I sat and watched a discussion group over the past month get onto the topic of trying to resolve the homeless problems in Los Angles, and they came to this delicate topic.
Suppose you built this place....three-story unit, taking up an entire block, with some green park in the middle (landscaped).
Then you moved 400 folks into the units.
The question then arose...how long would it take for the unit itself....to become one giant ghetto with drug dealers and alcoholics laying around? And would the local neighborhoods next to this....would they accept this type of condition without causing massive grief over the destruction of their surroundings?
This scenario has been on my mind and it's part of the whole landscape of trying to resolve this mess.
Maybe you could establish a test for the future occupants and find 400 folks who were non-drug users and non-drinkers. But then you'd come to a portion of the 400 folks (maybe one-quarter to half of them) who were Paranoid Schizophrenic types. This would be the group who'd be arguing with fellow occupants about the style of their clothing, the color of their shoes, the imagined aura of their heads, and the provocative nature of conversation (just how much of a Cowboys fan you really are....might set them off).
So all of this laid out....does it really mean that a 400-unit housing project would really resolve much of anything?
That's the problem. You could go and get 20-billion dollars from the federal government to build units like this all over Portland, Seattle, SF, and Los Angles, then find a decade later that the money did absolutely nothing but create newer and more intense homeless problems. The odds of the 20-billion dollars in units being torn down within twenty years? I'd give it better than a 50-percent chance. And what happens then? The homeless who found homes, then lost homes?
Go and explain that to the public who paid taxes to build fake solutions.
Sunday 29 December 2019
The 94-Million Dollar Problem
In a normal year, San Francisco will go and spend $94,000,000 on homeless folks within the city. That's to handle the 'crisis' in the city for 8,000 to 9,000 people.
I sat and pondered over this.
This comes out to around $10,400 a year, per person.
In Alabama terms, if you handed me the money and said that it'd be a regular sum for at least ten years....it'd be a rather simple task.
I'd go find a huge chunk of land (say 300 acres) and lay out a mini-city of modular cabins (15 ft by 20 ft) with a basic studio appearance. I'd issue out a free breakfast each morning, some baloney sandwiches with a Sun Drop cola for lunch, and a fried chicken plate each evening.
At the end of the year, I'd still have 25-million left in my hand.
The problem here is that this all San Francisco 'cost' and not Alabama 'cost'. You toss in city managers making $90k, and a little empire of 100 homeless technicians, and you have eaten away at fair chunk of the $94-million.
What'll have to happen to change the dynamics of the SF homeless issue? Well....you'd have to go and probably triple the $94-million to around $300-million....to really retake the city and end the 'crap-on-the-streets' chatter. And where does the money come from? Yeah, that's really the big question left to answer.
Then you come to pause on this last question....with the drug-usage dynamic playing into this....why would you assume that the numbers will stay at 8-thousand to 9-thousand? I would go and forecast that the homeless numbers in SF will bump to 12,000 by the end of 2021.
I sat and pondered over this.
This comes out to around $10,400 a year, per person.
In Alabama terms, if you handed me the money and said that it'd be a regular sum for at least ten years....it'd be a rather simple task.
I'd go find a huge chunk of land (say 300 acres) and lay out a mini-city of modular cabins (15 ft by 20 ft) with a basic studio appearance. I'd issue out a free breakfast each morning, some baloney sandwiches with a Sun Drop cola for lunch, and a fried chicken plate each evening.
At the end of the year, I'd still have 25-million left in my hand.
The problem here is that this all San Francisco 'cost' and not Alabama 'cost'. You toss in city managers making $90k, and a little empire of 100 homeless technicians, and you have eaten away at fair chunk of the $94-million.
What'll have to happen to change the dynamics of the SF homeless issue? Well....you'd have to go and probably triple the $94-million to around $300-million....to really retake the city and end the 'crap-on-the-streets' chatter. And where does the money come from? Yeah, that's really the big question left to answer.
Then you come to pause on this last question....with the drug-usage dynamic playing into this....why would you assume that the numbers will stay at 8-thousand to 9-thousand? I would go and forecast that the homeless numbers in SF will bump to 12,000 by the end of 2021.
Saturday 28 December 2019
Book Recommendation
I spent bits and pieces of the past two months reading a Civil War history book......'Field of Blood' by Joanne B. Freeman, 480 pages.
First, she lays out the whole period of 1830s to 1860, in magnificent detail and you get a great feel for DC, and how things were crumbling.
For a high school kid (11th to 12th grade), I'd probably make it mandatory reading and it really sets up the nation and how it'll fall apart for the Civil War to occur.
The second thing, as 1860 comes around, it's common knowledge that EVERY SINGLE House and Senate member were packing a pistol, or had one in their desk in the Capital building.
The threat of a conflict starting there....on the House floor? It came down on several occasions where enough was said, and threats made.....that the war could have easily erupted there, and a hundred House members could have been shot dead over an entire evening by gunfire.
If you've ever had questions over the Civil War and how things leading up to 1860 never made sense in high school or college, or via the stupid video lessons.....I'd recommend this book.
First, she lays out the whole period of 1830s to 1860, in magnificent detail and you get a great feel for DC, and how things were crumbling.
