Wednesday, August 31, 2016
7:15 p.m.: Trump vows to build the wallMore at LAT, "Campaign 2016 updates: Donald Trump vows that Mexico will pay for a wall along southern border."
Donald Trump began laying out his immigration plan, asking the crowd, “Are you ready? Are you ready?”
His first step: “We will build a great wall along the southern border," he said.
The crowd chanted, “Build the wall.”
“And Mexico will pay for the wall. They don’t know it yet, but they’re going to pay for the wall. Great people and great leaders, but they’re going to pay for the wall."
Trump said he would build a wall that was tall, impenetrable and beautiful.
“We will use the best technology,” he said, “including above and below-ground sensors, towers, aerial surveillance, to supplement the wall.”
Trump said he believed Mexico would help with his plan because it would stop criminal cartels.
“Especially after meeting with their wonderful, wonderful president today,” Trump said, “they want to solve this problem along with us, and I’m sure they will.”
Plus, more video, "Donald Trump says Illegal Immigrants will be out within the 1st hour he's President - AGAIN," and "Donald Trump says maybe ICE will deport Hillary Clinton - Phoenix, Arizona."
And, "Donald Trump lays out three steps of his immigration policy."
I thought "Can Josh Marshal Be This Stupid?"
The Mexico visit was a brilliant idea. It surprised everyone and actually opened a dialog with Mexico on building the wall. Trump beats expectations and appears diplomatic. Pretty smart, I thought.
So here's Byron York with the confirmation, at the Washington Examiner, "Mexico gamble a huge win for Trump":
About an hour before Donald Trump made his joint statement with Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto, a strategist in Trump's extended circle saw success on the horizon.Keep reading (via Memeorandum).
"I bet they have a nice meeting where they both explain their positions and promise to talk further — it doesn't have to be any more complicated than that," the strategist explained. "If [Trump] just has a calm, behind-closed-doors meeting, has a photo taken, looks presidential, and gets out of town, that's a big win."
Indeed, it was a big win — a very big win — for Trump. Going into a meeting with the potential for disaster — who knew how Pena Nieto would receive the world's most controversial presidential candidate or what embarrassments might lie ahead? — Trump came out of the meeting looking very much like a potential President of the United States. Standing beside the Mexican leader in front of a green-gray granite wall reminiscent of the United Nations, Trump presented the picture of a statesman.
Less than 24 hours earlier, Trump was reciting "The Snake" before a rowdy audience in Everett, Washington. In Mexico, he looked like a world leader.
Before the meeting, some in the Trump circle saw a win virtually no matter what happened. "It's a great gesture," another adviser said. "Frankly, the outcome doesn't matter. It's the fact that he did it. He took the guy up on his invitation, and even if there's no substance, at least the gesture was made, and it absolutely, totally overshadows anything Hillary Clinton is going to do for the next 48 hours."
After the hour-long session, Trump benefited enormously from the conventions and practices of international relations. There they were, the president at one podium and the candidate at another, translators translating, the assembled international press watching. When it came time to talk, Pena Nieto observed the niceties of diplomacy, treating Trump as a quasi-president already...
Previously, "Donald Trump to Visit Mexico to Meet with President Enrique Peña Nieto."
ADDED: Still more at Instapundit.
Also, Save on Skechers Shoes.
More, Apple EarPods 827 In-Ear Stereo Headphones with Remote and Mic - White.
Plus, KIND Bars, Dark Chocolate Nuts & Sea Salt, Gluten Free, 1.4 Ounce Bars, 12 Count.
BONUS: John Prados, Storm Over Leyte: The Philippine Invasion and the Destruction of the Japanese Navy.
I'm glad, because I like the lady.
At London's Daily Mail, "Renée Zellweger opens up about her Hollywood comeback in Bridget Jones’s Baby."
Teri Nichols, LAUSD Teacher's Assistant, Accused of Smuggling Cell Phones, Heroin to Death Row Inmate (VIDEO)
Teri Nichols, the accused TA, is black.
This is exactly the kind of assistive behavior among girlfriends and baby moms depicted in Alice Goffman's riveting book, On the Run: Fugitive Life in an American City.
Watch, at CBS News 2 Los Angeles, "LAUSD Teacher's Assistant Accused of Smuggling Cell Phones, Heroin to Death Row Inmate."
Also at the LAist, "LAUSD Teacher Allegedly Smuggled Heroin to San Quentin Death Row Inmate."
At LAT, "Donald Trump still has a path to victory, but it's a tough one, USC/L.A. Times poll shows":
Although he trails in nearly all national surveys and polls of most battleground states, Donald Trump still has a potential route to victory, albeit a difficult one that would require him to coax many people who sat out the last election to vote this time around, the USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times Daybreak tracking poll finds.Keep reading.
The existence of a bloc of disaffected voters large enough to potentially swing the election Trump’s way is the main finding from an analysis of the first eight weeks of the daily tracking poll.
Whether Trump can convert a significant number of those potential supporters into voters over the final two months of the presidential campaign could determine whether the election ends up as a close contest or a runaway for Hillary Clinton.
That group of potential voters also helps explain why the Daybreak poll’s results have consistently been more favorable to Trump than other major surveys.
The key group driving that result are people who sat out the 2012 election but say they plan to vote this year. Trump, who’s due to give a major speech on immigration Wednesday, leads among them in the poll. He trails Clinton among those who voted four years ago or were too young to do so.
The design of the Daybreak poll means it reflects, more strongly than some other surveys, the views of those who didn’t vote before but say they will this year. As a result, the poll presents something of a best-case scenario for Trump — one in which he succeeds in getting large numbers of previous nonvoters to cast ballots for him.
Even that best case is a problematic one for the Republican nominee since he seldom does better than a tie in the poll’s results. For the last two weeks, even as most polls have shown Clinton with a significant edge over Trump, the Daybreak poll has shown the two candidates roughly even, trading narrow leads back and forth. The poll also shows that a large percentage of voters remain uncertain about their choice.
As of Tuesday morning, the poll showed Trump ahead 45%-42%, well within the margin of error.
Trump’s situation is even more challenging because of the difficulty of turning nonvoters into voters, a task for which Trump’s campaign may be especially ill-suited...
And from yesterday's Los Angeles Times front page, "The Power Couple."
Mardoqueo Sincal Jochola Killed in Vicious Black Thug 'Knockout Game' Attack in Philadelphia (VIDEO)
Trump should speak out against the brutal black thug violence against Hispanic immigrants. Oh boy, talk about putting leftist Democrats on defense.
At London's Daily Mail, "Latino immigrant dies after being sucker punched during 'knockout game' in Philadelphia."
