth and make our world safer and freer than it had ever been.

We cannot clearly understand or articulate the vision for this country that we might hear in our city next month.

What we can all but promise is that much of what is said will be cruel, low and divisive.

The rhetoric of the social media swamp is now the lingua franca of American politics, and it’s damaging our country in ways that will be hard to repair.

Trump is the foremost symbol of this new reality, but its practitioners are everywhere.

For Dallas, we can expect to be the center of a celebration for the true believers and a source of scorn for the other side.

But what will be accomplished for the nation?

Rent, food and healthcare remain painfully expensive for most Americans. Federal spending is completely out of control, threatening financial disaster for the next generation. We are mired in a war in the Middle East with no clear path out. Our most dangerous adversary, China, is watching our increasing disunity with great pleasure.

Social media algorithms, often with addictive qualities, deluge us with empty slogans and misinformation. Endless dumb shows of “influencers” capitalize on whoever falls into that foul stream.

Americans are losing confidence in a better tomorrow.

Trump’s convention arrives amid this storm of anxiety and uncertainty. What we need is a serious and considerate assessment of where we are and a vision of how we can, together, address our fears and build a better nation.

What we will get, we must believe, will be nothing of the sort.

ONLINE: https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/article/trump-republican-convention-dallas-reagan-22408022.php

Sept. 1

The Philadelphia Inquirer on Donald Trump's oil deal with Venezuela

As a businessman, Donald Trump often cut corners, broke promises, and made bad deals. Now that he has the power of the U.S. government at his disposal, the submission of Republicans in Congress, and a pliant U.S. Supreme Court, the only difference is the scale of the abuse, corruption, and foolishness he brings to his ventures.

Late Friday, the president announced on Truth Social that he had reached an agreement with Venezuela to secure more than 65 billion barrels of oil. “This Historic Transaction MORE THAN DOUBLES American Oil Reserves, greatly increases our Oil Supply, and will substantially lower Gas Prices for all Americans, long into the future,” he wrote.

The deal, such as it is, is, in fact, very significant, as total proven U.S. reserves are about 81 billion barrels. But the rest of Trump’s claims, and the agreement itself, should be buried under caveats.

Trump noted that this comes “at no expense to the American taxpayer.” This is true unless you count the roughly $5 billion the U.S. has spent on military operations around Venezuela since August of 2025, including extrajudicial killings at sea and the illegal invasion that ended with the kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife on Jan. 3.

There is also the incalculable reputational cost as the United States’ revived imperialistic push into Latin America mirrors the president’s transactional nature and authoritarian bent.

The deal was reached with the unelected Venezuelan President Delcy Rodríguez, who took office after Maduro was taken. Never mind that she was part of the same repressive socialist regime that is accused of rampant corruption and human rights abuses; she has proved a lot more willing to work with the Trump administration than her predecessor.

Reports out of Venezuela find some people are hopeful U.S. investment will benefit the nation, yet under a government rife with cronyism, only a select few will likely reap any reward. Although details are still scarce, the agreement already sees the U.S. partner with a private company run by Alejandro Betancourt, an ally of Rodríguez, who has been under investigation by prosecutors in Zurich.

Trump’s assertion that gas prices will drop thanks to this deal is delusional, at least any time soon, as it would take years for this Venezuelan oil to have any impact on costs at the pump.

And that’s if the deal comes to fruition at all. The risks, at home and abroad, are significant.

The agreement would reportedly give Betancourt’s company access to 17 oil fields that are said to contain 65 billion barrels of oil. Development would cost billions of dollars and could take more than a decade. The Pentagon would finance the plan, but the legality of its participation is in question — as well as how the deal was crafted in the first place — meaning court challenges may be inevitable.

There are also political realities to contend with.

With Maduro gone and Trump threatening use of force, the Venezuelan government changed its position on working with the U.S. overnight. That could change just as quickly once Trump leaves office and if the new occupant of the White House has different priorities or if the current government of Venezuela is replaced and decides to honor the country’s 1999 constitution, which states that oil reserves belong to the nation and cannot be sold.

