Project a year or so down the road. Imagine a scenario in which these groups, which seem separate now, merge politically. Describe your scenario.
Group 1 is currently amassed under the banner of Donald J. Trump. Group 2 had been coalescing around Bernie Sanders, but Bernie moved out of their center and left them leaderless. The election will reposition Trump one way or the other, and either way will have an effect on where Group 1 goes next. Both groups will keep getting older and wiser and stupider.
Please speculate.
Oktubre 2, 2016
"On Mr. Trump’s best day (and Mrs. Clinton’s worst), this race gets only to tied."
"Mr. Trump has to figure out how to go from the red zone to the end zone and finally take some kind of lead. My expectation is that the only way he can do this is with a superb debate performance.... Mr. Trump remains as undisciplined as when he first came down the escalator in June 2015 to announce his candidacy. As we saw during Monday’s debate at Hofstra, while he started strong, Mr. Trump showed that he is more of a sprint campaigner than a marathoner. He excels at short spurts but doesn’t seem able to maintain consistency for a lengthy period. And the aftermath of the debate was clear: He got in a Twitter war with a former Miss Universe that totally took him away from a more powerful message. On a visceral gut level, he seems incapable of making the adjustments to acquire the discipline one needs as a politician....."
Writes Matthew J. Dowd in "4 Key Elements of the Clinton-Trump Contest Shaping the Final Weeks of the Race."
Writes Matthew J. Dowd in "4 Key Elements of the Clinton-Trump Contest Shaping the Final Weeks of the Race."
"The Time I Found Donald Trump’s Tax Records in My Mailbox."
By Susanne Craig at the NYT.
I just watched her on George Stephanopoulos's Sunday morning show, and she could barely suppress her glee at her coup getting these documents. My favorite part was when Stephanopoulos asked her if it was acceptable to reveal these leaked documents, and she relied entirely on what the lawyers told her, which is exactly what Trump says about not releasing his tax returns: I'm going by what my lawyers are telling me.
I'd like to see Trump flip the question back to Hillary skillfully. The real issue is the tax code. Does it need to be reformed or not? If Trump took deductions, it was because the tax code provided for them. Once the deductions are there in the tax code, he pretty much has to take them and would be a fool not to take them. If it looks wrong, what's really wrong is the tax code. So, is Hillary proposing to take away this deduction? Is Trump? Presumably, the deduction is there because it's good policy. Will either candidate defend the policy and, if not, promise to change it? I don't see what else matters here. And I suspect the candidates don't even disagree about that.
I just watched her on George Stephanopoulos's Sunday morning show, and she could barely suppress her glee at her coup getting these documents. My favorite part was when Stephanopoulos asked her if it was acceptable to reveal these leaked documents, and she relied entirely on what the lawyers told her, which is exactly what Trump says about not releasing his tax returns: I'm going by what my lawyers are telling me.
I'd like to see Trump flip the question back to Hillary skillfully. The real issue is the tax code. Does it need to be reformed or not? If Trump took deductions, it was because the tax code provided for them. Once the deductions are there in the tax code, he pretty much has to take them and would be a fool not to take them. If it looks wrong, what's really wrong is the tax code. So, is Hillary proposing to take away this deduction? Is Trump? Presumably, the deduction is there because it's good policy. Will either candidate defend the policy and, if not, promise to change it? I don't see what else matters here. And I suspect the candidates don't even disagree about that.
"Saturday Night Live" does the presidential debate, with Alec Baldwin brilliantly impersonating Donald Trump...
... and the funniest thing about it is how closely it sticks to material from the actual debate.
Oktubre 1, 2016
Lake Wingra — at noon today.
A gentle light, a warm enough day, but it looks bleak in the photograph.
Please talk about anything you like in the comments.
"The Democratic Party could have blocked the rise of Donald Trump years ago if it had just listened."
The story of Trump’s amazingly successful movement is also the story of how Democrats turned their backs on their working-class roots and sided with the elites on the crucial economic question of our times: Who would win from globalization, and who would lose? The facts are stark...."
So begins Rex Nutting's MarketWatch column, "How Donald Trump hijacked the Democrats’ best issue/Trump’s populist campaign is fueled by working-class anger about unfair trade, an issue the Democrats need to reclaim."
So begins Rex Nutting's MarketWatch column, "How Donald Trump hijacked the Democrats’ best issue/Trump’s populist campaign is fueled by working-class anger about unfair trade, an issue the Democrats need to reclaim."