And watch, at CBS News 3 Philadelphia:
Tuesday, August 30, 2016
Actually, tonight he's got a three-point lead, 45.1/42.3 percent.
At the USC Dornsife page.
Also, at LAT, "Where the presidential race stands today."
More at Breitbart, "LA Times Tracking Poll: Trump Captures Six Point Swing, Leads Clinton by Three."
Trump continues to upend the news cycle.
And if it's a productive meeting, he could damage Hillary Clinton's momentum in the Hispanic community.
He's unpredictable and totally fearless. I like it.
At LAT, "Donald Trump headed to Mexico for meeting with Enrique Peña Nieto."
More at Memeorandum.
Trump will be making another "major address" tomorrow, on immigration.
It's highly anticipated. And it's going to be an interesting news day.
He was giving a significant address on the crisis of the inner-cities. I like what I'm hearing. A lot.
In any case, here's Mac Donald's essay at WSJ, "Black Lives Matter to Donald Trump":
Hillary Clinton tried to tar Donald Trump as a racist last week by associating him with the “alt-right.” Yet it is Mr. Trump who has decried the loss of black life to violent crime—and has promptly been declared biased for doing so. Whether intentionally or not, Mr. Trump has exposed the hypocrisy of the Black Lives Matter movement and its allies.RTWT.
Speaking in West Bend, Wis., on Aug. 16, only days after the recent riots in Milwaukee, Mr. Trump observed that during “the last 72 hours . . . another nine were killed in Chicago and another 46 were wounded.” The victims, as in other cities with rising crime, were overwhelmingly black.
Bringing safety to inner-city residents should be a top presidential priority, Mr. Trump said: “Our job is to make life more comfortable for the African-American parent who wants their kids to be able to safely walk the streets and walk to school. Or the senior citizen waiting for a bus. Or the young child walking home from school.” Mr. Trump promised to restore law and order “for the sake of all, but most especially for the sake of those living in the affected communities.”
The reaction was swift. The progressive website Crooks and Liars deemed Mr. Trump’s speech a “mashup of Hitler and George Wallace.” On CNN the activist and former Obama adviser Van Jones called it “despicable” and “shocking in its divisiveness.” Historian Josh Zeitz told USA Today that “the term law and order in modern American politics is, ipso facto, a racially tinged term.”
Mr. Trump’s acceptance speech in July at the Republican National Convention provoked similar dismay. “Young Americans in Baltimore, in Chicago, in Detroit, in Ferguson,” he said, have “the same right to live out their dreams as any other child in America.”
This defense of black children was too much for Alicia Garza, a co-founder of the Black Lives Matter movement. “The terrifying vision that Donald J. Trump is putting forward casts him alongside some of the worst fascists in history,” Ms. Garza said. The executive director of the Advancement Project, Judith Browne Dianis, complained that “the speech lends itself to be interpreted as isolating and scapegoating of communities of color.” Political commentator Sally Kohn wrote in Time that Mr. Trump “has basically recycled Richard Nixon’s version of dog whistle racism by insisting he is the ‘law and order candidate’—implicitly protecting White America.”
Why this frenzied effort to demonize Mr. Trump for addressing the heightened violence in inner cities? Because the Republican nominee has also correctly identified its cause: the false “narrative of cops as a racist force in our society,” as he put it in Wisconsin...
Mac Donald's book is here, The War on Cops: How the New Attack on Law and Order Makes Everyone Less Safe.
Bernie Sanders supporters said they were looking at "Scandinavia," thinking "that's where we [America] ought to be going..."
But see Nima Sanandaji's new book, Debunking Utopia: Exposing the Myth of Nordic Socialism.
At the Los Angeles Times, "Huma Abedin is Hillary Clinton's closest aide, and now she might be a liability":
Before any of former U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner’s creepy sexting even came to light, his wife had attracted unwanted attention for her boss, Hillary Clinton.Good.
Huma Abedin is a favorite target of Republicans. They accuse her of being a Saudi spy, a self-dealing insider, the mastermind behind a plot to hide Clinton’s email.
But the noise around Abedin was so often distorted by conspiracy theories that the public seemed to tune it out — until Weiner suddenly appeared back in the spotlight with the revelation of his most disturbing Twitter message yet: an illicit photo in which his son was a prop, sent privately to another woman. Abedin announced Monday that she and Weiner would separate.
Now, Clinton’s campaign finds itself unable to duck unwanted attention drawn to Abedin, a 40-year-old aide closer to Clinton than anyone else on her payroll...
Maybe Ms. Huma will get the full public vetting she so richly deserves, especially her ties to Islamic jihad.
And the discussion at Politico, "Poll: Clinton leads Trump by 7 points."
At one point Monmouth had Clinton up by 12 points, and she's still up more than half that in this latest survey. Are they consistently oversampling Democrats? Is the poll a fraudulent outlier?
Check Hot Air for a nice analysis, "And now a new national poll shows the race tightening."
I think the race is tighter. Indeed, I think it's a dead heat national horse race at the moment, and lots of good solid polling organizations are generating those numbers. See from Sunday, "Latest Morning Consult Poll Has Hillary Clinton Up 43 to 40 Percent Over Donald Trump."
Yesterday the USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times 'Daybreak' poll had Trump up over Clinton 44.0/43.6. It's a dead heat.
And even the latest UPI presidential tracker has Clinton up by just 3 points, "UPI/CVoter poll: Hillary Clinton regains lead over Donald Trump."
Of course, I remember what happened in 2012, and most of these polls may well be perfectly accurate. We'll see. As I always say. We'll see.
Monday, August 29, 2016
From Ed Driscoll, at Instapundit, "ROGER SIMON: RIP JOE HICKS—GREAT MAN OF HIS TIMES."
I was interviewed by Joe Hicks, along with Bill Whittle, on PJTV right before the 2008 election. I'd just published, "Obama's Fundraising Fraud."
I really admired him. R.I.P.
Also at Memeorandum.
Carlos Danger's getting kicked to the curb.
And see Twitchy, "Bad omen? You bet! No wonder Anthony Weiner and Huma couldn’t make it work."
Previously Anthony Weiner blogging is here.
And see the story at the New York Times, "‘Blood in the Water,’ a Gripping Account of the Attica Prison Uprising."
I'm not so worried about the far-left agenda, since I'd have something to criticize in classroom discussions, in any case. But see Robert Cherry, at the New York Post, for more.
PREVIOUSLY: "The Sad and Worn-Out Shakedown Shtick of Ta-Nehisi Coates."
And here's his book, if you're interested, Between the World and Me. (I picked up a copy. It's know your enemies with me, remember. I just read everything.)
I've never discounted Trump's chances in Florida, mainly because he's had such a big business presence there. Plus, Florida elects GOP governors all the time. Why count out Trump?