For a high school kid (11th to 12th grade), I'd probably make it mandatory reading and it really sets up the nation and how it'll fall apart for the Civil War to occur.
The second thing, as 1860 comes around, it's common knowledge that EVERY SINGLE House and Senate member were packing a pistol, or had one in their desk in the Capital building.
The threat of a conflict starting there....on the House floor? It came down on several occasions where enough was said, and threats made.....that the war could have easily erupted there, and a hundred House members could have been shot dead over an entire evening by gunfire.
If you've ever had questions over the Civil War and how things leading up to 1860 never made sense in high school or college, or via the stupid video lessons.....I'd recommend this book.
The 'Einstein-Insanity' Style of Impeachment
It's a term that I heard this morning and you have to sit and ponder upon it for a while.
In this type of impeachment situation.....you go through the same processes.....doing the same thing, and in each single case, you expect a different outcome in the end.
It'd be like a group of eighth-grade kids in the school lab, with the five ingredients for some lab experiment, and they go down the list of processes, to discover each day for two weeks.....you can only have the same outcome, unless you radically changed the procedures, or added a sixth ingredient, or deducted one ingredient.
It's a bit comical, but readily fits into the mess we have today.
In this type of impeachment situation.....you go through the same processes.....doing the same thing, and in each single case, you expect a different outcome in the end.
It'd be like a group of eighth-grade kids in the school lab, with the five ingredients for some lab experiment, and they go down the list of processes, to discover each day for two weeks.....you can only have the same outcome, unless you radically changed the procedures, or added a sixth ingredient, or deducted one ingredient.
It's a bit comical, but readily fits into the mess we have today.
Friday 27 December 2019
Pelosi, Impeachment and Senate 'Scheduling'
Most people don't grasp this, but there's a flowing schedule which sets out Senate priorities over the next month or two. Various committees have people scheduled to appear, and witnesses have the dates marked on their calendars.
So as each week goes by......the Senate schedule is kinda in a mess to keep organized.....if they don't get the Articles of Impeachment.
It'd be like your boss hinting of a major conference meeting next week, but as of Friday this week.....you have no idea which day it will occur, or at what time. And you might be shocked that this critical meeting.....gets pushed to the week after, or even two weeks after next week.
So Pelosi is kinda playing with this mess, and seeing how much she can probably get away with.
So as each week goes by......the Senate schedule is kinda in a mess to keep organized.....if they don't get the Articles of Impeachment.
It'd be like your boss hinting of a major conference meeting next week, but as of Friday this week.....you have no idea which day it will occur, or at what time. And you might be shocked that this critical meeting.....gets pushed to the week after, or even two weeks after next week.
So Pelosi is kinda playing with this mess, and seeing how much she can probably get away with.
Closing of the Newseum
Next Tuesday, the Newseum will shut down in DC. It was a critically placed building (fine structure) that sat between the White House and the Capital Building.
I went to the structure in 2011 and spent two hours walking around. For me, it was the biggest waste of $20-$25 that I'd ever made in my life. On that particular Saturday, there was one busload of kids in the place (mostly bored by the tour), and maybe ten tourists.
They basically tried to make a museum into something that tourists would want to come and see.....it being all about the news.
Financially, from day one (11 years ago), it's been in this profitability 'mess'. No one cared to come, and it was continually draining resources. So the structure is being sold off, and this marginal idea will come to an end.
I went to the structure in 2011 and spent two hours walking around. For me, it was the biggest waste of $20-$25 that I'd ever made in my life. On that particular Saturday, there was one busload of kids in the place (mostly bored by the tour), and maybe ten tourists.
They basically tried to make a museum into something that tourists would want to come and see.....it being all about the news.
Financially, from day one (11 years ago), it's been in this profitability 'mess'. No one cared to come, and it was continually draining resources. So the structure is being sold off, and this marginal idea will come to an end.
2019, and Great Movies
Back in the mid-1970s....there was a year or two in there where there just weren't that many great movies produced. In fact, you can go to several periods in the past 30 years where there might have been six classics put out in a year.
So I come to 2019, and this odd factor of maybe fifteen great movies, and it's kinda shocking at the level worth seeing.
The list:
- The Irishman
- Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
- Richard Jewell
- Little Women
- Avengers Endgame (ok, maybe not a classic but worth viewing)
- Knives Out
- Marriage Story
- Parasite (South Korean, and surprising quality)
- Joker
- Downtown Abbey
- Uncut Gems
- Ford versus Ferrari
- The Lighthouse
- 1917 (probably one of the ten best war movies ever made)
- Dolemite is My Name (Eddie Murphy ought to win a Oscar)
- Midway (actually a great war movie)
- Birds of Passage
Then behind this group....there's at least ten more which are just a step or two behind. This group would include The Kid (great western), Deadwood the Movie (another great western),
So I come to 2019, and this odd factor of maybe fifteen great movies, and it's kinda shocking at the level worth seeing.
