Maybe Trump fans are the kind of people who won't vote.

The Washington Post has this: "Trump’s fans are excited to rally — but they’re not sure they’ll show up to vote." Reporter Jenna Johnson found some guy named Randy in Des Moines:

“In the end, everything that he’s saying might not happen if he is elected — but I’m willing to give it a shot,” said Randy Reynolds, 49, who used to vote for Democrats but switched to Republicans a decade ago. “I will give him 100 percent. . . . It would be amazing if the majority of things that he said would actually happen. That would be amazing.”

But will he caucus?

“We’re going to see,” Reynolds said. “With kids and grandkids and all this, it’s kind of hectic. . . . We’ll look into it. If our time is available, then yeah, maybe we’ll do it. Maybe. We’ll have to see.”

This story may seem to offset to recent reports that Trump has more support than the polls indicate (because people aren't willing to say they're for Trump).

People's level of education may have something to do with whether they're willing to openly back Trump in live interviews, the Morning Consult study suggests.... In the case of the "Trump effect," blue-collar voters aren't embarrassed about their support — their support is consistent in both live-interview and online surveys. But there's a clear difference among college-educated Republicans. "Among adults with a bachelors degree or postgraduate degree, Trump performs about 10 percentage points better online than via live telephone," the study said. 

But maybe there's a double Trump effect in Iowa. The less educated people who are willing to say they're for Trump are not the kind of people who get out and caucus. And the better-educated people who are the kind who'd caucus have this problem of not wanting to be seen supporting Trump, which would disable them from showing up to caucus.

For times of satire and political incorrectness: a #1 box of inhumanity and publicity.

I just noticed that the #1 item in the Toys & Games category at Amazon is a card game called Cards Against Humanity. One customer reviewer describes an actual round of the game:

1. The Judge plays a Black Card that says: "Life for the Native Americans was forever changed after the white man introduced them to ____________."
2. All players (exc. the Judge) choose a White Card.
3. After everyone has chosen their White Card, the Judge reviews the responses: "Smallpox Blankets", "Drinking Alone", "A Can of Whoop-Ass", and "Take-Backsies"
(Before you read these and think I'm an awful person, these are actual White Cards that I have seen played on the aforementioned Black Card)
4. The Judge chooses "Drinking Alone" and the player who picked this White Card wins the round.

Masses of people seem to be finding this kind of overt anti-humanitarianism hilarious. Take note. Take note political commentators — you who think the general public will gasp at "schlonged."

Now, Cards Against Humanity is made in China and the company seems to be managing its PR by doing some conspicuously nice things for its workers. The Guardian reports on its "eight sensible gifts for Hanukah" program that funded a paid week off for all of its factory workers. 150,000 customers bought what was a series of unknown items the first 3 of which turned out to be socks, which are indeed sensible. (Socks is the answer Meade gives if you ask him what he wants for Christmas.) You'd think at least one paid week of vacation would already be part of the labor deal, but this company wins smiles and publicity for doing this.

Cards Against Humanity also leveraged favorable publicity from a program called "Give Cards Against Humanity $5," which raised in $71,145 in donations that were distributed to the U.S. employees, whose obligation to say how they spent it made it possible for The Guardian to end its article with cutesy details:

Maria... spent $732 on three bottles of scotch whisky, $800 on a TV, saved $1500 and donated $1153 to the pet charity PAWS. Tom spent $1500 on a custom suit of armour, $589 on a sword, and $125 on swordplay lessons, before donating $1971 to the International Wolf Center in Minnesota. Karlee donated $1027 to Planned Parenthood, and spent $3410 on lubricant, cleaning spray and a 24-karat gold vibrator.

The serious journal Foreign Policy published "Cards Against Humanity Is All For Chinese Workers/The irreverent card game maker claims to have sent Chinese factory workers on a paid vacation." Foreign Policy makes its story about what it properly calls a "publicity campaign." It describes the companies PR mailer, which included "thank-you notes from workers and photos from the vacations that they took." FP put the word "claims" in the headline but not the word "purported" before "thank-you notes."