Well, it turns out, there's also a new and large white retiree community that might bolster that Manhattan mogul.
This is cool.
At WSJ, "White Retiree Influx Helps Keep Florida in Play for Donald Trump":
THE VILLAGES, Fla.—Fast-growing minority communities give Democrats an increasing advantage in Florida, one of the most heated battlegrounds in the presidential election. A different and little-noted demographic trend is helping to keep the state competitive for Donald Trump : a new influx of white retirees, such as Art Donnelly.Keep reading.
Mr. Donnelly and his wife moved last year from Long Island, N.Y., to a retirement community here, where he has attended tea-party gatherings and Republican club meetings. He said he plans to get more involved in helping to elect Mr. Trump, the GOP nominee.
“Politicians in general are too focused on how they can help themselves and their inner circles,” said 67-year-old Mr. Donnelly, a former consultant in the intelligence community. “I don’t think Trump is going to be so easily controlled by the power brokers.”
Florida, the largest swing state, is being keenly targeted by the presidential campaigns. While Democrat Hillary Clinton can lose the state and find other paths to victory, it is seen as a must-win for Mr. Trump. Both candidates have been stumping there regularly.
New arrivals like Mr. Donnelly help explain why the Florida race remains tight in polls. The most recent, a Mason-Dixon survey released Friday, showed Mr. Trump trailing Mrs. Clinton by only two points among likely voters, a slim margin helped in part by his lead of over 20 points among white seniors.
President Barack Obama won Florida by less than a percentage point in 2012 amid a poor showing among white voters. Since then, the terrain has turned more favorable to Democrats. The share of eligible voters who are non-Hispanic white has fallen from 67% in 2012 to a projected 64% this year, according to the nonpartisan States of Change demography project.
That is due to more Hispanic and minority voters, as well as to a big influx of residents from economically troubled Puerto Rico, who are eligible to vote and tend to back Democrats. Some 96,000 Hispanics arrived in Florida from abroad in 2014, including many from Puerto Rico.
That trend is partly offset by another set of new residents—white retirees, many from GOP-leaning areas of the country. Though Florida has long been a destination for white retirees, they have arrived in larger numbers in recent years as a stronger economy and rising property values made it easier to move, economists and local officials say.
“People around the country in depressed areas were able to sell homes and come down,’’ said Don Hahnfeldt, a resident of The Villages community who is running unopposed for a state House seat.
A net 7,800 white, non-Hispanic residents left Florida in the recession year of 2008, but whites streamed back as the economy picked up, topping a net 94,000 arrivals in 2014.
“The interplay between the share of the white vote and the share of the Hispanic vote will keep the state relatively competitive for a while,” said Democratic strategist Steve Schale, who managed Mr. Obama’s 2008 campaign in Florida.
These trends are on display in two neighboring areas of central Florida: The Villages and Orlando. The Villages—an expanse of residential tracts interspersed with golf courses, country clubs and town centers with architectural themes, such as an old cattle town—is the fastest-growing metro area in the U.S. Its county, Sumter, is the only one in the country where the majority of the population is seniors.
The Villages has a high rate of new arrivals, 87% of whom were white in 2014, census data show. Between 2009 and 2013, the biggest source of new residents from beyond Florida was rural places outside metro areas nationwide, which tend to be more conservative. By voter registration, Sumter County is 53% Republican and 26% Democratic...
Too late now. He'll be 21 in January, lol.
My youngest son just turned 15 and started high school last week. He doesn't use social media. He doesn't even have a Facebook account. We'll see how long that lasts. I'm glad, though.
In any case, watch, at CBS This Morning, from the other day, "A new survey of teenagers and parents finds that 60 percent of teen internet users have created online accounts that their folks don't know about. That's more than twice the percentage of parents who suspect their teens have secret accounts. Wired magazine contributor Mary H.K. Choi joins "CBS This Morning" to discuss her latest article, "Like. Ghost. Flirt," and how she met with five teens across the country to learn how high schoolers actually use social media."
Here's the piece, at Wired, "Like. Flirt. Ghost: A Journey Into the Social Media Lives of Teens."
Irvine PTA Mom Busted With Ziploc Bag of Marijuana, Two EZY Dose Pill-Pouch Baggies, One With 11 Percocet Pills, Another With 29 Vicodin
From the front-page at yesterday's LAT, "FRAMED: SHE WAS THE PTA MOM EVERYONE KNEW. WHO WOULD WANT TO HARM HER?"
Oh boy, what a drama.
It's in six parts too.
Sunday, August 28, 2016
Here's the new Morning Consult poll, "Trump Gains Ground on Clinton; Black Voters Still Wary":
In a survey taken Aug. 24 through Aug. 26, Trump halved the 6-point distance between himself and Clinton from the previous week’s poll. In the most recent head-to-head matchup, 43 percent of registered voters say they will vote for Clinton, and 40 percent say they will vote for Trump; 17 percent don’t know or have no opinion...I mentioned my hunch that the national horse race was tightening the other day. Here, "It's a Dead-Heat at the USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times 'Daybreak' Poll."
It's still a six-point spread at RCP national horse race average, but there's been a couple of close polls the last few days.
And, interestingly, RCP doesn't include UPI's polling, which shows Trump leading as of Friday. See, "UPI/CVoter poll: Donald Trump maintains slim lead over Hillary Clinton."
Also, today's results at the USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times 'Daybreak' tracking poll has Clinton just barely ahead (virtually tied) at 44.2 to 43.6.
I haven't trolled around to check the battleground state polling, but the national horse race is definitely tightening and way too close to count anyone out.
Saturday, August 27, 2016
See, "Exclusive – Breitbart/Gravis Poll: Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump Now Neck and Neck Ending August." (Via Memeorandum.)
And now here's the latest smears, at WaPo, "New Trump campaign chief faces scrutiny over voter registration, anti-Semitism."
Right. Notice how this piece bolsters Crooked Hillary's attack on Trump and the alt-right.
I thought I hated the left under Obama. I swear I'm feeling more angry about all things regressives than ever before.
It's a good piece. Breitbart's actually not one of my daily reads, mainly because I hate all the ads on the website. I'll see some of the better stuff going viral on social media. Besides, I'm not into conspiracy politics, which apparently is going strong there.
That said, I'm glad the site's doing well. I don't care about Stephen Bannon, and I know Breitbart's gone downhill since Andrew died, but at least it's emerged as a recognized force fighting the radical left. And that scares the hell out of regressives, heh.
Friday, August 26, 2016
It's now available in paper, and more timely than ever.
At Amazon, Dick and Liz Cheney, Exceptional: Why the World Needs a Powerful America.