The list:
- The Irishman
- Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
- Richard Jewell
- Little Women
- Avengers Endgame (ok, maybe not a classic but worth viewing)
- Knives Out
- Marriage Story
- Parasite (South Korean, and surprising quality)
- Joker
- Downtown Abbey
- Uncut Gems
- Ford versus Ferrari
- The Lighthouse
- 1917 (probably one of the ten best war movies ever made)
- Dolemite is My Name (Eddie Murphy ought to win a Oscar)
- Midway (actually a great war movie)
- Birds of Passage
Then behind this group....there's at least ten more which are just a step or two behind. This group would include The Kid (great western), Deadwood the Movie (another great western),
Thursday 26 December 2019
The Billion Euro Loss in Health Funds?
In the past week, if you follow German health insurance news.....the companies all came up and admitted that together.....they went past their normal budget by about one-billion Euro, and so they had to dip into reserves.
A long-term problem? Well, yeah.
The bulk of blame? You could assign blame to around a dozen factors, but the biggest issue was nursing salary increases which had to be prioritized in 2019 because of nurses walking out of the profession, and trying to make up for shortfalls in the nursing population (recruiting from outside of Germany).
The odds this shortfall will continue into 2020? About a hundred-percent chance. So by 2021's national election....a national crisis and more costs for the insurance fund? It'll likely become a top five topic for the national election.
A long-term problem? Well, yeah.
The bulk of blame? You could assign blame to around a dozen factors, but the biggest issue was nursing salary increases which had to be prioritized in 2019 because of nurses walking out of the profession, and trying to make up for shortfalls in the nursing population (recruiting from outside of Germany).
The odds this shortfall will continue into 2020? About a hundred-percent chance. So by 2021's national election....a national crisis and more costs for the insurance fund? It'll likely become a top five topic for the national election.
The Homeless Story
President Trump basically gave the 'warning' to the California state government (particularly the governor) to settle it's homeless problems, or face federal intervention.
The Governor Newsom problem? He's basically locked into a lose-lose situation at this point. The city councils of San Francisco and Los Angeles (all Democratic-controlled operations)? They now face an extreme problem.
What happens now? I'll lay out three likely things to occur over the next six months.
First, President Trump simply sent a 'warning'. There is no schedule attached to this, and it might be twelve months before you see the threat go to the next level.
Second, the President will use this chaos to arrive in California and talk in a campaign message that the Governor and Democratic councils are screwing the general public and triggering the crisis to continue. Whether they like it or not....you could see a million voters walk away from the Democrats in 2020's state election. Enough to change the outcome? No....Hillary picked up 8.7-million votes, and Trump barely managed 4.5-million, so a million flipped votes wouldn't matter.
However, in district races.....if you scattered a million extra votes around....it'd probably flip at least five Democratic House seats over to the GOP. I suspect the bulk of this 'pressure' is about flipping House seats.
Third and final....in the stakes of a poker game....he's trying to force them to take measures that would be extreme.
Trying to resolve the homeless issues? I would go and suggest that the last thing that the federal government wants to do....is draw a line and say they want to fix this. You'd basically end up with three chief things that would be forced down:
1. Judges would be brought in and if you were mentally unstable....you'd be sent to some isolated federal controlled facility way out in the desert where the mental-case people would be isolated.
2. Drug-addicted folks would be given a one-shot rehab deal, and then if they failed that....they'd go to the desert facility described in the paragraph above.
3. Finally, you'd build cheap housing units with private security attached, and if you demonstrated you weren't willing to play by society rules....you'd also go to the desert facility described in the paragraph above.
At the end of this 'mess', I suspect that three-quarters of the homeless crowd would not be allowed into the public scene and live out their lives in a quiet compound area surrounded by security fences.
The Governor Newsom problem? He's basically locked into a lose-lose situation at this point. The city councils of San Francisco and Los Angeles (all Democratic-controlled operations)? They now face an extreme problem.
What happens now? I'll lay out three likely things to occur over the next six months.
First, President Trump simply sent a 'warning'. There is no schedule attached to this, and it might be twelve months before you see the threat go to the next level.
Second, the President will use this chaos to arrive in California and talk in a campaign message that the Governor and Democratic councils are screwing the general public and triggering the crisis to continue. Whether they like it or not....you could see a million voters walk away from the Democrats in 2020's state election. Enough to change the outcome? No....Hillary picked up 8.7-million votes, and Trump barely managed 4.5-million, so a million flipped votes wouldn't matter.
However, in district races.....if you scattered a million extra votes around....it'd probably flip at least five Democratic House seats over to the GOP. I suspect the bulk of this 'pressure' is about flipping House seats.
Third and final....in the stakes of a poker game....he's trying to force them to take measures that would be extreme.
Trying to resolve the homeless issues? I would go and suggest that the last thing that the federal government wants to do....is draw a line and say they want to fix this. You'd basically end up with three chief things that would be forced down:
1. Judges would be brought in and if you were mentally unstable....you'd be sent to some isolated federal controlled facility way out in the desert where the mental-case people would be isolated.
2. Drug-addicted folks would be given a one-shot rehab deal, and then if they failed that....they'd go to the desert facility described in the paragraph above.
3. Finally, you'd build cheap housing units with private security attached, and if you demonstrated you weren't willing to play by society rules....you'd also go to the desert facility described in the paragraph above.
