Showing posts with label election-USA-2016. Show all posts
Showing posts with label election-USA-2016. Show all posts
Friday, 3 February 2017
The Deplorables of Punxsutawney
Yesterday was Groundhog Day, so I watched the excellent film of the same name. It is set in the town of Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania, and I couldn't help thinking of it in relation to Trump's election victory.
Friday, 20 January 2017
President Zuckerberg
A Vanity Fair piece by Nick Bilton asks, Will Mark Zuckerberg Be Our Next President?
According to Betteridge's Law of Headlines, the answer is no. But in his opening sentence Bilton insists this is a serious question, so let's play along. (The same question has been picked up by The Atlantic.)
According to Betteridge's Law of Headlines, the answer is no. But in his opening sentence Bilton insists this is a serious question, so let's play along. (The same question has been picked up by The Atlantic.)
 |
| Mark Zuckerberg. Photo credit: By Presidência do México - Flickr, CC BY 2.0, Link |
Friday, 23 December 2016
The Positive Emperor
Between Trump, Brexit, Syria, and elsewhere, this has been an awful, terrifying year in the news. I'm going to try and conclude it with something a little more positive.
By way of background, I have a friend, let's call him Bill. He's a lot more devoted to political reform than I am. He works for an NGO and goes to dangerous parts of the world, to spend time building institutions of democracy. I don't agree with all of his views, but I give him kudos for intelligence and dedication.
Bill has repeatedly criticised me for failing to offer a positive vision. I think he misunderstands this blog, and my activity on social media more generally. I more or less explicitly model my blogging on Ed at Gin and Tacos. Ed has described his modus operandi as something like, "Here is this stupid thing, and here is Ed making fun of it."
This is a hobby for me. I write about politics to amuse myself (and hopefully others), and criticising is easier and more enjoyable than designing worthy proposals. I try not to have delusions of grandeur; my blog isn't going to transform the world either way, so I might as well have fun. And for the record, my day job is in computational biology. Among other things, I'm contributing to new treatments for cancer. So I'm pretty secure in my belief that I'm a responsible citizen.
That said: Okay, Bill. You wanted a positive vision, and here it is.
Imagine that by an unlikely chain of events, I am made Emperor of the United States, Shogun of Japan, Grand High Poobah of Australia, and Protector of the Western World, with absolute power over the USA, the EU, Canada, Australia, Japan, and sundry other rich and more-or-less democratic countries. The rest of the world matters too, but I don't understand places like China well enough to articulate their problems with any confidence, let alone propose solutions; this Empire is plenty to be getting on with.
What would I do?
By way of background, I have a friend, let's call him Bill. He's a lot more devoted to political reform than I am. He works for an NGO and goes to dangerous parts of the world, to spend time building institutions of democracy. I don't agree with all of his views, but I give him kudos for intelligence and dedication.
Bill has repeatedly criticised me for failing to offer a positive vision. I think he misunderstands this blog, and my activity on social media more generally. I more or less explicitly model my blogging on Ed at Gin and Tacos. Ed has described his modus operandi as something like, "Here is this stupid thing, and here is Ed making fun of it."
This is a hobby for me. I write about politics to amuse myself (and hopefully others), and criticising is easier and more enjoyable than designing worthy proposals. I try not to have delusions of grandeur; my blog isn't going to transform the world either way, so I might as well have fun. And for the record, my day job is in computational biology. Among other things, I'm contributing to new treatments for cancer. So I'm pretty secure in my belief that I'm a responsible citizen.
That said: Okay, Bill. You wanted a positive vision, and here it is.
Imagine that by an unlikely chain of events, I am made Emperor of the United States, Shogun of Japan, Grand High Poobah of Australia, and Protector of the Western World, with absolute power over the USA, the EU, Canada, Australia, Japan, and sundry other rich and more-or-less democratic countries. The rest of the world matters too, but I don't understand places like China well enough to articulate their problems with any confidence, let alone propose solutions; this Empire is plenty to be getting on with.