While reading Dave Weigel's piece at WaPo yesterday, I followed the links to Joseph Sobran's essay, "For Fear of the Jews."
It's just revolting, but it's not new to me. This Sobran dude's new (to me), but the ideas there are pretty familiar after dealing with disgusting "paleoconservative" losers over this last decade or so. And unfortunately, some of the memes at that piece don't just reflect on paleos but on the "alt right" as well (see Yishai Schwartz, "Banal, Incoherent, Anti-Semitic and Pro-Trump: Why We Should Take the Alt-Right Seriously"), to say nothing of a lot of generic libertarians too (think of the Ron Paul trolls back in 2008).
Sometimes folks have argued that I'm not really neoconservative, but actually more of a straight "conservative." Nope. I see unalloyed support for Israel as a fundamental tenet of neoconservatism (see David Bernstein, "Is Neoconservatism a 'Jewish' Movement?"). Not blind support, mind you (see David Horowitz's flawed essay on that). But unwavering support for the Jewish people and Israel's leadership in the cause of moral decency in the Middle East and the world. I thus always push back against all manner of attacks against the "evil" neocons, which are usually thinly-veiled attacks on Jewish supporters of democracy promotion, regime change, the war in Iraq, and so forth. After the Arab Spring I'm much more careful about uncritical advocacy for democracy promotion, but Israel remains the light of moral decency in international affairs.
Interestingly, all this recent discussion of "white supremacy" and the "alt right" has conveniently obscured the intense racism, Israel-hatred, and ideological extremism on the Democrat Party left. Folks ought not lose sight of what's really at stake in this election. Donald Trump's a good man. Hillary's attacks on him are despicable. She's got more in common with those "fringe extremists" on the "far reaches of the Internet" than Donald Trump ever will (see William Jacobson, "Hijacking of #BlackLivesMatter by anti-Israel activists already has damaged the movement").
There's a lot more to neoconservativism that foreign policy and support for Israel. In my case, I'm a classic throwback to the old "liberal" who's been "mugged by reality." I'm especially neoconservative on domestic issues, points of ideological emphasis that hark back to the 1960s and some of the earliest neocons who helped shape public policy at that time --- folks like Irving Kristol, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, and Norman Podhoretz (see Justin Vaïsse, "Why Neoconservatism Still Matters").
In any case, one of the things I love about the "neocon" label is how widely you see people on the right attack it (usually this is part of a diatribe against "endless wars"). Although I sometimes get a painful twinge at these outbursts, I just embrace the label as a badge of honor.
So, there you go. I just felt like I needed to get that out, especially after reading that vile Sobran piece.
At PBS NewsHour, "Why the ‘alt-right’ is coming out of online chat rooms to support Trump."
I haven't seen Weigel in years. He's packed on a few pounds and grown a "pornstache," lol.
If Hillary wins I expect we might see many more years of Democrat advantage, mainly because of tremendous demographic change. A Trump presidency, on the other hand, might be able to slow down those trends, especially if he's successful implementing immigration reform (and slows down the current hyper-speed rates of invasion from abroad). Also, a successful Trump economy might turn on young voters --- so-called Millennials --- to the Republican brand. Some analysts argue that the youth vote is up for grabs, and thus an expanding economy with increased opportunity (perhaps with some reforms in the student debt sector) could convince large numbers of young people to vote GOP. All of this is speculation, but nothing's decided yet. The election's actually closer than folks are letting on, as evidenced by Hillary's massive hysterical smear campaign against Trump and the "alt right."
Thursday, August 25, 2016
Also, "The Presidential Horse Race at the L.A. Times 'Daybreak' Tracking Poll."
Remember, it's an online panel survey that rolls over sub-samples daily. About 3,000 respondents participate in the entire survey, and individual opinions change, not the sample participants themselves (and thus the poll's supposed to be less volatile than traditional random sampling). This one's got a lag of a couple of days before you see changes in the numbers generated by campaign controversies. Notice at the screen-cap how Hillary (in blue) fails to get a substantial bounce out of the Democrat Convention (compared to CNN's post-convention poll on August 1st.) And in the past week or so, Hillary's email controversies appear to be taking a toll.
But frankly, I have no clue on how reliable is the "Daybreak" poll, although it's interesting that RCP's average of recent horse-race polls is down to 6 percent from almost 8 percent a couple of weeks ago.
Also, we're not talking about polling in the battleground states. The horse-race is the horse-race: It's a snapshot of national opinion that provides survey fodder for TV talking heads, as well as feedback for the campaigns to make adjustments, etc. Lots of folks are saying "if the election were held today" Hillary would crush Trump in a landslide. But the election's not being held today, and frankly, I think the Clinton camp is extremely desperate in the aftermath of the latest devastating email bombshells. Hillary's speech today reeks so strongly of desperation, it's almost like she's lost her mind. (See, "Hillary Clinton's Desperate, Shameful Speech on Donald Trump and the 'Alt Right'.")
Still, I'm not going to be all like 2012, when everyone thought Romney was surging to the finish line, and polls like Gallup had the GOP ticket at 51 percent on the eve of the election. Even Robert Stacy McCain was all excited about a "silent majority" of voters in Ohio flocking to the polls to put Romney over the top. Nope. It didn't happen. Indeed, the networks called the race around dinner time on the West Coast. Totally anti-climactic. And a real bummer.
So, I'm just burning off some steam here. As always, we'll see what happens on November 8th.
More here, in any case, "Where the presidential race stands today."
I tweeted my thoughts at the time, just as she finished up with the shameful show of baseless slander:
That was the most divisive, desperate presidential speech I've ever heard. It's Democrats who'll face a reckoning now. Hillary's just ugly.— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) August 25, 2016
.@DLoesch The worst speech I've ever seen. An all-out attack on regular Americans. A cascade of smears disguised as "tolerance." Despicable.— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) August 25, 2016
And for Donald Trump's response, see Politico, "Trump hits back at Clinton: 'Shame on you'":
Donald Trump roared back at Hillary Clinton's accusations of racism and hate with three words: Shame on you.More.
Railing against Clinton for smearing and lying about “decent people,” Trump blasted his Democratic opponent Thursday for suggesting his campaign had allied itself with the likes of racists, white supremacists and Ku Klux Klan members.
“I will work to dismantle the criminal gangs and cartels and to liberate our poorest citizens from crime and violence and poverty and fear,” he said at a rally in Manchester, New Hampshire. “To Hillary Clinton and her donors and advisers, pushing her to spread smears and her lies about decent people, I have three words."
Gesturing at the cameras with his right index finger, Trump intoned, "I want you to remember these three words: Shame. On. You."