"This vacation I took my son to the river bank to catch fish, and we also climbed a 600-meter-tall mountain,” wrote one worker, adding that Cards Against Humanity is a “very interesting a card game, but I do not know how to play!” 

On first read, I saw that as an implicit criticism of Americans. We sit inside playing a boxed game and the Chinese worker knows the importance of taking his son on a vigorous, nature-loving trek. On second read, I see it that way too, but with the worker a fictional character in a deliberate satire.

[A] U.S. company that goes out of its way to treat Chinese workers well can also make for effective publicity, despite consumer skittishness towards products made in China. Many are attuned to working conditions in China.... “This doesn’t undo the ways that all of us profit from unfair working conditions around the world,” read an enclosed note in the mailing campaign from Cards Against Humanity, “but it’s a step in the right direction.”

"Clinton talked at this last DNC debate about her failure as Secretary of State as if she was successful," Facebooks Jim Webb...

... because that's where he's speaking from now, not the debate stage anymore.

While she held that office, the U.S. spent about $2 billion backing the Libyan uprising against Qadaffi. The uprising, which was part of the Arab Spring, led directly to Qaddafi being removed from power and killed by rebel forces in 2011. Now some 2,000 ISIS terrorists have established a foothold in Libya. Sophisticated weapons from Qaddafi's arsenal—including up to 15,000 man-portable, surface-to-air missiles have apparently fallen into the hands of radical Islamists throughout the region. For a Secretary of State (and a Presidential administration) this is foreign policy leadership at its worst.

ADDED: Here's a report on the debate. Hillary was asked "How much responsibility do you bear for the chaos" in Libya.

AND: There's some talk about Webb maybe having the idea of running as an independent. Since he never got any traction as a Democratic Party candidate, it's hard to take this seriously. I assume he wants to be a voice, and we are reading his Facebook post. If he were to say he was an independent candidate, would that amplify his voice and boost his stature and credibility? He's just a voice, either way. To me, your credibility is better if you present yourself as what you really are.

The Sanders campaign floats a conspiracy theory.

"Sanders campaign hints ‘hacker’ who accessed Clinton data may have been a DNC plant."

“It’s not as if we conjured this guy Josh from thin air. This is an individual … who was recommended to us by the DNC and NGP VAN"....

Trying to peg Donald Trump as a misogynist, David Brock uses a blatant misandrist word against him: "wuss."

Did you notice this little encounter between Brock and Trump's spokeswoman Katrina Pierson. Pierson was there — on CNN — to explain a couple of Trump tweets that tell Hillary to "be careful" about accusing him of degrading women. Pierson speaks first and praises Donald Trump for his willingness to take on Bill Clinton. Brock changes the subject to Trump's psyche:



He says: "What kind of a man insults, threatens, and degrades women — not just Hillary, Megyn Kelly, Fiorina? I'll tell what kind of a man that is. That is somebody who is frightened, who is insecure, and is a wuss, who has to act like a bully to make him feel like he's a big man."

What kind of a man calls another man's masculinity into question and uses the word "wuss"?! Listen to that audio. Brock takes a bullying tone as he calls Trump a bully. Why would he do that? Does it make him feel like a man?

Here's the article at The Hill — "Trump campaign: Hillary bullied women to hide Bill's 'sexist secrets'" — which doesn't mention the "wuss" epithet. The emphasis there is on Pierson's remarks:  “But Hillary Clinton has some nerve to talk about the war on women and the bigotry toward women when she has a serious problem in her husband.” And:  “What’s interesting about this, this notion of being bullied is, I mean, I can think of quite a few women that have been bullied by Hillary Clinton to hide her husband’s misogynist, sexist secrets,” Pierson said.

Bill Clinton — with his jostling, his unique explanations, and his luminescence — to be unleashed in the dogfight with Sanders/Trump.

"Bill Clinton gets a higher profile just as the jostling with Donald Trump gets more pointed." That's the subheadline subheadline at the Wall Street Journal. Scrolling down a few paragraphs:

Mrs. Clinton holds a commanding lead among Democrats nationally, but polling shows the contests in Iowa and New Hampshire are up for grabs. Losses in both states could potentially alter the dynamics of a race she is dominating. In a conference call with supporters this past week, Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta said that Mrs. Clinton was in a “dog fight” in New Hampshire.