At the end of this 'mess', I suspect that three-quarters of the homeless crowd would not be allowed into the public scene and live out their lives in a quiet compound area surrounded by security fences.
Friday 20 December 2019
Why the House May Never Hand Impeachment to the Senate
Once you hand the articles over....the Senate process would start, and likely be over in roughly twenty days (more or less).
The trouble with this discussion is that Hunter and Joe Biden were skipped for the most part in the House 'game'....but neither can avoid the Senate episode, and for Joe Biden....if he's dragged in via subpoena and made to swear on 'truth'.....his reputation for the most part ends. For Hunter, the allegations of money-laundering will be laid out and likely gets him the full focus of the Treasury Department and the FBI.
I might be willing to bet that Pelosi and team have reached a point where they know the score is zero on convicting Trump and they need some exit to play this game out.
Reputation for the whole affair? If they fail to hand the Impeachment articles over by the middle of January, then the whole thing starts to die off because the news media can't keep people focused on this whole thing. Adding to it, by mid-January.....the Super Bowl and NCAA basketball business starts up.
I'll go and predict that if nothing happens with the House articles by 10th of January (the 2nd Friday of the month), then it's finished, and just dissolves away as a Jeopardy question.
Should they have gone to Censure? Yes. But it's late now to admit that.
Adding to Trump's campaign funds in this Impeachment build-up? That's another huge part of the story. He probably collected a minimum of 50-million in this past hundred days.
We can laugh, but this is a pretty lousy joke.
The trouble with this discussion is that Hunter and Joe Biden were skipped for the most part in the House 'game'....but neither can avoid the Senate episode, and for Joe Biden....if he's dragged in via subpoena and made to swear on 'truth'.....his reputation for the most part ends. For Hunter, the allegations of money-laundering will be laid out and likely gets him the full focus of the Treasury Department and the FBI.
I might be willing to bet that Pelosi and team have reached a point where they know the score is zero on convicting Trump and they need some exit to play this game out.
Reputation for the whole affair? If they fail to hand the Impeachment articles over by the middle of January, then the whole thing starts to die off because the news media can't keep people focused on this whole thing. Adding to it, by mid-January.....the Super Bowl and NCAA basketball business starts up.
I'll go and predict that if nothing happens with the House articles by 10th of January (the 2nd Friday of the month), then it's finished, and just dissolves away as a Jeopardy question.
Should they have gone to Censure? Yes. But it's late now to admit that.
Adding to Trump's campaign funds in this Impeachment build-up? That's another huge part of the story. He probably collected a minimum of 50-million in this past hundred days.
We can laugh, but this is a pretty lousy joke.
Mayor Pete in the News
I sat and watched pieces of the Democratic debate from last night, and Senator Warren got all over that poor kid....Mayor Pete.
Mayor Pete apparently had some campaign fund-raising done....in a 'wine-cave', with 900-dollar-per bottle wine.
I stopped the video, and ran that a couple of times....just that 20-second piece.
Being from Alabama, I am a bit curious about a wine-cave. We don't drink that much wine in Alabama and when we do....it's usually on the deck out back, or under some shade-trees in the midst of a hot summer afternoon, with an ice cube or two in the wine cup (you know, those Dixie-cups).
But then I got onto the subject of the 900-dollar wine. You see....having lived for years in Germany, I've had a chance to drink a fair amount of wine. In fact, I've sipped some really fine Italian, German, Australian, South African, Spanish, French, and even Greek wine. Well....some were fine (that Greek wine is marginally two-star, no matter what you pay for it).
The general amount that you'd pay for fine German wine is maybe $6 to $20. On some special occasions, you might pull out the equivalent of $30. The majority of Germans will tell you in their entire life, they've never spent more than roughly $30 for a fine bottle of decent wine.
So the question ought to come up....all these poor fools who were paying 900 dollars for a wine with Mayor Pete.....were they really drinking a bottle of wine worth $900? I have my doubts. My guess is that the bottles were simply $100 per bottle wine, and the rest were catering services and the donation to the Mayor Pete's campaign.
Does Senator Warren have a point? Basically, you have to offer 'something' for a campaign stop fund-raiser. It doesn't matter if it's a cup of Pepsi, some catfish, cupcakes with Cool-Whip on top, or beans and rice. In the end, you need to get a couple of hundred dollars out of some crazy fool.
The sad part of this story is that Trump only needs to say he's getting impeached, and send you a personal e-mail about this, and it's forty-percent chance that you will just send Trump's team $100, for nothing. No dip, no wine, no biscuits....nothing. You might go one step higher, buying that stupid cheapo red-baseball cap with 'MAGA', for $35, or buying ten of the stupid hats for $350. Can Mayor Pete compete with Trump? No.
My end-point is this....which you have to wonder about....what exactly was Senator Warren serving for her fund-raiser? A beer and cheap chips, for $129.00?
Mayor Pete apparently had some campaign fund-raising done....in a 'wine-cave', with 900-dollar-per bottle wine.
I stopped the video, and ran that a couple of times....just that 20-second piece.