What would I do?
 |
| Joshua A Norton, self-proclaimed Emperor of the United States, whose life was dramatised by Neil Gaiman in The Sandman. |
Friday, 16 December 2016
Full Circle
In the 1999 novel The Business, by the late Iain Banks, a character describes contemporary Russia:
This portrait was written before Putin's rise to power, in the chaotic reign of Boris Yeltsin; but it still contains much truth.
Modern Russia practices a particularly vicious form of gangster capitalism. The only truly effective institutions of the state are the military and security services. Those the state perceives as enemies are met with overwhelming force. A hollow charade of elective democracy is not allowed to disturb the oligarchs who truly wield power.
Here is the bitter conclusion which Banks did not live to see: The United States of America is now controlled by people who see the nightmare vision of Russia as a model to follow.
What was imagined as a grotesque caricature of America is now becoming its reality.
Many of Trump's senior advisors openly admire and align themselves with Russia. His cabinet picks are heavy with retired generals and sociopathic business executives, the better to secure an oligarchy. For their part, the Republican majorities in Congress will find a White House which indulges their most rapacious ideas.
In a previous post, I made fun of a Washington Post columnist who urged Democrats in the Electoral College to vote for Mitt Romney.
In point of fact, the Republican leadership can still make Romney President without a single Democrat vote. All they need to do is flip thirty-seven Republican electors from Trump to Romney, so that no one candidate receives a majority in the EC. Under the Twelfth Amendment to the US Constitution, the three candidates are then voted on by the House of Representatives, where the Republicans hold a majority.
But why on Earth would they want to do a thing like that? Then they would have to own their opposition to Trump. They would have to take responsibility for angering his supporters. They would have halted his coronation, in favour of a candidate who might occasionally show some glimmer of conscience.
Trump will not stand in their way. He is fluent in the language of rage and hate spoken by the Republican base, in a way that bloodless ghouls like Paul Ryan cannot match. They think he will be useful to them, distracting the rubes while they get on with asset-stripping the country; and they are probably right.
The present incarnation of the Republican party has stopped even pretending it wants to build anything of value. All it cares about making are walls and prisons. All power to the billionaires, the police, and the army; everyone else is there to be crushed and discarded.
From their point of view, the main risk is that Trump might blunder into a nuclear war or some other disaster; one so bad, it casts down even the billionaires and their most highly placed servants. Evidently, that is a chance they are willing to take.
In a way, this movement reminds me of the so-called Islamic State. It is not subtle. It goes out of its way to think of the most sadistic and destructive things it can do, and then does them. It takes joy in the horror it inspires in anyone with a sense of decency.
I am very cautious about talking of politics in terms of good and evil. I don't apply the word "evil" to normal, democratic politicians with whom I happen to disagree. However, Trump and his henchmen are anything but normal.
Trump and the leadership of the Republican party are evil. It's not a secret; they openly celebrate their cruelty. Their one saving grace is that they are not terribly competent. I hope the better angels of America's nature, from both conservative and liberal traditions, prove capable of standing up to them.
The Russians have created their own form of capitalism in the image of what was portrayed to them as the reality of the West by the old Soviet Union's propaganda machine. They were informed that there was nothing but gangsterism, gross and endemic corruption, naked profiteering, a vast, starving, utterly exploited underclass and a tiny number of rapacious, vicious capitalist crooks who were entirely above the law. Of course, even at its most laissez-faire the West was never remotely like that, but that's what the Russians have now created for themselves.
This portrait was written before Putin's rise to power, in the chaotic reign of Boris Yeltsin; but it still contains much truth.
Modern Russia practices a particularly vicious form of gangster capitalism. The only truly effective institutions of the state are the military and security services. Those the state perceives as enemies are met with overwhelming force. A hollow charade of elective democracy is not allowed to disturb the oligarchs who truly wield power.
Here is the bitter conclusion which Banks did not live to see: The United States of America is now controlled by people who see the nightmare vision of Russia as a model to follow.