Am I the only one who likes Hillary a lot more after hearing this new leaked audio?
The leak seems to have come from Republicans, but most of what you hear is placing her in the center and resisting getting pulled too far left by Bernie Sanders. (The recording is from February 2016.) To my ear, she sounds much better — much more grounded and forthright — than she does when addressing the public.
Here's the audio — from a fundraiser in February 2016. Transcription:
Here's the audio — from a fundraiser in February 2016. Transcription:
"But the young Mr. Wainwright’s clandestine journey from Bermuda to New York in November 1934 very likely garnered more ink..."
"... than any of his considerable later achievements, making headlines worldwide for months afterward. 'The Silk-Stockinged Stowaway,' the papers called him. 'He Was Game to Be a Huck Finn — but Not a Little Lord Fauntleroy,' declared one headline, atop an article that appeared in many American newspapers in 1935, adding: 'Balmy and British, Bermuda palled on this 8-year-old great-grandson of Jay Gould — until, penniless, he stowed away for New York and won the right to be raised as a Yankee.'"
From the obituary of Carroll L. Wainwright Jr., who grew up to be a NYC lawyer and lived to the age of 90.
First, garnered. The word. I must register my disapproval of this deplorable word.
Second, what a story! What were boys like in 1935?
"Gee, I had a swell time. I was on the bridge lots of times; I examined the instruments and I steered the ship. The captain is a grand guy."
From the obituary of Carroll L. Wainwright Jr., who grew up to be a NYC lawyer and lived to the age of 90.
First, garnered. The word. I must register my disapproval of this deplorable word.
Second, what a story! What were boys like in 1935?
"Gee, I had a swell time. I was on the bridge lots of times; I examined the instruments and I steered the ship. The captain is a grand guy."
After 70 years doing one radio show — "Folksong Festival" — Oscar Brand has died at the age of 96.
He started that show in 1945:
I saw Oscar Brand in concert once. It was at The Bottom Line in NYC, circa 1980. We were not interested in seeing him. We were there to see the headline act, someone we really cared about, perhaps Patti Smith. Someone in the punk/new wave genre that we loved at the time. We got there early and got the table right in front of the stage. Picture a table forming a T with a small, low stage. That's where we were — at the performer's feet.
I knew Oscar Brand was someone I was supposed to respect and honor, but the music was completely sincere old-school folk music — with gentle, comic stories in between. It was like "A Mighty Wind," but it wasn't a movie, and we were right in front of the man, where he could plainly see us.
He was telling his little stories, so that gave a place to laugh, but the stories were not funny enough to support the way that we desperately needed to laugh. We did not want to disrupt the performance or affect it or hurt his feelings in any way, but that only made it more insanely, hysterically funny. How do you let yourself laugh, but restrain yourself from laughing as uproariously as you need to laugh?
You might say it would be better not to start laughing at all. Laughing feeds on itself. But he could see us, and he was telling funny stories. We couldn't stare stony-faced. So we laughed, and we could see that he was enjoying receiving our laughter, which made it surreal and — unfortunately — even more provocative of the wrong kind of laughter.
You could see in his face that he believed in what he was doing and believed he was loved. These kids, these Baby Boomers, in the front row couldn't be receiving what he was giving in a different spirit from how he offered it, could they? We wanted him to think that, and we wanted to think that he did.
But perhaps we only saw his game face, and he totally knew where our heads were and how distant we were on that day, and he did what he had to do, what he always had to do — in good times or bad — continue the tradition of American folk music.
His radio career began in December 1945, after he wrote a letter to New York stations offering to present a program of Christmas songs he claimed most people had never heard. WNYC, which at the time was owned by the city, accepted the challenge. His song about Santa’s distinctive body odor proved his point.The show is — by a lot — the longest running radio show with a single host.
At the show’s end, WNYC’s program director asked Mr. Brand what he was doing the next week. He boldly replied that he’d be right back in the same studio in the Municipal Building.
I saw Oscar Brand in concert once. It was at The Bottom Line in NYC, circa 1980. We were not interested in seeing him. We were there to see the headline act, someone we really cared about, perhaps Patti Smith. Someone in the punk/new wave genre that we loved at the time. We got there early and got the table right in front of the stage. Picture a table forming a T with a small, low stage. That's where we were — at the performer's feet.
I knew Oscar Brand was someone I was supposed to respect and honor, but the music was completely sincere old-school folk music — with gentle, comic stories in between. It was like "A Mighty Wind," but it wasn't a movie, and we were right in front of the man, where he could plainly see us.