The high investment cost and political volatility are why U.S. oil companies have been reticent to enter Venezuela, even under pressure from Trump. According to the Wall Street Journal, Exxon and other energy interests are in talks to expand operations there, which is the prerogative of any private company that is willing to roll the dice on long-term investment, but should be far from the purview of the U.S. government and its taxpayers.

Trump’s half-baked oil agreement in Venezuela tramples that country’s sovereignty, benefits corrupt interests, and will likely fail to deliver for the American people. The art of the deal strikes again.

ONLINE: https://www.inquirer.com/opinion/editorials/venezuela-oil-deal-trump-latin-america-maduro-20260901.html

Aug. 31

The Guardian on the side-effects of Donald Trump's immigration crackdowns

Is the Trump administration creating a group in the US with fewer protections against executive power owing to their immigration status? Its often openly racist actions suggest so. US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) claims to target “the worst of the worst” – undocumented migrants who commit violent crimes. Yet the Guardian reported that over half of those arrested in July had no criminal convictions or pending charges. That month, ICE made record arrests and deportations, apprehending 1,500 people and removing 1,100 daily.

When campaigning, Donald Trump falsely claimed that Haitians were “eating the pets”. In office, his administration moved to end temporary protected status (TPS) for Haitians. In June, the supreme court let the protection expire, leaving about 350,000 people at risk of deportation to a country gripped by violence and instability. The court’s decision means more than 1 million TPS holders from 13 nations previously considered too unsafe to return to are now at risk of deportation. Many have lived and worked legally in the US for years.

Although Barack Obama deported a record 430,000 people in 2013, his administration focused largely on border-crossers. Mr Trump’s crackdown reaches deep into America, targeting those who call the country home. The Economist reports that Trumpian legal tactics have left 1.7 million more immigrants open to deportation.

Mr Trump’s dehumanising rhetoric does political work: it turns groups into threats, making harsh treatment easier to justify. By calling migration an “invasion”, he sought to suspend habeas corpus – the ancient safeguard against arbitrary detention. When that proved too much even for Mr Trump, his administration attacked due process instead. In July 2025, an ICE directive quietly rewrote detention policy, treating many migrants arrested inside the US as if they had just arrived at the border, denying them bond hearings. For many, the only recourse was to go to the federal courts. Judges repeatedly ruled the policy illegal yet thousands languish in detention for months awaiting relief.

The White House has sought to deport immigrants for protected political speech. Last week, a federal judge ruled visa cancellations for noncitizen students’ pro-Palestinian advocacy unconstitutional. Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia graduate and permanent resident whose arrest by ICE in 2025 after Gaza protests made global news, is still fighting a final deportation order – a stark threat to liberty.

Mr Trump’s immigration crackdown still fires up his Maga base, but is unpopular with many Americans. In one week in July, three ICE encounters ended in death. ICE’s masked thuggishness is a disgrace. So is the president’s cruelty. The Brookings Institution thinktank estimates that more than 100,000 children, three-quarters of whom are probably US citizens, have been separated from their parents during Mr Trump’s second term.

The argument within the US right is moving beyond undocumented migrants and noncitizens. Some Republicans are pushing to restrict the rights of naturalised and dual citizens – including their right to run for office. They may be spooked by the success of the Ugandan-born New York mayor Zohran Mamdani, whose family has Indian roots. Mr Trump has long spoken about – and treated – people differently according to their race. He is still doing so. The US has been down this road before. Abraham Lincoln understood the danger: once equality admits exceptions, where do they stop?

ONLINE: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/aug/31/the-guardian-view-on-trumps-immigration-crackdown-who-will-have-fewer-rights-next

Aug. 26

The Wall Street Journal on the FDA approval of a new therapy for pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer has long been an agonizing death sentence, but it could be commuted by novel treatments and earlier detection. That’s the hope after the Food and Drug Administration on Wednesday approved Revolution Medicines’s novel drug, daraxonrasib, which doubled survival time in a late-stage trial for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.