What was imagined as a grotesque caricature of America is now becoming its reality.
 |
| Symbol of a republic in grave peril. Image source: Wikimedia Commons |
Many of Trump's senior advisors openly admire and align themselves with Russia. His cabinet picks are heavy with retired generals and sociopathic business executives, the better to secure an oligarchy. For their part, the Republican majorities in Congress will find a White House which indulges their most rapacious ideas.
In a previous post, I made fun of a Washington Post columnist who urged Democrats in the Electoral College to vote for Mitt Romney.
In point of fact, the Republican leadership can still make Romney President without a single Democrat vote. All they need to do is flip thirty-seven Republican electors from Trump to Romney, so that no one candidate receives a majority in the EC. Under the Twelfth Amendment to the US Constitution, the three candidates are then voted on by the House of Representatives, where the Republicans hold a majority.
But why on Earth would they want to do a thing like that? Then they would have to own their opposition to Trump. They would have to take responsibility for angering his supporters. They would have halted his coronation, in favour of a candidate who might occasionally show some glimmer of conscience.
Trump will not stand in their way. He is fluent in the language of rage and hate spoken by the Republican base, in a way that bloodless ghouls like Paul Ryan cannot match. They think he will be useful to them, distracting the rubes while they get on with asset-stripping the country; and they are probably right.
The present incarnation of the Republican party has stopped even pretending it wants to build anything of value. All it cares about making are walls and prisons. All power to the billionaires, the police, and the army; everyone else is there to be crushed and discarded.
From their point of view, the main risk is that Trump might blunder into a nuclear war or some other disaster; one so bad, it casts down even the billionaires and their most highly placed servants. Evidently, that is a chance they are willing to take.
In a way, this movement reminds me of the so-called Islamic State. It is not subtle. It goes out of its way to think of the most sadistic and destructive things it can do, and then does them. It takes joy in the horror it inspires in anyone with a sense of decency.
I am very cautious about talking of politics in terms of good and evil. I don't apply the word "evil" to normal, democratic politicians with whom I happen to disagree. However, Trump and his henchmen are anything but normal.
Trump and the leadership of the Republican party are evil. It's not a secret; they openly celebrate their cruelty. Their one saving grace is that they are not terribly competent. I hope the better angels of America's nature, from both conservative and liberal traditions, prove capable of standing up to them.
Friday, 9 December 2016
Break Glass In Emergency
The Electoral College will meet on the 19th of December. It is almost certain to formalise the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States.
Almost certain. Thereby hangs a tale.
Almost certain. Thereby hangs a tale.
 |
| Maybe he won't be looking so smug after all? |
Friday, 2 December 2016
American Nightmare
Twenty-four days after the election, and the reality of the forthcoming Trump administration is beginning to sink in. We are in a scary place.
How did we get here, and what happens now?
How did we get here, and what happens now?
 |
| To reiterate: If the Comedian were a real person, he'd be loving this, and also working for Trump. |
Friday, 18 November 2016
Polls, Predictions, and Russian Roulette
In the aftermath of the US election, prediction websites have been heavily criticised for giving Clinton a high chance of victory. This is not the fault of the sites themselves; I think it has more to do with the mindset of the users.
 |
| This is really safe, right? |
Friday, 11 November 2016
The Wolf Hall President
Donald Trump will be President of the United States.
I feel physically sick typing those words, but this is the new reality and we have to deal with it. The fact of Trump's victory is bad enough, but more sickening is the rush to normalise him.
I feel physically sick typing those words, but this is the new reality and we have to deal with it. The fact of Trump's victory is bad enough, but more sickening is the rush to normalise him.
|
| Donald Trump. Source: Wikimedia Commons |
Tuesday, 8 November 2016
Reasons To Be Afraid
First things first: There is no reason to panic.
Although FiveThirtyEight give Trump a 28% chance of winning the election, they are very much an outlier among prediciton sites. I prefer the Princeton Election Consortium (PEC), who give Trump a chance of less than 1% to win the popular vote, and just over 5% to win the electoral college (and with it the presidency).