He was telling his little stories, so that gave a place to laugh, but the stories were not funny enough to support the way that we desperately needed to laugh. We did not want to disrupt the performance or affect it or hurt his feelings in any way, but that only made it more insanely, hysterically funny. How do you let yourself laugh, but restrain yourself from laughing as uproariously as you need to laugh?
You might say it would be better not to start laughing at all. Laughing feeds on itself. But he could see us, and he was telling funny stories. We couldn't stare stony-faced. So we laughed, and we could see that he was enjoying receiving our laughter, which made it surreal and — unfortunately — even more provocative of the wrong kind of laughter.
You could see in his face that he believed in what he was doing and believed he was loved. These kids, these Baby Boomers, in the front row couldn't be receiving what he was giving in a different spirit from how he offered it, could they? We wanted him to think that, and we wanted to think that he did.
But perhaps we only saw his game face, and he totally knew where our heads were and how distant we were on that day, and he did what he had to do, what he always had to do — in good times or bad — continue the tradition of American folk music.
"She told me, 'Don’t worry, everything is fine'... She said where they lived, on the other side of the river, was very safe."
She = Fabiola Bittar de Kroon, the one person killed in the Hoboken commuter train disaster.
She was commenting after the recent bombing in Chelsea.
ADDED: We're hearing so little about the cause of the crash. Here's an article in yesterday's NYT about how federal investigators have not even looked at "most of" the train or interviewed the train's engineer.
She was commenting after the recent bombing in Chelsea.
ADDED: We're hearing so little about the cause of the crash. Here's an article in yesterday's NYT about how federal investigators have not even looked at "most of" the train or interviewed the train's engineer.
Jim Southworth, an investigator for the National Transportation Safety Board, said... "Because of the asbestos, because of the unsettled structures that we’re not sure about, I’m not allowing anybody to go in there... None of the evidence in there is perishable, so I have the time to go in there."None of the evidence in there is perishable, but what about the evidence that's not in there? Have officials excluded terrorism?
"Few match the opulence of the airstrip setup, whose owner claims to run the largest store of gold for private clients..."
"Near the runway sits the VIP lounge and a pair of luxurious apartments for clients. The walls of the apartments are lined with aged wood from Polish barns. South African quartzite was chosen for the floors to match the faded gray timber, and the amenities—bathroom mirror, TV screens—can retract into the ceiling, counter, or wall. The owner offers a place for clients to sleep and eat, because 'many do not want to leave a paper trail of credit card receipts and passports' at hotels and restaurants."
From a Bloomberg article titled "Secret Alpine Gold Vaults Are the New Swiss Bank Accounts." These vaults are built in "a maze of tunnels" — old military bunkers in Switzerland. With "luxurious apartments" on top. What inspires people with gold to trust these places? Aged wood from Polish barns?? You've got to trust something when you have gold that needs to be stashed.
"We don’t see any tangible evidence of criminality of a systemic nature, but this could be a topic for the future," said the Swiss secretary of state for international finance.
From a Bloomberg article titled "Secret Alpine Gold Vaults Are the New Swiss Bank Accounts." These vaults are built in "a maze of tunnels" — old military bunkers in Switzerland. With "luxurious apartments" on top. What inspires people with gold to trust these places? Aged wood from Polish barns?? You've got to trust something when you have gold that needs to be stashed.
"We don’t see any tangible evidence of criminality of a systemic nature, but this could be a topic for the future," said the Swiss secretary of state for international finance.
Setyembre 30, 2016
NYT election buzzword: "subtle."
From an op-ed, "Hillary Clinton Will Not Be Manterrupted," by Jessica Bennett:
Some analysis by Amy Chozick, "Hillary Clinton, at Ease Onstage, Seems Utterly Herself":
Women are less likely to speak up, and less likely to be heard, in groups that are mostly men... women are less likely to have their own ideas attributed to them....You just have to be more honest than Trump and it's not fair to view you as dishonest? That's just nutty. We should always question whether a politician is trustworthy. At what point is "the way" we question honesty sexist?
This is subtle sexism.... Subtle sexism is everywhere in this election, and not just from Mr. Trump. It’s in the way we question whether Mrs. Clinton is trustworthy, even though she’s been rated by PolitiFact, the Pulitzer Prize-winning fact-checkers, as much more honest than her opponent....