“Her greatest fear is she loses both,” said Douglas Schoen, a pollster and consultant who has advised Mr. Clinton. “Then, even though she is still on a path to win the nomination, there would be complete chaos.”

Seems like the "secret weapon" — "secret weapon" is Hillary's term for Bill — is needed to fight Sanders, not Trump. But I would love to hear the back-and-forth of the "jostling" between Bill Clinton and Trump.

Marc Lasry, a friend of Mr. Clinton’s and head of New York hedge fund firm Avenue Capital Group, said: “President Clinton campaigning for Hillary is a huge asset. People love seeing him and he’s able to explain things to people in a way that’s unique.”

So bring on the unique explanations of Bill Clinton and the Trump counter-jostling. I want to watch that.

By the way, did you know that in the New York penal code, there's a crime called "jostling"? It's the crime of putting your hand too close to somebody's pocket. I like the idea that the politicians running for office are putting their hands too close to our pockets. Stop them before they rip us off. And did you know that one of the old meanings of "jostle" is "to encounter sexually?" But mostly it means pushing and shoving in a crowded place to get to something you want.

I also like this in that WSJ article — David Axelrod gushing over Bill Clinton and incidentally dissing Hillary: "He’s a luminescent figure. That’s always an issue....It’s important for people to see her out there on her own." The nonluminescent Hillary.

I force myself to read one — just one — of the many racial-politics-of-Donald-Trump articles I've been reflexively avoiding.

Racial politics is a long-time subject on this blog. I've got 973 posts with the "racial politics" tag. So I want to get proactive on the subject of Donald Trump and race. I have to force myself a bit, because I see so many MSM headlines begging for attention that I have a real aversion to clicking in. It seems so cheap and pathetic and even — understanding the term broadly — racist. Or racistist. I made up that word just now, but you see what I mean? Maybe not. I might explain it later.

But right now what I want to do is force myself to read one of those articles. I've chosen something from a website I usually avoid, Salon. I avoid it because it feels like a cocoon for people who want a certain sort of cocoon-y comfort, a kind that's not to my taste. The cocoon that's to my taste is this blog. And here on this blog, today, I'm pushing myself through the exercise of reading a Salon article, by Chauncey DeVega, called "Donald Trump leads an insane white cult — and Pat Buchanan just explained how it works/GOP front-runner leads cult of personality centered around white alienation, racial resentment and authoritarianism."

What Pat Buchanan said was:

[Trump's] popularity is traceable to the fact that he rejects the moral authority of the media, breaks their commandments, and mocks their condemnations. His contempt for the norms of Political Correctness is daily on display. And that large slice of America... relishes this defiance.

Buchanan seems to be taunting MSM, but "moral authority," "commandments," "condemnation," and "norms of Political Correctness" seem to imply anti-racism. So maybe what excites the "defiance" of the "large slice" is racism.

[The media] constantly denounce him as grossly insensitive for what he has said about women, Mexicans, Muslims, McCain and a reporter with a disability. Such crimes against decency, says the press, disqualify Trump as a candidate for president.

Yes, what Trump says is framed as racist by the media, and somehow a lot of people — a large slice of America — are resisting the demand that they reject Trump. It's a fascinating phenomenon, and it could mean these Americans are drawn to whatever racism or remnants and resonances of racism Trump's various statements contain, but it could also mean these Americans are tired of these insinuations and heartened that Trump won't take the push back that has worked on virtually everyone else.

As Buchanan put it:

[W]hen [the media] demand he apologize, Trump doubles down. And when they demand that Republicans repudiate him, the GOP base replies: “Who are you to tell us whom we may nominate? You are not friends. You are not going to vote for us. And the names you call Trump — bigot, racist, xenophobe, sexist — are the names you call us, nothing but cuss words that a corrupt establishment uses on those it most detests.”

So these people, in Buchanan's view, are not racists, but people who have been on the receiving end of the accusations of racism, and Trump represents them, as he stands his ground and wins for them. He's lifted them up. Are people who feel this way an "insane white cult"? Of course, Buchanan isn't saying that explicitly, so how does DeVega set out to put these people back in the low place where he thinks they belong?