It's not just wishful thinking. With my professional data-analyst hat on, I find this Huffington Post critique of 538's model results to be persuasive. So far as we can tell, 538 have an overcomplicated model which assigns far too much probability to weird outlier scenarios. Unlike 538, PEC make their data and methods fully public; I haven't delved into their code, but their general methodology appears sound.
PEC predict this election map, very likely a comfortable victory for Clinton:
Although FiveThirtyEight give Trump a 28% chance of winning the election, they are very much an outlier among prediciton sites. I prefer the Princeton Election Consortium (PEC), who give Trump a chance of less than 1% to win the popular vote, and just over 5% to win the electoral college (and with it the presidency).
It's not just wishful thinking. With my professional data-analyst hat on, I find this Huffington Post critique of 538's model results to be persuasive. So far as we can tell, 538 have an overcomplicated model which assigns far too much probability to weird outlier scenarios. Unlike 538, PEC make their data and methods fully public; I haven't delved into their code, but their general methodology appears sound.
PEC predict this election map, very likely a comfortable victory for Clinton:
Click the map to create your own at 
Friday, 4 November 2016
Four Metaphors for the Presidential Election
It's hard to do justice to the grotesque spectacle before us with just one metaphor, so here is a selection.
Yes, we know they are. It's just that not all of us care, and Donald Trump is offering candy for dinner every night. If that's all we ate, we know it would make us sick. We suspect that if Trump was in charge, there would be no candy at all, because he'd spend the money on whiskey and slot machines. But a lot of people have problems that won't be fixed by vegetables, and want to believe in the candy.
We are watching The Hobbit: The Battle of Five Armies. It is bloated, costly, unedifying, the final act of a production which was already far too long. The antagonists try increasingly absurd and pointless ways to smash the hell out of each other. We care less and less about the performance before us, but keep watching because we've stuck it out this long, and hope the show redeems itself with a satisfying ending.
We are children in the back seat of a car. We have left our old home and will not be going back. We are fed up with the vehicle, the journey, and each other, but apprehensive about our destination. It might be a home much like the one we left, or it might be an unimaginable nightmare. We peer out the windows, looking for clues, but it has grown too dark to see anything. We fidget and ask once again if we are nearly there yet.
The towering, mindless, deformed monster of an election lurches on, groaning and slobbering. We can hardly stand to watch, but can't bear to look away. We hope it will be given a quick, clean death before dawn on the ninth of November, so we can all move on. Until then, some of us can only watch from a distance and try to express our horror.
 |
| Trump and Clinton in the second debate. |
One
Hillary Clinton tells us to eat our vegetables. In this she is the latest in a long line of worthy but dull Democrats: Kerry, Gore, Dukakis, Mondale. Her husband and Obama managed to sell progressive change as an exciting journey, but Clinton just tells us the vegetables are good for us.
Yes, we know they are. It's just that not all of us care, and Donald Trump is offering candy for dinner every night. If that's all we ate, we know it would make us sick. We suspect that if Trump was in charge, there would be no candy at all, because he'd spend the money on whiskey and slot machines. But a lot of people have problems that won't be fixed by vegetables, and want to believe in the candy.
Two
We are watching The Hobbit: The Battle of Five Armies. It is bloated, costly, unedifying, the final act of a production which was already far too long. The antagonists try increasingly absurd and pointless ways to smash the hell out of each other. We care less and less about the performance before us, but keep watching because we've stuck it out this long, and hope the show redeems itself with a satisfying ending.
Three
We are children in the back seat of a car. We have left our old home and will not be going back. We are fed up with the vehicle, the journey, and each other, but apprehensive about our destination. It might be a home much like the one we left, or it might be an unimaginable nightmare. We peer out the windows, looking for clues, but it has grown too dark to see anything. We fidget and ask once again if we are nearly there yet.
Four
The towering, mindless, deformed monster of an election lurches on, groaning and slobbering. We can hardly stand to watch, but can't bear to look away. We hope it will be given a quick, clean death before dawn on the ninth of November, so we can all move on. Until then, some of us can only watch from a distance and try to express our horror.