Earlier, in his prebuttal to Clinton’s speech in Nevada, Trump said: "Now, I have not seen what Hillary is going to say. But I’ve heard about it. And, in a sense, I don’t want to dignify her statements by dwelling on them too much, but a response is required for the sake of all decent voters she is trying to smear."
Accusing Clinton of being “in hiding,” Trump observed that his opponent “is emerging not to take responsibility for her unethical and criminal conduct, but instead to make one of the most brazen attempts at distraction in the history of politics.”
The comments follow the Clinton campaign's release Thursday of a video featuring members of the KKK and Confederate flags waving, an ad that the Trump team denounced as a "disgusting new low."
"The news reports are that Hillary Clinton is going to try to accuse this campaign, and the millions of decent Americans — at record levels. This was set up — this event was set up late last night, and look what happens,” Trump said, gesturing to the crowd at the rally in Manchester. “Look how many people.
“It's a movement, folks, like they've never seen before. And going to accuse decent Americans who support this campaign, your campaign, of being racists, which we're not," Trump said. "It’s the oldest play in the Democratic playbook."
Democrats resort to “this one tired argument" when their policies fail, Trump continued. “You’re racist. You’re racist. You’re racist. They keep saying it. It’s a tired, disgusting argument, and it’s so totally predictable. They are failing so badly.”
"They keep going back to this same well, but you know what? The people are becoming very smart. They’ve heard it too many times before," the Republican nominee continued. “The well is dry. The well is dry. This is the year the American people who believe in much better and much more honest politics say the word enough. Enough.”
This is how alt-right American Renaissance defines the alt-right, from their statement in response to Clinton speech pic.twitter.com/hOy65O383b— Kasie Hunt (@kasie) August 25, 2016
And my earlier entry, "Hillary Clinton to Give Speech Attacking Donald Trump and the 'Alt-Right'."
I'm post something on pathetic Hillary's pathetic speech a little later. I'm taking my youngest over to Game Stop in a minute.
Also, "Emily Ratajkowski sparkles on the sand as the cover girl for C Magazine."
BONUS: Via Sports Illustrated, ".@EmRata's Instagram account never lets us down."
No, Ms. Emily rarely disappoints. She knows how to work social media with the best of them.
Hillary's gonna smear Donald Trump and the "alt-right" as reactionary racists threatening a Fourth Reich in America.
I posted on the alt-right in May, "Trump Trolls, the Alt-Right, Neo-Reactionaries, and Anti-Semitism."
Frankly, the movement's mostly harmless, especially the Milo Yiannopoulos brand. Alex Jones and Paul Joseph Watson (Prison Planet) are pretty harmless too.
I would warn against some of the more hardcore varieties, however, folks that cluster more closely to the Stormfront types. You've got real racism over there, and of course some anti-Semitism. Naturally the media's gonna highlight these latter groups as totally representative of the "alt-right," thus smearing Donald Trump and his legions of supporters. These are the regular everyday folks in flyover America, those whom Salena Zito has been talking to all election season. See, "Stumped by Trump's Success?"
In any case, David Weigel (no friend of mine who blocked me on Twitter years ago) has a background piece up at WaPo, "What’s the alt-right? A primer." Weigel was at the libertarian Reason years ago, but he increasingly moved left. For a while he had that prime gig posting the "Right Now" column at WaPo, but was then outed (and fired) in the JournoList scandal as a pathetic partisan hack who made ugly attacks on opponents of homosexual marriage. (For some reason, WaPo rehired Weigel a couple of years ago, as if nothing ever happened. I guess the idiot got down on his knees for forgiveness, or more.)
So, FWIW, here's this from his piece today (via Memeorandum and Hot Air):
On Thursday, with an unusual amount of fanfare, Hillary Clinton will give a speech denouncing the "alt-right" and delineating ways in which Donald Trump has inflamed racist sentiment. On the alt-right itself, the speech is being welcomed as a sort of coming-out party; alt-right figures are finding their phones and email boxes glowing with new messages, asking to explain who they are and what they think.Keep reading.
While reporters like Rosie Gray, Olivia Nuzzi, and Benjy Sarlin have reported on the alt-right's success for a year, and while the Southern Poverty Law Center has closely monitored its success, the movement remains elastically defined, harboring some terms and personalities that remain obscure or impenetrable. This is a guide — which can and will be updated — to the basics.
'The Camp of the Saints'
A 1973 French novel by Jean Raspail, published as "Le Camp des Saints," which envisions an immigrant invasion of France, and which many on the alt-right view as prophetic. In a 2005 essay for the American Conservative, after riots in France, commentator (and future Michelle Bachmann collaborator) Jim Pinkerton cited Raspail's novel at length to ask why Europe had not realized it was committing "national suicide."
As Raspail describes the scene aboard the immigrant convoy, “Everywhere, rivers of sperm. Streaming over bodies, oozing between breasts, and buttocks, and thighs, and lips, and fingers … a welter of dung and debauch.”Raspail's vision has been cited frequently at Breitbart News, especially when a major Western leader criticizes anti-immigrant sentiment. "Now, as in the novel, prominent political officials are urging on ever larger waves," wrote Breitbart's Julia Hahn in 2015. "Secular and religious leaders hold hands to pressure blue collar citizens to drop their resistance; media elites and celebrities zealously cheer the opportunity that the migrants provide to atone for the alleged sins of the West — for the chance to rebalance the wealth and power of the world by allowing poor migrants from failed states to rush in to claim its treasures."
But France is persuaded that these people are a “million Christs,” whose arrival will “signal the dawn of a just, new day.” In other words, Raspail writes, what the French are lacking is a proper sense of national-racial consciousness, “the knowledge that one’s own is best, the triumphant joy at feeling oneself to be part of humanity’s finest.” Instead, he concludes, after having been beaten down by decades of multicultural propaganda, “the white race” has become “nothing more than a million sheep.”
Interesting, in any case.
At WSJ, "Years of Fed Missteps Fueled Disillusion With the Economy and Washington":
Once-revered central bank failed to foresee the crisis and has struggled in its aftermath, fostering the rise of populism and distrust of institutions.Keep reading.
In the past decade Federal Reserve officials have been flummoxed by a housing bubble that cratered the financial system, a long stretch of slow growth they failed to foresee and inflation persistently undershooting their goal. In response they engineered unpopular financial rescues, launched start-and-stop bond buying and delayed planned interest-rate boosts.
“There are a lot of things that we thought we knew that haven’t turned out quite as we expected,” said Eric Rosengren, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. “The economy and financial markets are not as stable as we previously assumed.”
In the 1990s, a period known in economics as the “Great Moderation,” it seemed the Fed could do no wrong. Policy makers and voters saw it as a machine, with buttons officials could push to heat or cool the economy as needed. Now, after more than a decade of economic disappointment, the central bank confronts hardened public skepticism and growing self-doubt about its own understanding of how the U.S. economy works.