Being from Alabama, I am a bit curious about a wine-cave. We don't drink that much wine in Alabama and when we do....it's usually on the deck out back, or under some shade-trees in the midst of a hot summer afternoon, with an ice cube or two in the wine cup (you know, those Dixie-cups).
But then I got onto the subject of the 900-dollar wine. You see....having lived for years in Germany, I've had a chance to drink a fair amount of wine. In fact, I've sipped some really fine Italian, German, Australian, South African, Spanish, French, and even Greek wine. Well....some were fine (that Greek wine is marginally two-star, no matter what you pay for it).
The general amount that you'd pay for fine German wine is maybe $6 to $20. On some special occasions, you might pull out the equivalent of $30. The majority of Germans will tell you in their entire life, they've never spent more than roughly $30 for a fine bottle of decent wine.
So the question ought to come up....all these poor fools who were paying 900 dollars for a wine with Mayor Pete.....were they really drinking a bottle of wine worth $900? I have my doubts. My guess is that the bottles were simply $100 per bottle wine, and the rest were catering services and the donation to the Mayor Pete's campaign.
Does Senator Warren have a point? Basically, you have to offer 'something' for a campaign stop fund-raiser. It doesn't matter if it's a cup of Pepsi, some catfish, cupcakes with Cool-Whip on top, or beans and rice. In the end, you need to get a couple of hundred dollars out of some crazy fool.
The sad part of this story is that Trump only needs to say he's getting impeached, and send you a personal e-mail about this, and it's forty-percent chance that you will just send Trump's team $100, for nothing. No dip, no wine, no biscuits....nothing. You might go one step higher, buying that stupid cheapo red-baseball cap with 'MAGA', for $35, or buying ten of the stupid hats for $350. Can Mayor Pete compete with Trump? No.
My end-point is this....which you have to wonder about....what exactly was Senator Warren serving for her fund-raiser? A beer and cheap chips, for $129.00?
Can Anyone Be Impartial Now?
RBG (Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Supreme Court Judge)....says that if Senators cannot be impartial....then they can't vote in the impeachment.
Part of this comment goes to an oath that Senators have to take...as they start the hearing.
I pondered over this impartiality chatter for a long while. To be honest, if you really pushed this impartial 'game'....virtually every single House member (both Republicans and Democrats) would have to step out of the building and walk away from Impeachment. The nine Supreme Court judges? Same story. Journalists? Yep, same story.
You walk around the general public today and discuss politicized topics? You find that most everyone has an opinion, unless they live under some bridge, smoke a lot of Acapulco Gold marijuana, or live in some delusional fantasy world with cat-people/dog-people.
So RBG's fantasy world of impartiality no longer exists? More or less. Even if you asked her about Trump, she'd be very slow to respond to any question....to hide the fact that she's already non-impartial.
Basically, that's what people are having to do now....pretend to be impartial, and just act dopey. Civilization? Socrates, if he were alive today....would say that civilization has collapsed, and there's something going on that violates human standards.
Part of this comment goes to an oath that Senators have to take...as they start the hearing.
I pondered over this impartiality chatter for a long while. To be honest, if you really pushed this impartial 'game'....virtually every single House member (both Republicans and Democrats) would have to step out of the building and walk away from Impeachment. The nine Supreme Court judges? Same story. Journalists? Yep, same story.
You walk around the general public today and discuss politicized topics? You find that most everyone has an opinion, unless they live under some bridge, smoke a lot of Acapulco Gold marijuana, or live in some delusional fantasy world with cat-people/dog-people.
So RBG's fantasy world of impartiality no longer exists? More or less. Even if you asked her about Trump, she'd be very slow to respond to any question....to hide the fact that she's already non-impartial.
Basically, that's what people are having to do now....pretend to be impartial, and just act dopey. Civilization? Socrates, if he were alive today....would say that civilization has collapsed, and there's something going on that violates human standards.
Thursday 19 December 2019
If The Impeachment Were a Columbo Episode
Imagine at 5 AM, Columbo gets this call from the chief.
He's supposed to go out to this neighborhood, where there is NO body, no evidence of a murder, and no one reported missing.
So Columbo shows up. Hours go by. Columbo is mostly knocking on doors and presenting himself. He asks folks about nefarious acts. The only two things that folks mention is someone's dog who craps in everyone's yard during the night, and food-poisoning at some bar and grill down near the 'pike'.
Columbo continues on, and eventually goes back to write a sixteen-page report for the Chief.....with notices about the dog crapper thing and some definite hygiene problems at the grill operation.
Other than two mentions and twelve hours of research.....that was mostly it.
So the question is....would you even watch a 90-minute Columbo episode like this? The general answer is that fewer than 10-percent of people would care, and most would flip the channel over to watch a rerun of Bonanza.
This is the reality of the current situation....no one much believes in this impeachment, there is no factual evidence which really proves anything illegal, and public sentiment is more focused on Christmas....than impeachment.
He's supposed to go out to this neighborhood, where there is NO body, no evidence of a murder, and no one reported missing.