Friday, 14 October 2016
Hatred Unleashed
I hoped the USA would wake up to the awfulness of Trump, and give him a clear electoral defeat. It now looks like it's going to happen; Hillary Clinton's lead is 6.7% in the RCP polling average. Nobody should be complacent, but Trump is running out of time to turn things around. Obama won by 7.2% against McCain in 2008, and if Trump continues to implode, it's plausible Clinton could exceed that margin.
Maybe I should be happy. Instead, I am sickened that it's come to this.
I'm relieved Trump will not get anywhere near the Oval Office, and cautiously optimistic about Clinton's leadership. Those feelings are overshadowed by fear and loathing, of what Trump has done and continues to do.
Maybe I should be happy. Instead, I am sickened that it's come to this.
 |
| Trump and Clinton at their second debate. Source: CNN |
I'm relieved Trump will not get anywhere near the Oval Office, and cautiously optimistic about Clinton's leadership. Those feelings are overshadowed by fear and loathing, of what Trump has done and continues to do.
Friday, 7 October 2016
Thoughts On Hillary Clinton
I've spent a lot of time railing against Donald Trump; but what about Hillary Clinton?
Any mainstream US politician would be preferable to Trump. Bernie Sanders. Mitt Romney. Marco Rubio. Rod Blagojevich, disgraced former governor of Illinois, currently serving a 14-year sentence in federal prison. Duke the dog, mayor of Cormorant, Minnesota.
(Maybe not Ted Cruz; he's as extreme as Trump in some ways, and a lot smarter. One to be afraid of in 2020 or 2024.)
As it happens, Trump's opponent is not just any politician; it's Hillary Clinton. If current polling is correct and the fates are not excessively cruel, she will be the forty-fifth President of the United States. What do I think of her?
Any mainstream US politician would be preferable to Trump. Bernie Sanders. Mitt Romney. Marco Rubio. Rod Blagojevich, disgraced former governor of Illinois, currently serving a 14-year sentence in federal prison. Duke the dog, mayor of Cormorant, Minnesota.
(Maybe not Ted Cruz; he's as extreme as Trump in some ways, and a lot smarter. One to be afraid of in 2020 or 2024.)
As it happens, Trump's opponent is not just any politician; it's Hillary Clinton. If current polling is correct and the fates are not excessively cruel, she will be the forty-fifth President of the United States. What do I think of her?
 |
| Hillary Clinton. Source: Wikimedia Commons |
Friday, 30 September 2016
What Trump Stands For
Like Agent Smith, I'd like to share a revelation I've had during my time here.
Donald Trump does not stand for fascism. Maybe he wants to, maybe he thinks he does. But what he actually stands for is nothing.
Contrast Trump with Vladimir Putin, whom he claims to admire. Putin is many things, but he is not ignorant. He understands very well how the world works. He has plans; evil plans, but plans nonetheless.
Trump has no plans. As his debate with Hillary Clinton made abundantly clear, he doesn't understand anything, and doesn't care to. Instead of plans, he has empty posturing. He puts forward a performance of fascism, and hopes we will mistake it for the real thing.
Trump's supporters have not simply given up on democracy. It's more than that. They've given up on government.
Trump is the bitter conclusion of Reagan's famous quip:
Trump isn't just a would-be tyrant, he's an incompetent would-be tyrant. He has no realistic prospect of accomplishing anything. He will not use the authority of the American government to solve anyone's problems; he will not even make a serious attempt to do so. If the worst happens and Trump becomes President, he will treat the awesome power of the Oval Office as his personal plaything, a stick with which to beat those he dislikes.
Many of his supporters are themselves too ignorant to notice this. Others may have grasped it, at least subconsciously, but do not care.
The point of Trump is not to build a wall, or assert American dominance, or protect American industry, or anything else in the incoherent rants that serve him in place of policy. The point of Trump is to articulate hatred. It is to inflict fear and pain on those Other People whom his supporters blame for their unsatisfactory lives.
It is as close as a national politician can get to pure nihilism. Trump represents a howling void of undirected hate and anger.