For anyone seeking to explain one of the most unpredictable political seasons in modern history, with the rise of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, a prime suspect is public dismay in institutions guiding the economy and government. The Fed in particular is a case study in how the conventional wisdom of the late 1990s on a wide range of economic issues, including trade, technology and central banking, has since slowly unraveled.
Once admired globally for their command of the economic system, central bankers now are blamed by the left and right for bailouts during the financial crisis and for failing to foresee and manage forces suffocating the global economy in its aftermath.
Populist protest movements called “Fed Up,” “End the Fed” and “Occupy Wall Street” lashed out at the bank’s policies, and in the case of End the Fed, its very existence. Lawmakers of both parties want to subject it to more scrutiny or curb its powers.
David Einhorn, founder of the hedge fund Greenlight Capital, cites the fable of the ant and the grasshopper, in which a famished grasshopper begs a thrifty ant for help in wintertime after failing to stockpile food during warmer weather.
“We had the grasshoppers party from 2002 to 2007 and winter came and the Fed bailed them out,” said Mr. Einhorn, referring to financial firms and individuals who lived above their means. “Now the ants are pissed.”
The Fed’s struggles will be on display from Friday to Sunday when it gathers for an annual retreat in Jackson Hole, Wyo. On issues of growth, inflation, interest rates, unemployment and how to fight a recession, basic assumptions inside the central bank’s complex computer models have been upended.
“I certainly myself couldn’t have imagined six, seven years ago that we would be employing the policies we are now,” Fed Chairwoman Janet Yellen said to a packed ballroom in New York earlier this year. She lamented the government has leaned so heavily on the Fed to stimulate the economy while tax and spending policies were stymied by disagreements between Congress and the White House.
Many Fed officials believe—and private economists agree—their responses to the crisis helped avert a second Depression, outweighing any unfairness in the bailout process. Fed leaders believe low rates helped, too. “Inflation would be lower and unemployment higher now by noticeable amounts had we not employed those policies,” Ms. Yellen said in March.
Regardless, confidence in the central bank’s leadership has dropped. An April Gallup poll found 38% of Americans had a great deal or fair amount of confidence in Ms. Yellen, while 35% had little or none. In the early 2000s, confidence in Chairman Alan Greenspan often exceeded 70%...
Wednesday, August 24, 2016
Frankly, we know very little about it, and a new radiological study indicates that children inflicted with Zika may face additional brain and body abnormalities as they grow.
At the scientific journal, Radiology, "Congenital Brain Abnormalities and Zika Virus: What the Radiologist Can Expect to See Prenatally and Postnatally."
And at the New York Times, "Brain Scans of Brazilian Babies Show Array of Zika Effects."
Zika's calamitous attack on the brains of babies — as seen from the inside https://t.co/8JJug37KV1— The New York Times (@nytimes) August 24, 2016
The Zuck zombies just store too much information on each and every user.
You can guess how the "Social Network" has me pegged, all the better for malicious targeting and censorship.
At the New York Times, "Which Way Do You Vote? Facebook Has an Idea."
How does Facebook label you? https://t.co/PEBU0tn022— Stefan Molyneux (@StefanMolyneux) August 24, 2016
So, check Flopping Aces, "Sunday Funnies."
Also, at Theo's, "Cartoon Roundup..."
Cartoon Credit: Legal Insurrection, "Branco Cartoon – Can’t Get Up."
From Lisa Boothe, at the Washington Examiner, "Clinton's Inescapable Cloud of Corruption":
While many in the media have declared the presidential election all but over, damning accusations of pay to play at the Clinton Foundation and reports that the FBI found 15,000 work-related documents that Hillary Clinton failed to turn over represent the political land mines that still lie between her and the presidency. Multiple ongoing Freedom of Information Act civil suits, perjury allegations, an IRS probe and alleged joint U.S. Attorney-FBI investigation into the Clinton Foundation represent the inescapable cloud of corruption that could be the Democratic nominee's undoing.That's the best summary and analysis of this so far.
As the drip, drip, drip of information highlighting the intersection between the Clinton Foundation and the State Department surfaces, the political fallout for Hillary Clinton is unavoidable. The newly exposed emails demonstrate another lie told by the Clinton campaign. Despite her lawyers stating that only 30,000 emails on her server were related to work, the 15,000 puts that number closer to 45,000. But more importantly, it paints a clearer picture of what Hillary Clinton was attempting to hide by setting up private servers in the first place and attempting to wipe them clean.
What is particularly troubling for Clinton is that liberal publications like the Huffington Post and Boston Globe are calling for the Clinton Foundation to shut down. The calls will undoubtedly grow louder as reports continue to expose the overlap between top foreign donors to the foundation and the access it gained them to Hillary Clinton as secretary of state. That access puts into question the impartiality of the decisions Secretary Clinton made while in office and the potential conflicts of interest she would be confronted with as commander in chief. The Wall Street Journal has reported that "At least 60 companies that lobbied the State Department during her tenure donated a total of more than $26 million to the Clinton Foundation." And according to the Associated Press, 55 percent of Clinton's meetings and calls with people outside of the government were donors to the Clinton Foundation.
More than 40 percent of the Clinton Foundation's top donors are based in foreign countries, prompting the Washington Post to write, "Rarely, if ever, has a potential commander in chief been so closely associated with an organization that has solicited financial support from foreign governments." Many of those foreign governments have a history of human rights abuses. It is estimated the Clinton Foundation has accepted tens of millions of dollars from Middle Eastern countries.
Emails recently released by Judicial Watch and reports by Fox News demonstrate the close level of communication between State Department and Clinton Foundation officials. Judicial Watch recently released 725 pages of State Department documents showing coordination between Hillary Clinton's Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin and Douglas Band, a former longtime aide of President Bill Clinton and employee of the Clinton Foundation, who worked together to grant access to then-Secretary Clinton for high-dollar donors like Crown Prince Salman of Bahrain.
After failing to set up a meeting with the secretary of state through State Department channels, Salman, who contributed $32 million to the Clinton Global Initiative, went through the Clinton Foundation and successfully set up a meeting 48 hours later...
That wouldn't be good, of course. But who knows? Maybe the seal's got a good track record of hopping up on boats.
Via ABC News:
It's worth a read, in any case.
* Leslie Gelb, "The Future of U.S. Primacy: Power to Lead, But No Longer to Command."Personally, I'm not worried about the continued preponderance of American power in the international system. I'm worried about American leadership of the system. That's the key theme of Rober Lieber's book, Retreat and its Consequences: American Foreign Policy and the Problem of World Order.