Oncologists herald the small-molecule pill as a revolution in pancreatic cancer care. The prognosis for pancreatic cancer is typically bleak, with a five-year survival rate of about 3% for Stage 4. Patients fare better if their cancers are caught early (40%), but very few are.

The usual course of treatment involves physically draining rounds of chemotherapy and radiation. If patients stop responding, they have scant options. Immunotherapies haven’t proven effective against pancreatic cancer, which is almost always driven by a mutation in the RAS gene family.

These mutations are adept at evading targeted treatments and were long considered “undruggable.” Revolution’s daraxonrasib upends this assumption. Patients in its trial lived a median of 13.2 months, compared to 6.7 months for those who received chemotherapy. The drug also reduced the risk of death by 60% compared to the chemotherapy group.

These results would be impressive for any cancer drug, but especially for a disease that has defied treatment. When former Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse was diagnosed with Stage 4 pancreatic cancer in December, he was given three to four months to live. He’s still living, we are delighted to say (and writing for these op-ed pages), after receiving daraxonrasib as part of a clinical trial.

Daraxonrasib may not cure most patients, but it could give them precious more time with loved ones and help them hang on while other experimental treatments are developed. AI models and blood tests that detect cancers earlier could also improve the prognosis.

The Mayo Clinic this year reported that its AI model could allow specialists to detect pancreatic cancer on routine abdominal CT scans up to three years before it is typically diagnosed by picking up on subtle changes not visible to the human eye. Many cancers like melanoma were once also considered “terminal,” as doctors used to say, until breakthrough treatments came along and they weren’t.

ONLINE: https://www.wsj.com/opinion/fda-approves-daraxonrasib-pancreatic-cancer-drug-revolution-medicines-5a7ff903?mod=editorials_article_pos19

Aug. 31

The Washington Post on the cost of the Iran war

The Iran war was launched with too little scrutiny and has been prosecuted with too much secrecy. The government has systematically sought to conceal from the American people the true costs of President Donald Trump’s war of choice, including its toll on military readiness.

The Post’s Alex Horton and Tara Copp revealed over the weekend that several military leaders have warned Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that “prolonging large-scale operations against Iran is unsustainable and risks weakening their ability to confront threats elsewhere, including the U.S. homeland.”

The commanders responsible for U.S. forces in Europe, Asia and Latin America, along with the Navy’s top admiral, privately said in an Aug. 14 document that they disagree with Hegseth’s order to extend their forces but will nevertheless carry it out. In military parlance, this is a “non-concur.”

On Sunday, Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell posted online that “non-concurs are standard” and Hegseth “sees them constantly.” Parnell also said, without evidence, that much of The Post’s scoop was inaccurate. The Post’s newsroom, which operates independently of the opinion section, responded by expressing confidence in its reporting.

The generals clearly have good reasons to worry about resources being stretched thin. Troops have been overextended, and it’s taking a toll on morale. Stockpiles of critical weapons are running low. Roughly a quarter of the Pentagon’s Reaper drones have been used. And the Navy’s only aircraft carrier in the Pacific was diverted to the Middle East earlier this month. Allies are rattled.

In a free society, there is an overwhelming public interest in knowing these facts. The Constitution guarantees the rights of news organizations to publish such information.

Six months ago, Trump took the country into a preemptive war without making a robust case for why it was in the national interest. He never articulated a clear strategy or endgame. Trump also refused to seek congressional authorization.

The administration and its defenders argue that The Post’s reporting will undermine deterrence, but Trump’s hubris already did that. The president apparently let the success of the operation to remove Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro get to his head. He seemed convinced that toppling the regime in Tehran would be easy, too.

Now there’s a quagmire, and Trump wants to put the Iran issue back on the shelf, at least until after the midterms. To hold elected leaders accountable, voters need to know the truth.

ONLINE: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2026/08/31/americans-have-right-know-costs-iran-war/