We can hope his sheer ineptitude prevents him from winning office. I fear that even if this is so, he will make it easier for some more intelligent would-be tyrant to follow after him.
Donald Trump does not stand for fascism. Maybe he wants to, maybe he thinks he does. But what he actually stands for is nothing.
Contrast Trump with Vladimir Putin, whom he claims to admire. Putin is many things, but he is not ignorant. He understands very well how the world works. He has plans; evil plans, but plans nonetheless.
Trump has no plans. As his debate with Hillary Clinton made abundantly clear, he doesn't understand anything, and doesn't care to. Instead of plans, he has empty posturing. He puts forward a performance of fascism, and hopes we will mistake it for the real thing.
Trump's supporters have not simply given up on democracy. It's more than that. They've given up on government.
Trump is the bitter conclusion of Reagan's famous quip:
The nine most terrifying words in the English language are "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help."Trump doesn't offer iron-fisted tyranny on the Putin model. Voting for that would be a terrible thing, but it's not necessarily irrational. If you're poor and desperate enough, a tyrant might begin to sound pretty good.
Trump isn't just a would-be tyrant, he's an incompetent would-be tyrant. He has no realistic prospect of accomplishing anything. He will not use the authority of the American government to solve anyone's problems; he will not even make a serious attempt to do so. If the worst happens and Trump becomes President, he will treat the awesome power of the Oval Office as his personal plaything, a stick with which to beat those he dislikes.
Many of his supporters are themselves too ignorant to notice this. Others may have grasped it, at least subconsciously, but do not care.
The point of Trump is not to build a wall, or assert American dominance, or protect American industry, or anything else in the incoherent rants that serve him in place of policy. The point of Trump is to articulate hatred. It is to inflict fear and pain on those Other People whom his supporters blame for their unsatisfactory lives.
It is as close as a national politician can get to pure nihilism. Trump represents a howling void of undirected hate and anger.
We can hope his sheer ineptitude prevents him from winning office. I fear that even if this is so, he will make it easier for some more intelligent would-be tyrant to follow after him.
Friday, 16 September 2016
The Rise of Unreality
The US Presidential election is shaping up as a battle between reason and unreason. The distressing thing is, reason isn't winning by nearly enough.
Clinton's lead has shrunk to approximately 3% in national polls. That's probably enough for a clear victory; the Princeton Election Consortium gives her an 81% chance of winning. But it still means a very large segment of the US electorate prefers Trump.
Clinton's lead has shrunk to approximately 3% in national polls. That's probably enough for a clear victory; the Princeton Election Consortium gives her an 81% chance of winning. But it still means a very large segment of the US electorate prefers Trump.
 |
| Image source: Wikimedia Commons |
Wednesday, 10 August 2016
Presidential Election Explained Using Food
Imagine the USA has to vote on what everyone eats tonight.
Hillary Clinton is like a cheese and tomato pizza. Some people would prefer additional toppings, or a different food altogether. Others are excited about the first pizza candidate with a real chance of winning. All things considered, it's a safe and widely acceptable choice.
Donald Trump is like a cheeseburger laced with anthrax. If the cheeseburger wins, a lot of people will be made horribly ill, and some will die. We have no way of knowing how many, but those not in robust health to start with will come out worst. (Trump isn't even trying to hide the anthrax. He assures us the infection will Make America Great Again.)
Gary Johnson, the Libertarian candidate, is like the five-alarm chili flavoured with Guatemalan insanity peppers. It's undoubtedly exciting, but let's face it, not to everyone's taste.
Jill Stein, the Green candidate, is like an organic kale and quinoa salad. It may be very nutritious; but as Homer Simpson has observed, you don't win friends with salad. (At least, you won't win over the Homer Simpsons of America, and a winning candidate needs their votes.)
Bernie Sanders started off supporting salad too. But he's won the concessions of basil pesto and better quality cheese, and now he is endorsing pizza. Nevertheless, some of his erstwhile supporters insist that it's salad or nothing.
In this election, "Nothing" is not an option. One of these candidates will win, and it will affect the entire world, not just America. Realistically speaking, it's either pizza or the anthrax burger. If you are so inclined, you can fight for salad another time. Right now, it's strongly advisable to get with the program and vote for pizza.