DeVega never seriously considers Buchanan's analysis. He leaps into calling Trump "the leader of a cult of personality," "a proto-fascist," and "a classic 'strong man' political figure." He finds fault in his "egomaniacal narcissism" and "charismatic leader persona." Trump is "a type of political cult leader." If Trump is a cult leader, then, I guess, the people who like him must be in a cult. And then maybe the next leap is possible. They're insane:

To understand Donald Trump’s appeal, one must seriously consider the possibility that his followers specifically, and movement conservatives and the Republican Party more generally, are exhibiting signs of political psychopathology....

Donald Trump is using his campaign to garner more money and power....

(Garner! It's taking all my power to resist digressing (again) on that ludicrous word. One must seriously consider the possibility that anyone who uses this word is exhibiting signs of psychopathology.)

Look, all of us participating in American politics have human minds, and our thinking is unavoidably infused with emotion. The people who lean in ways that are different from yours are not insane, not for the most part. Don't disparage those who suffer from genuine mental illness by saying the people you disagree with politically are crazy. Emotion is not insanity. You should try to understand the emotion that draws people to candidates you dislike, but to call them crazy is to do something that is, ironically, akin to racism. You're aiming disgust and contempt at them and trying to make other people shun them. (Ah, there! I did stumble into defining racistist.)

DeVega says:

Trump is providing a safe space and outlet for conservatives to validate their preexisting racist, xenophobic and bigoted attitudes. Their true selves are being actualized and “liberated.”

That's a hypothesis worth thinking about, but DeVega hasn't proved it. Indeed, he's operating within the safe space of Salon, providing an outlet for liberals and lefties who are happy to validate their preexisting belief that conservatives are racist, xenophobic, and bigoted. Who's got the "true self" here and who is being "actualized" and "'liberated'"? It's psychology all the way down.

There's what the NYT calls an "ethnic divide" between white and Asian-Americans in "a high-achieving school district" in New Jersey.

The divide is between white parents and Asian-American parents. The headline says "ethnic divide," though the article never refers to ethnicity. The terminology in the article is race:

A packed Board of Education meeting this month at Grover Middle School in West Windsor, N.J., where a districtwide debate that often splits along racial lines is underway about the pressure put on students there to succeed....

[I]nstead of bringing families together, [the principal's] letter revealed a fissure in the district, which has 9,700 students, and one that broke down roughly along racial lines....

Not all public opinion has fallen along racial lines...

I guess a headline saying that a school district was divided along racial lines would get readers hot to see another one of the many stories the Times runs about divisions between black and white people. There are so many of those that I doubt that the NYT wants to dial back the racial divisiveness. Maybe they just didn't want to disappoint readers who hunger for more black-versus-white material.

Anyway, this is a fascinating conflict, with white parents put out that the Asian-American kids are upping the competition. Immigrants from China, India, and Korea have moved to the school district, near Princeton, in large numbers precisely to get their kids into the very best, high level schools. The Asian-American kids are now the distinct majority in the schools — 65%. These families were big supporters of advanced mathematics, instrumental music, and maximizing honors and Advanced Placement credits.

The white parents are agonizing about all the stress on their kids, and the school superintendent, David Aderhold, is responding to them, dialing back the program in what the Asian-American parents tend to see as "dumbing down" and "anti-intellectual."  Aderhold puts his reforms in terms of prevention of mental illness and suicide. He speaks of "a holistic, 'whole child' approach... that respects 'social-emotional development' and 'deep and meaningful learning.'"

Both Asian-American and white families say the tension between the two groups has grown steadily over the past few years, as the number of Asian families has risen. But the division has become more obvious in recent months as Dr. Aderhold has made changes, including no-homework nights, an end to high school midterms and finals, and a “right to squeak” initiative that made it easier to participate in the music program.

So the white people are not the majority nor are they arguing for meritocracy... and yet they seem to be winning. They are winning with the argument that it's not good to have too much winning when they are not the ones doing the winning.

This story made me want to reread Malcolm Gladwell's 2005 article "Getting In/The social logic of Ivy League admissions":

White Christmas in Blue Mounds... on the Overlode Trail.