So Columbo shows up. Hours go by. Columbo is mostly knocking on doors and presenting himself. He asks folks about nefarious acts. The only two things that folks mention is someone's dog who craps in everyone's yard during the night, and food-poisoning at some bar and grill down near the 'pike'.
Columbo continues on, and eventually goes back to write a sixteen-page report for the Chief.....with notices about the dog crapper thing and some definite hygiene problems at the grill operation.
Other than two mentions and twelve hours of research.....that was mostly it.
So the question is....would you even watch a 90-minute Columbo episode like this? The general answer is that fewer than 10-percent of people would care, and most would flip the channel over to watch a rerun of Bonanza.
This is the reality of the current situation....no one much believes in this impeachment, there is no factual evidence which really proves anything illegal, and public sentiment is more focused on Christmas....than impeachment.
Wednesday 18 December 2019
The Ten Things to Take Away From the Senate Impeachment Episode
This is my list of predictions, on things that will come out:
1. The first two days will be wasted on procedural things and the subpoena list. The Democratic Senate members are royally screwed, and they already know it.
2. Joe Biden will be subpoenaed and will attempt to fight it. Figure four weeks wasted as courts have deal with this. If he is forced into the hearing....he's finished as a political figure, and his years of Senate service are probably to be forgotten real quick.
3. Hunter Biden will disappear (probably off to South Africa). His finance records from the Ukraine company will be entered as crime 'evidence' and the IRS will be interested in his income level. The money-laundering aspects? They will be apparent, with at least two other national governments now interested, and the Justice Department looking at how vast this really is. I don't think Hunter will ever return to the US.
4. The idea that Shifty and Nadler will be the 'prosecution-team'? They are out of the league facing them. One of the brightest legal minds in DC is Ted Cruz and will carve them every chance he gets.
5. Continual coverage by CNN? Even that won't help their numbers.
6. About a week into this, Rush Limbaugh will have what I'll call a 'fat-lady' singing moment, and lay out the problems of the past week, and that this opera is mostly finished. About 40-percent of the general public will say 'enough' at that point, and voice the idea of shutting down the entire impeachment. By the end of the second week....the amount will be up to around 60-percent.
7. The suggestion of another impeachment coming up in 2020? Forget about it. The damage to the process will have been done.
8. Trump's favor with Latinos and blacks? You can figure that he bumps up another five points...nearing 40-to-45 percent of the voting public within both groups.
9. Pelosi will stand and deliver some explanation at the conclusion, and it'll be so confusing....that members of the Democratic Party suggest that she's in some dementia situation.
10. At least forty different Trump-campaign video advertisements will be made out of the impeachment 'circus'. Folks will be surprised at the creative nature, and stupid quotes by the prosecution folks.
1. The first two days will be wasted on procedural things and the subpoena list. The Democratic Senate members are royally screwed, and they already know it.
2. Joe Biden will be subpoenaed and will attempt to fight it. Figure four weeks wasted as courts have deal with this. If he is forced into the hearing....he's finished as a political figure, and his years of Senate service are probably to be forgotten real quick.
3. Hunter Biden will disappear (probably off to South Africa). His finance records from the Ukraine company will be entered as crime 'evidence' and the IRS will be interested in his income level. The money-laundering aspects? They will be apparent, with at least two other national governments now interested, and the Justice Department looking at how vast this really is. I don't think Hunter will ever return to the US.
4. The idea that Shifty and Nadler will be the 'prosecution-team'? They are out of the league facing them. One of the brightest legal minds in DC is Ted Cruz and will carve them every chance he gets.
5. Continual coverage by CNN? Even that won't help their numbers.
6. About a week into this, Rush Limbaugh will have what I'll call a 'fat-lady' singing moment, and lay out the problems of the past week, and that this opera is mostly finished. About 40-percent of the general public will say 'enough' at that point, and voice the idea of shutting down the entire impeachment. By the end of the second week....the amount will be up to around 60-percent.
7. The suggestion of another impeachment coming up in 2020? Forget about it. The damage to the process will have been done.
8. Trump's favor with Latinos and blacks? You can figure that he bumps up another five points...nearing 40-to-45 percent of the voting public within both groups.
9. Pelosi will stand and deliver some explanation at the conclusion, and it'll be so confusing....that members of the Democratic Party suggest that she's in some dementia situation.
10. At least forty different Trump-campaign video advertisements will be made out of the impeachment 'circus'. Folks will be surprised at the creative nature, and stupid quotes by the prosecution folks.
Monday 16 December 2019
The Thing About Van Drew and the 2nd District of NJ
After the smoke cleared, and people realized that Jeff Van Drew had changed his party status over to the Republicans....it required some survey of the 2nd District of New Jersey.
This is the district to the far south of New Jersey. It is 75-percent white and a working-class type district. Blacks make up only around 10-percent of the voters, and Latinos make up around the same number. Note: don't use Wiki for this Demographics business, because their numbers add up to around 110-percent.
While it's true that Obama won with 53-percent of the local vote in both 2008 and 2012.....Trump won with 50.6 percent (Hillary only carried 46 percent).
It's also true that if you use data from the 1940s to present....about every twenty years....the seat flips from the GOP to the Democrats, and then back.