Hillary Clinton is like a cheese and tomato pizza. Some people would prefer additional toppings, or a different food altogether. Others are excited about the first pizza candidate with a real chance of winning. All things considered, it's a safe and widely acceptable choice.
_1.jpg) |
| Image by Lombroso, Wikimedia Commons |
_1.jpg){kind=link}
Gary Johnson, the Libertarian candidate, is like the five-alarm chili flavoured with Guatemalan insanity peppers. It's undoubtedly exciting, but let's face it, not to everyone's taste.
Jill Stein, the Green candidate, is like an organic kale and quinoa salad. It may be very nutritious; but as Homer Simpson has observed, you don't win friends with salad. (At least, you won't win over the Homer Simpsons of America, and a winning candidate needs their votes.)
Bernie Sanders started off supporting salad too. But he's won the concessions of basil pesto and better quality cheese, and now he is endorsing pizza. Nevertheless, some of his erstwhile supporters insist that it's salad or nothing.
In this election, "Nothing" is not an option. One of these candidates will win, and it will affect the entire world, not just America. Realistically speaking, it's either pizza or the anthrax burger. If you are so inclined, you can fight for salad another time. Right now, it's strongly advisable to get with the program and vote for pizza.
Friday, 5 August 2016
A Taxonomy of Trumpists
More and more, Trump's campaign looks like some mad piece of performance art. Exactly how bad can he get? How ignorant and hateful can he sound before he is abandoned by the American public?
Just in the last two weeks, Trump has insulted the parents of a dead Muslim American soldier, celebrated the use of torture, and claimed the Presidential election would be rigged. He reportedly asked a foreign policy expert why the USA had nuclear weapons if it didn't use them. In what I think is an unprecedented step for a sitting President, Obama said Trump was unfit to hold the office.
Obama is absolutely right. It's not simply that I disagree with Trump. He is unable to handle the responsibility of being President.
Obama is absolutely right. It's not simply that I disagree with Trump. He is unable to handle the responsibility of being President.
 |
| Image source: Gage Skidmore, Wikimedia Commons |
It is not so shocking Trump has said and done what he has. We always knew he was an ignorant bully; those who thought otherwise were deluding themselves. The shocking thing is that his popular support remains so high. The RCP polling average currently has Clinton 47.4%, Trump 40.6%. That should translate into a comfortable victory for Clinton, but it still means four in ten Americans prefer Trump.
Friday, 20 May 2016
Failure Is Not An Option
 |
| Bernie Sanders. Source: Wikipedia |
Some Sanders partisans still cling to hope of the nomination, as in this article by Seth Abramson. He starts by looking at the much closer contest in 2008:
Clinton conceded in 2008 for a number of reasons: her opponent, now-President Obama, agreed to retire her massive campaign debt; she believed (correctly) that Obama would name her either Vice President or Secretary of State, the latter the second-most powerful position in Washington; and finally and most importantly, Obama had kicked the hell out of her in the latter half of the election season, winning 16 of the final 25 states. [Emphasis mine]Most importantly? Maybe, just maybe, the fact that Obama was narrowly ahead of Clinton in both popular vote and delegate count had something to do with it. Abramson is very, very careful to avoid mentioning this, since it undermines his argument for nominating Sanders.
Wednesday, 11 May 2016
Trump and the Republican Nightmare
In the fallout from Trump's presumptive nomination, establishment Republicans are trying to work out where they stand. Prior to Cruz and Kasich dropping out, Washington Post columnist George Will called for Trump to be stopped at a contested convention, earning this response from Drew Magary (very NSFW language):
Magary is not wrong on the facts. Donald Trump got a large plurality of votes in the primaries. By the time it's all done, he may well have a majority of both votes and pledged delegates.
So what?
I wish this democracy didn’t have so much DEMOCRACY in it, you know? Once in a while, it’s important to disregard the will of the voters and leave the selection process to people who know BEST.