* Geoffrey Wheatcroft, "Is a Rational American Foreign Policy Even Possible?"
* Robert D. Kaplan, "Is Primacy Overrated?"
* Barry Posen, "The High Costs and Limited Benefits of America’s Alliances."
* Barry Gewen, "American Power in an Age of Disorder."
And see Stephen Brooks and William Wohlforth, "The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers in the Twenty-First Century: China’s Rise and the Fate of America’s Global Position."
Watch, via the Blaze, "Tomi Lahren's Final Thoughts on Huma Abedin and Hillary Clinton's Corruption."
And it's not just the Ferguson effect. California's on the leading edge of the "de-incarceration" movement, with predicable results.
And remember, Long Beach is home to some of the most notorious gangstas anywhere in the country. Local hoodlums brag about their Long Beach creds. Snoop Dogg came out with "I'm From Long Beach" last year, apparently trying to capitalize on this city's hoodlum image:
After dark, no hooks, no marks, all GsIn any case, at the Long Beach Press-Telegram, "Crime spike in Long Beach continues":
Dip through the Funk House and I graduated with all Cs
So dope and I made bread
Never switching that's some real shit
Stayed down from the playground
And I always represent 20 crip...
Police Chief Robert Luna said his department has been concerned about the crime rate since it began rebounding from historic lows in recent years.And don't forget the war on cops.
In 2014, the number of violent crimes committed in the city was the lowest in 42 years, but violent crime jumped up almost 20 percent in 2015. That included 36 murders, the highest number in six years.
‘KEEPING US UP AT NIGHT’
“To see numbers like this, I’ve got to be honest with you, was keeping us up at night trying to figure out what was going on,” Luna said.
As crime has increased, so have the number of calls the police department has to respond to, according to the chief.
“We’re working more overtime right now to keep up with the workload,” Luna said.
Overtime is often assigned to a specific location and at specific times to tamp down areas where police see crime trends, Luna said.
The chief also said recent changes in California law have made it harder for officers to do their jobs. For example, Proposition 36 softened California’s three-strikes law. Proposition 47 reclassified a swath of felonies, including many drug crimes, as misdemeanors. And AB 109, a prison downsizing bill known as realignment, put local law enforcement in charge of supervising lower-level parolees.
Luna said he couldn’t directly tie the rise in crime to those changes, but he said he’s “highly suspicious” that offenses started trending upward after they went into effect...
But I don't feel sorry for him. If you're out drunk "carousing" at 4:00am in a Third World Country, bad things can happen. Very bad things. He's lucky things didn't turn out worse.
In any case, Melissa Clouthier cuts the guys some slack, "Feel Sorry for Ryan Lochte."
And see USA Today, "USA TODAY Sports investigation raises questions about Rio cops, Lochte incident."
One thing for sure: He's at the tail end of his swimming career either way, and thus his sponsors are making a rational decision to cut him loose. He might repair his reputation, but I'd be surprised if he returns to his swimming glory days of yore. Never say never, of course. I'll give the guy due props if he makes it to the 2020 Tokyo games.
At Legal Insurrection, "Stanford U. Bans Hard Liquor Over Sex Assault Case."
And watch, at CBS News 5 San Francisco, "Stanford Bans Hard Liquor."
But read Duke Taber's comment, at the Conservative Treehouse, "Kellyanne Conway is Not Helping Donald Trump – and Perhaps That’s the Plan…":
With over 600 comments on this issue, obviously a lot of people have strong opinions about KC [Kellyanne Conway]. What I am about to say probably has already been said but here goes anyways. I do not believe for an instance that KC’s [Kellyanne Conway's] comment/s were accidental. I don’t think most of you think so either. So the question is whether or not they were intentional for profitable design or nefarious design. The article has landed on the side of nefarious design. That is understandable considering the clients KC [Kellyanne Conway] has represented in the past. I couldn’t stand “wolf in sheep’s clothing” Cruz.Keep reading.
However, I just don’t see this as something of nefarious design...
At Amazon, Bruce Dickson, The Dictator's Dilemma: The Chinese Communist Party's Strategy for Survival.
At Hot Air, "“This could be the shortest book tour ever”: Yes, there’s one Trump fan who’ll be unhappy if he flips on deportation."
Here's the video, "Ann Coulter Makes the Case for Trump - Hardball (MSNBC)."
Yeah, Trump's purported flip on immigration does put Coulter in a bind, but she's consistent, in any case. According to Hot Air, so far she's the only hard-line Trump backer willing to criticize the nominee.
And at Amazon, in any case, Ann Coulter, In Trump We Trust: E Pluribus Awesome!
PREVIOUSLY: "Donald Trump Lays Out His Plan to Combat Illegal Immigration (VIDEO)."
From Hannity's town hall last night:
I fucking hate illegal immigration.
That out of the way, I'm skeptical that we'd be able to pull off mass deportation. I'm skeptical for a variety of reasons. It's not the cost that bothers me (we can afford it), it's the visuals. Not only would mass deportation take on police state optics on an industrial scale, we'd have the radical left sabotaging efforts to the point of domestic terrorism. It could possibly foment civil war. Just look at the Costa Mesa and Sacramento Donald Trump rallies for an idea of the kind of dregs who'd take to the streets. Ask yourself if you're ready to crush a leftist insurgency, because that's what it'd be like. That's how far things have gone in this country.
In any case, at the Los Angeles Times, "Can Donald Trump really round up and deport 11 million people?":
At rallies and debates over the last year, Donald Trump has repeatedly vowed to round up and deport the estimated 11 million people in the country illegally, sometimes saying he would eject them all in two years.Still more.
Over the last four days, however, the GOP presidential nominee and his top aides have issued contradictory signals as to whether Trump is backing off that core campaign pledge.
Aides have not said if Trump’s plan is under review because it appears politically unpalatable with moderate Republicans, or because forced deportations of millions of people would be prohibitively expensive and probably logistically impossible.
For now, the campaign has yet to provide specifics on how mass removals would be carried out, who would be targeted, and how much it would cost.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement deported 235,413 people last year, down from a record high of 409,849 in 2012, according to ICE records.
The fall-off followed the Obama administration’s efforts to target individuals who threaten public safety or national security and not deport those with clean records and strong family ties in the U.S.
Independent groups have expressed widespread skepticism that a Trump administration could dramatically ramp up that process without disrupting key sectors of the economy, tearing apart millions of families and violating civil liberties on a mass scale.
In May, a report by the right-leaning think tank American Action Forum estimated that finding, detaining, legally processing and deporting everyone who is in the country illegally would cost up to $300 billion.
To meet Trump’s two-year goal, the report said, Congress would need to appropriate money to hire, train and field about 90,000 immigration apprehension agents — up from 5,000 Enforcement and Removal Operations officers today.