The previous Representative? Frank LoBiondo. From 1995 on, Frank won with 60-plus percent of the vote. After he retired? Van Drew won with 53 percent of the vote (2018).
The odds of Van Drew winning in 2020, if he'd stayed a Democrat? I'd give it less than 30-percent odds. Part of this problem would have been Blacks flipping votes over to Trump, and the approaching Trump wave.
This is the district to the far south of New Jersey. It is 75-percent white and a working-class type district. Blacks make up only around 10-percent of the voters, and Latinos make up around the same number. Note: don't use Wiki for this Demographics business, because their numbers add up to around 110-percent.
While it's true that Obama won with 53-percent of the local vote in both 2008 and 2012.....Trump won with 50.6 percent (Hillary only carried 46 percent).
It's also true that if you use data from the 1940s to present....about every twenty years....the seat flips from the GOP to the Democrats, and then back.
The previous Representative? Frank LoBiondo. From 1995 on, Frank won with 60-plus percent of the vote. After he retired? Van Drew won with 53 percent of the vote (2018).
The odds of Van Drew winning in 2020, if he'd stayed a Democrat? I'd give it less than 30-percent odds. Part of this problem would have been Blacks flipping votes over to Trump, and the approaching Trump wave.
Friday 13 December 2019
Trump and the Presidential Debates?
The story came out last night....Trump now hints that he may not participate in the 2020 Presidential debates.
Logic? He doesn't say much.
You would ponder over this? Bias reporters as the moderators. Stupid questions. Audiences made up of 'favorite-players'.
Presidential debates didn't start up until the 1960s and it's been marginally a plus-up for Republican candidates since Reagan.
So what's this all about now? I would suggest that Trump has laid the trap. To get him over to the table....you will have to play by his rules.
Just me guessing but I would think that he will require three central situations:
1. No audience. It'll be a camera crew in one theater, and no one else allowed.
2. The moderator will be a non-journalist. Maybe you could select some Iowa farmer, a Topeka barber, or a retired 1990s Braves pitcher. Trump might shock people by asking that one of the three moderators be a NY City taxi driver, or a Taiwanese-American businessman.
3. The topics will be canned and known by the two candidates for at least 24 hours prior to the debate.
The odds of the journalists and special agenda folks getting around this? Near zero. Because of the biased nature of the past five election debates....most people will agree that they are almost worthless.
Frankly, I've reached a point where if I watch a debate....I will immediately turn the TV off once it concludes, and avoid the dimwit reporters trying to tell me who won or who lost. It's terribly controlled....like some Italian opera, and you just start laughing over their fake nature.
Logic? He doesn't say much.
You would ponder over this? Bias reporters as the moderators. Stupid questions. Audiences made up of 'favorite-players'.
Presidential debates didn't start up until the 1960s and it's been marginally a plus-up for Republican candidates since Reagan.
So what's this all about now? I would suggest that Trump has laid the trap. To get him over to the table....you will have to play by his rules.
Just me guessing but I would think that he will require three central situations:
1. No audience. It'll be a camera crew in one theater, and no one else allowed.
2. The moderator will be a non-journalist. Maybe you could select some Iowa farmer, a Topeka barber, or a retired 1990s Braves pitcher. Trump might shock people by asking that one of the three moderators be a NY City taxi driver, or a Taiwanese-American businessman.
3. The topics will be canned and known by the two candidates for at least 24 hours prior to the debate.
The odds of the journalists and special agenda folks getting around this? Near zero. Because of the biased nature of the past five election debates....most people will agree that they are almost worthless.
Frankly, I've reached a point where if I watch a debate....I will immediately turn the TV off once it concludes, and avoid the dimwit reporters trying to tell me who won or who lost. It's terribly controlled....like some Italian opera, and you just start laughing over their fake nature.
Thursday 12 December 2019
Antisemitism Story
While the impeachment chatter is the number one topic right now....the President went and created a secondary topic which will get him additional negativity....over Antisemitism. It's a curious twist coming up.
So it's mostly rumors, but apparently the Present will expand out the protections against Antisemitism to campus areas. This means that if you went and did something really stupid and labeled this effort at a college in some way Antisemitic....the federal guys would come around and drag you into court.
If he'd stopped there....it might have gone to page two, but then the rumor is....the executive order coming....will make Judaism as a race/nationality as well.....not just a religion.
The hate-speech crowd? Well, they will get all hyped-up over this.
Here's the odd historical part of this story. Way back, 2,000 years ago....the Romans came into the Judah region of the Middle East and were introduced to the Judah people. Rome meant this as a conquering episode, and figured that they've go in with the same strategy and tactics as everywhere else.
The conquering strategy was a miserable failure. The residents of Judah were connected....not by a king, royal council, or laws. They were one society based on their religion, and the 'book' that tended to bind society.
As the first conquering effect failed....Rome went back to the strategy session (involving the Greeks). They returned for a second conquering effort and recognized the religion and the people.....as one single society or race. From that point, Rome gained respect.
All of this may trigger a massive amount of hate-speech but in the end, it's Trump's table because of the 2016 election.