Magary is not wrong on the facts. Donald Trump got a large plurality of votes in the primaries. By the time it's all done, he may well have a majority of both votes and pledged delegates.
So what?
Friday, 6 May 2016
Trump the Nominee
Donald Trump is now the presumptive Republican nominee for President.
It was more or less unthinkable to write those words at the beginning of the year, but here we are.
Stopping Trump is now the responsibility of Hillary Clinton, who will almost certainly be the Democratic nominee for President. She will have the last, best opportunity to take Trump down. Along with much of the rest of the world, I am hoping she does not fail.
The odds of a Democratic win are good. The geography of the electoral college favours them. Trump's odiousness is such, to voters in general and minorities in particular, that formerly solid Republican states like Texas and Arizona may be put into play. But it would be foolish for the Democrats to be complacent.
It was more or less unthinkable to write those words at the beginning of the year, but here we are.
Stopping Trump is now the responsibility of Hillary Clinton, who will almost certainly be the Democratic nominee for President. She will have the last, best opportunity to take Trump down. Along with much of the rest of the world, I am hoping she does not fail.
The odds of a Democratic win are good. The geography of the electoral college favours them. Trump's odiousness is such, to voters in general and minorities in particular, that formerly solid Republican states like Texas and Arizona may be put into play. But it would be foolish for the Democrats to be complacent.
Friday, 29 April 2016
Veepery and Desperation
In what appears to be a desperate plea for attention, presidential candidate Ted Cruz has announced his running mate. She is Carly Fiorina, failed CEO of Hewlett Packard, failed Senate candidate, failed Presidential candidate, and purveyor of malicious untruths about Planned Parenthood.
Gin and Tacos has an entertaining piece, pointing out that Cruz' preferred candidates were disqualified by reason of being unconstitutional, imaginary, or dead:
Typically, the running mate is announced after a candidate has won the nomination. This is not so for Cruz. In the words of fictional bookshop owner Bernard Black: In this, as with all else, he is an innovator.
Even the expert prognosticators at Five Thirty Eight are baffled as to what it is meant to achieve. They speculate Fiorina may shore up Cruz' anti-establishment credentials, or help him attack Trump, but his strategy is clear as mud.
By any normal standards, Fiorina is a despicable human being; but compared to the overweening malevolence of Trump and Cruz, she looks almost respectable. Cruz this week was described by John Boehner, supposedly his political ally, as "Lucifer in the flesh" and a "miserable son of a bitch".
Could Cruz' motivation be that simple? Could it be that all he wants is an official spokesperson and surrogate who does not cause audiences to recoil in disgust?
We may never know. Meanwhile, Trump continues to rack up primary victories. Cruz shares at least one thing with the Republican party establishment: Both are desperate to stop Trump and rapidly running out of ideas.
For your further enjoyment, here is the hilarious rant in which Bernard utters the line referenced above:
Gin and Tacos has an entertaining piece, pointing out that Cruz' preferred candidates were disqualified by reason of being unconstitutional, imaginary, or dead:
Typically, the running mate is announced after a candidate has won the nomination. This is not so for Cruz. In the words of fictional bookshop owner Bernard Black: In this, as with all else, he is an innovator.
Even the expert prognosticators at Five Thirty Eight are baffled as to what it is meant to achieve. They speculate Fiorina may shore up Cruz' anti-establishment credentials, or help him attack Trump, but his strategy is clear as mud.
By any normal standards, Fiorina is a despicable human being; but compared to the overweening malevolence of Trump and Cruz, she looks almost respectable. Cruz this week was described by John Boehner, supposedly his political ally, as "Lucifer in the flesh" and a "miserable son of a bitch".
Could Cruz' motivation be that simple? Could it be that all he wants is an official spokesperson and surrogate who does not cause audiences to recoil in disgust?
We may never know. Meanwhile, Trump continues to rack up primary victories. Cruz shares at least one thing with the Republican party establishment: Both are desperate to stop Trump and rapidly running out of ideas.
For your further enjoyment, here is the hilarious rant in which Bernard utters the line referenced above:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)