"General Washington, who spoke a lot about Providence and the Almighty Being, less about God, and nothing about Jesus Christ..."

"... surprised the hung-over Lutheran Hessians garrisoned at Trenton, on the morning after Christmas. On the English side General Charles, Lord Cornwallis, the last British commander, was of a different breed from the early commanders, the conciliatory and peace-seeking brothers, General Sir William Howe and Admiral Richard, Lord Howe. Cornwallis and his armies marched through the South burning barns, crops, towns, and devastating stores. In Virginia he took particular pleasure in ravaging Governor Thomas Jefferson’s possessions, making off with livestock (which was cricket) and cutting the throats of colts (which was not). Jefferson accused him of a 'spirit of total extermination.'"

Sebastian De Grazia, "A Country With No Name: Tales from the Constitution."

Tiffany Trump and Marla Maples go to the North Pole.

That's what it says here.

This post is for those who need a daily Donald Trump fix.

It is a white Christmas after all!

Christmas chard. I think I might have some Christmas chard later today. If only I had a blowtorch, I could have Christmas chard charred.

ADDED: "Yes, it’s White Christmas! That holiday classic featuring closeted homosexuals and child abusers and the women with eating disorders who love them!"

"When the Puritans of New England famously made Christmas illegal during their first decades on this side of the Atlantic, it was not because they were killjoys..."

"... or at least, not only because they were killjoys."

Christmas was an existential threat to orderly society, a shorthand for the spiritual risks they encountered every day in the New World. The era’s leading preacher, Cotton Mather, even continued to rail against the “heathen feast” after the laws prohibiting Christmas were repealed.

“Can you in your Conscience think, that our Holy Savior is honoured,” he wrote, “by Mad Mirth, by long Eating, by hard Drinking, by lewd Gaming, by rude Revelling; by a Mass fit for none but a Saturn, or a Bacchus, or the Night of a Mahometan Ramadam?”

That 3,600-foot-long asteroid that passed by on Christmas Eve...

... was 6.8 million miles away.

Tags: astronomy, survival

Yeah, we survived another near miss... near in the astronomical scheme of things.

If a 3,600-foot-long asteroid had hit Earth, it would have had the effect of an X-kiloton nuclear bomb. I don't know the number, sorry. I tried to look it up, and I did find some discussion of how we could use a nuclear bomb to destroy an asteroid that really was about to hit us:

With only weeks' notice, we would have to hastily come up with a plan.... If we blow up an asteroid that is too close to Earth, the end result could be just as catastrophic—a "shotgun effect" that could rain down fiery fragments of debris over a huge portion of the Earth.... And then we need to know what the asteroid is made of. Whether we would try to hit it with a spacecraft, divert it with a nuclear blast, or completely destroy it with a nuke depends significantly on what the asteroid is composed of, whether it's light, porous silicates or dense iron-nickel alloys known as meteoritic iron.... Another problem is that the fusing mechanism of a nuclear device would be destroyed in an impact over 671 miles per hour effectively disarming the nuke...

Why is burnt food a big trend now?

We're told it's the craving for authenticity. If you burn your food, on purpose — like with a blowtorch from Williams-Sonoma — you're getting the feeling of reality — like in some poverty-striken rural, peasant-type place in South America.

"So when we hear tell of the birth of Christ, let us be silent and let the Child speak.... This Child teaches us what is truly essential in our lives..."

Says Pope Francis his Christmas homily.

This Child, whose face radiates the goodness, mercy and love of God the Father, trains us, his disciples, as Saint Paul says, 'to reject godless ways' and the richness of the world.... In a society so often intoxicated by consumerism and hedonism, wealth and extravagance, appearances and narcissism, this Child calls us to act soberly, in other words, in a way that is simple, balanced, consistent, capable of seeing and doing what is essential. In a world which all too often is merciless to the sinner and lenient to the sin, we need to cultivate a strong sense of justice, to discern and to do God's will. Amid a culture of indifference which not infrequently turns ruthless, our style of life should instead be devout, filled with empathy, compassion and mercy, drawn daily from the wellspring of prayer.

Are you seeing and doing what is truly essential?