The government also would need to build about 1,250 immigration courts — there now are 57 such courts — and hire thousands more immigration judges and federal attorneys to process the caseload.
The think tank estimates that the lost labor and purchasing power of 11 million people — many of whom work, own businesses and pay taxes — could reduce the nation’s gross domestic product by $1 trillion, equal to about $9,000 per household.
Moreover, finding millions of undocumented migrants almost certainly would entail immigration agents entering homes, raiding businesses and operating roadblocks to check identity papers to separate U.S. citizens and approved immigrants from those in the country illegally, a winnowing-out process that undoubtedly would be challenged in court.
“You will really have to tear up the social fabric to get this done,” said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, head of the nonprofit think tank...
At the New York Post:
From Matthew Vadum, at FrontPage Magazine, "Strong evidence of Hillary and Huma’s pay-to-play conspiracy emerges in new email dump."
She needs to get back on a diet. At some point, all that heft isn't attractive. Since when has she been selling herself as a plus-size model? Ashley Graham's got that celebrity top-spot nailed down, and she makes no apologies about it.
In any case, at the Sun U.K., "'THEY'RE GETTING BIGGER!' — Kelly Brook fans celebrate her curves as they speculate the buxom stars breasts are larger than ever before: The 36-year-old showed off her assets wearing a skintight striped dress."
PREVIOUSLY: "Wow! Kelly Brook is Packing on the Pounds!", and "Kelly Brook Goes for a Bike Ride."
At Politico, "Carville: 'Somebody is going to hell' over Clinton Foundation attacks."
Tuesday, August 23, 2016
Crooked Hillary's email scandal keeps dropping into the news, with new emails coming to light, from new iterations of freedom of information requests.
Here's the big Associated Press story up right now at Memeorandum, "MANY DONORS TO CLINTON FOUNDATION MET WITH HER AT STATE":
WASHINGTON (AP) -- More than half the people outside the government who met with Hillary Clinton while she was secretary of state gave money - either personally or through companies or groups - to the Clinton Foundation. It's an extraordinary proportion indicating her possible ethics challenges if elected president...A.P.'s Stephen Braun discusses the story at the video here.
Plus, at Washington Free Beacon, "ABC: State Dept Access Given to Clinton Foundation Donors ‘Precisely What She Said She Would Not Do’."
That piece discusses the story by ABC News investigation reporter Brian Ross. Here's the video, "Clinton Foundation: Did Donors Get Special Access?"
More at Memoeorandum.
I don't think I watched any more after Tuesday night. Once most of the marquee track events were done, I tuned out. Then of course you had the news of that idiot lyin' Ryan Lochte. I hope he's banned from the sport. He only took one gold anyway, and that was on a team relay. He's washed up, in more ways than one.
And as you recall, my hashtag's been #ThirdWorldGames, and for good reason.
In any case, from the article:
More than anything else, what surprised me during my first Olympics was the sheer scale of the bubble the IOC has made for itself. After arriving at the airport, members and assorted apparatchiks were ushered into private cars, ferried along exclusive highway lanes—look out the window, and there were Rio 2016-branded walls to mask the favelas—and dropped off at their exclusive hotels ringed by security, so only those with credentials could enter. They then took the same private cars to all of their events. Some even got motorcades. Once they got to the various sports venues, they went in the Olympic Family entrances, passed through the Olympic Family security lines, mingled in the Olympic Family club lounges, and watched athletes compete from the Olympic Family seats. When they were hungry, they surely put their $900 per diems to use at the city's most exclusive restaurants and bars, never risking having to interact with anyone who wasn't wealthy. Except, perhaps, for the people serving them.Rather than bring development and prosperity, the games will increase economic inequality and social division.
Yes, the Olympic Bubble is so all-encompassing that the IOC has convinced itself that it doesn't exist. "These games have not been organized in a bubble," IOC President Thomas Bach told reporters on Saturday as he made other demonstrably false claims, such as the Games not using any public money and Brazilians being "united behind these Olympic Games" despite the fact that half of them weren't. Bach ended his press conference by no-commenting almost every question, but adding that if the Olympics can happen in Rio, they can happen anywhere.
Putting aside Bach's sportocrat snobbery, there is a critical lesson here. The Olympic Bubble's comprehensiveness illustrates just how little the IOC is concerned with anyone but themselves—and how blithely, even happily indifferent the entire Olympic "movement" is to the waste and corruption it fosters, and the human wreckage it leaves in its wake...
More at that top link.
But then I tell students we don't get those kind of blowouts these days. The country's been pretty clearly divided between party strongholds for almost twenty years. I'll tell you though, unless Donald Trump really makes up some big gains in the key battlegrounds, the Democrats might well expand their map this year.
Still, though, it's not likely to be blowout.
See the New York Times, "Think the Clinton-Trump Race Will Be a Landslide? Hold Your Horses":
Will Trump lose in a landslide? It's been 32 years since a presidential candidate lost by double digits. https://t.co/12skQvayDO— Jeremy W. Peters (@jwpetersNYT) August 23, 2016
Donald J. Trump, after weeks of self-inflicted damage, has seen support for his candidacy in national polls dip into the 30s — Barry Goldwater and Walter F. Mondale territory — while Hillary Clinton has extended her lead to double digits in several crucial swing states.Keep reading.
Time to declare a landslide, right? Not so fast.
The vote may be more favorable to Mr. Trump than the worst-case-scenario prognosticators suggest for a very simple reason: Landslides do not really happen in presidential elections anymore.
It has been 32 years since a president won the popular vote by a double-digit percentage. That was when Mr. Mondale suffered an 18-point defeat to Ronald Reagan in 1984. It was also the last time there was a landslide among states, with Mr. Mondale winning only Minnesota and the District of Columbia.
There are a variety of factors that are likely to prevent a candidate today from rallying the huge, 60-plus-point majorities that swept Franklin D. Roosevelt into office in 1936, Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964 and Richard M. Nixon in 1972.
The country is too fragmented and its political temperature too overheated for any single person to emerge as a consensus choice for anything nearing two-thirds of the electorate. And that climate has led the political parties to become far more ideologically uniform than they used to be.
“The biggest difference between today and say, 1936 or 1964, is the composition of the two parties,” said Jonathan Darman, author of the book “Landslide: LBJ and Ronald Reagan at the Dawn of a New America.” Party identification used to be more fluid, making it less difficult for partisan voters to conceive of supporting someone of the opposite affiliation.
“The Republican and Democratic parties were much more heterogeneous than the parties we have today,” Mr. Darman added. “Party identification had a lot more to do with regional ties and family traditions than ideology.”