Subtle sexism is the fact that — while, indeed, Hillary Clinton has made mistakes — we judge mistakes more harshly in women, and remember those mistakes longer. It’s that she must strike a near-impossible balance between niceness and authority — a glimmer of weakness, and she doesn’t have the “stamina”; but too much harshness and she’s “cold,” “aloof,” “robotic,” scolded by a man who is all but frothing at the mouth for not having the right “temperament.”...From a news analysis piece, "The Subtle Phrases Hillary Clinton Uses to Sway Black Voters," by Farah Stockman:
When Hillary Clinton talked about race during her debate Monday night against Donald J. Trump, she delivered a subtle and powerful message to black voters, speaking to them not only in the substance of what she said, but in her carefully chosen language....The "subtle phrases" are, we're told, "systemic racism" — she said "We’ve got to address the systemic racism in our criminal justice system" — and "implicit bias" — she said "I think implicit bias is a problem for everyone, not just police." What makes these stock phrases subtle? I think they're only subtle if they are subliminal — if they bypass your defenses. But these phrases are dropped in conspicuously, precisely to bonk people who like those terms over the head with the fact that she said them. Why wouldn't you be suspicious? Why wouldn't you think: Great, you said the words. I get it. You need my vote. But what will you actually do for me?
Some analysis by Amy Chozick, "Hillary Clinton, at Ease Onstage, Seems Utterly Herself":
When Mr. Trump interrupted her, she showed flashes of the steely calm she displayed during more than eight hours of testimony to a Republican-led House panel. As Mr. Trump spoke, she perched a leg in a subtle curtsy and calmly looked on. When it was her turn, she needled Mr. Trump by calling him “Donald.”Even her leg is subtle!
Goodbye to Mr. Tucker.
My high school English teacher. Unforgettable classes. If only I could say my lines from Marbury v. Madison the way he could do "Moby Dick."
"Not looking so great anymore, Ann."
Email sent last night from the Democratic Party. I thought they were the ones who weren't disparaging women's looks. Oh, they're the ones who are not looking so great anymore:
I never give any politicians money, by the way, but I do read the email, because I like to see how the different characters try to scare up money. This one is interesting not just because they played on a woman's fear that she's losing her looks — but thanks for appreciating how I used to look — but also because it calls attention to Trump's success getting a high volume of small donations. That reminded me of this article in the NYT, which also highlights how the 2 parties have switched positions: "Democrats Rake In Money, Thanks to Suit by Republicans":
Imagine how the NYT would phrase the story if it were Trump taking advantage of McCutcheon — tapping the wealthy — and Hillary reaping huge numbers of small donations from ordinary people.
Ann, up until this point, September has been a great month of fundraising for Democrats thanks to grassroots supporters like you.I'm told to "pitch in $3 now" as a way of saying "hell no" to the question whether I want to the Democrats look bad because they got "outraised by Donald Trump and the GOP."
When we hit our mid-month goal, it seemed like Donald Trump and the GOP wouldn't be able to catch us by the end of the month -- but I have to tell you I'm starting to get a little worried.
Donald Trump's grassroots donations are steadily climbing each month. He's getting record-breaking numbers of small-dollar donations -- something that's not typical of a lot of Republican campaigns we've been up against.....
I never give any politicians money, by the way, but I do read the email, because I like to see how the different characters try to scare up money. This one is interesting not just because they played on a woman's fear that she's losing her looks — but thanks for appreciating how I used to look — but also because it calls attention to Trump's success getting a high volume of small donations. That reminded me of this article in the NYT, which also highlights how the 2 parties have switched positions: "Democrats Rake In Money, Thanks to Suit by Republicans":
Democrats denounced [McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission] as an assault on democracy and a sop to billionaires when the Supreme Court issued a ruling two years ago that loosened limits on campaign giving. But Hillary Clinton and Democratic Party leaders are now exploiting the decision, funneling tens of millions of dollars from their wealthiest donors into a handful of presidential swing states.... Just 250 donors have accounted for about $44 million in contributions to the Hillary Victory Fund during the last year....At the very end of the article: "By contrast, the money raised by Mr. Trump and the Republicans, while robust, has been driven chiefly by small checks from his grass-roots supporters."
Imagine how the NYT would phrase the story if it were Trump taking advantage of McCutcheon — tapping the wealthy — and Hillary reaping huge numbers of small donations from ordinary people.
Mag-subscribe sa:
Mga Post (Atom)
Mga Post