So it's mostly rumors, but apparently the Present will expand out the protections against Antisemitism to campus areas. This means that if you went and did something really stupid and labeled this effort at a college in some way Antisemitic....the federal guys would come around and drag you into court.
If he'd stopped there....it might have gone to page two, but then the rumor is....the executive order coming....will make Judaism as a race/nationality as well.....not just a religion.
The hate-speech crowd? Well, they will get all hyped-up over this.
Here's the odd historical part of this story. Way back, 2,000 years ago....the Romans came into the Judah region of the Middle East and were introduced to the Judah people. Rome meant this as a conquering episode, and figured that they've go in with the same strategy and tactics as everywhere else.
The conquering strategy was a miserable failure. The residents of Judah were connected....not by a king, royal council, or laws. They were one society based on their religion, and the 'book' that tended to bind society.
As the first conquering effect failed....Rome went back to the strategy session (involving the Greeks). They returned for a second conquering effort and recognized the religion and the people.....as one single society or race. From that point, Rome gained respect.
All of this may trigger a massive amount of hate-speech but in the end, it's Trump's table because of the 2016 election.
Tuesday 10 December 2019
Impeachment: Two Charges?
Yep, just two charges.
So number one....abuse of power, and number two: obstruction of Congress.
In terms of powerful summaries? The obstruction of Congress will be easily fought back with obstruction of the executive government by Congress. The abuse of power? It'll rattle around and be mostly about the Ukraine business, and if Joe Biden was the target of Trump's enthusiastic call with the 'boss' of the Ukraine.
The necessity of Hunter and Joe Biden being called in to provide sworn testimony? Well, that's part of the bigger problem. Both will refuse to play along with the subpoena. Neither will show up, and the impeachment will falter very quickly with that charge.
Great drama? Well, if you got the natural gas company from Ukraine to come over and talk about their board and how Hunter fits into it (for five years)....it might be curious to hear the rest of the story.
I would offer this judgement....Joe Biden's ethical standards won't clear this mess, and he's finished for the 2020 election. It's sad to be in this mess....because of the cocaine-addicted son (Hunter). If Joe hadn't run.....he wouldn't have come into the cross-hairs of Trump's discussions with the Ukraine. He invited this upon himself.
Lousy charges with marginal outcomes.
So number one....abuse of power, and number two: obstruction of Congress.
In terms of powerful summaries? The obstruction of Congress will be easily fought back with obstruction of the executive government by Congress. The abuse of power? It'll rattle around and be mostly about the Ukraine business, and if Joe Biden was the target of Trump's enthusiastic call with the 'boss' of the Ukraine.
The necessity of Hunter and Joe Biden being called in to provide sworn testimony? Well, that's part of the bigger problem. Both will refuse to play along with the subpoena. Neither will show up, and the impeachment will falter very quickly with that charge.
Great drama? Well, if you got the natural gas company from Ukraine to come over and talk about their board and how Hunter fits into it (for five years)....it might be curious to hear the rest of the story.
I would offer this judgement....Joe Biden's ethical standards won't clear this mess, and he's finished for the 2020 election. It's sad to be in this mess....because of the cocaine-addicted son (Hunter). If Joe hadn't run.....he wouldn't have come into the cross-hairs of Trump's discussions with the Ukraine. He invited this upon himself.
Lousy charges with marginal outcomes.
Monday 9 December 2019
Number Story
Its an interesting statistic.
The population of the US is around 322-million people (more or less).
Half of the population (161-million) live in 9 states. Yep, just nine states.
Georgia, Texas, NY, California, Florida, Ohio, Michigan, Penn and Illinois.
The other 41 states? They make up the other half of the nation's population.
If we dumped the Electoral College? Well, those nine states would be the basic line of politicizing....to entice the majority of those residents to side with X-party.
The population of the US is around 322-million people (more or less).
Half of the population (161-million) live in 9 states. Yep, just nine states.
Georgia, Texas, NY, California, Florida, Ohio, Michigan, Penn and Illinois.
The other 41 states? They make up the other half of the nation's population.
If we dumped the Electoral College? Well, those nine states would be the basic line of politicizing....to entice the majority of those residents to side with X-party.
Friday 6 December 2019
Trump Impeachment II, III and IV?
Late Thursday, a comment came from a Democrat who said that even if Trump impeachment I fails....this will only lead to II, III and possibly more.
I sat and pondered over this.
In general, this impeachment episode will be handled to the Senate around Christmas week (assuming it passes the House with 218 votes). The Seante won't pick up the impeachment until 6 or 7 January. You can figure that within 30 days....it will end, and likely be voted 'down'.
So the odds of a second impeachment coming up? Presently, I'd say it's near a 99-percent chance.
But here's the big problem lingering. The news media will have burnt every single bit of enthusiasm to get the public all pepped up, and once that January episode ends, the public enthusiasm will drop like a rock.
So getting into March, with new evidence? More than likely. So more hearings in the House will occur, and by May....I would anticipate a new series of charges to be done by the House.
The Senate? They will take this....spend two weeks on this....with half as much interest by the general public, and vote it down.
So by August, another impeachment hearing period will start, and run through the same results....with impeachment handed to the Senate by late November (after the election).
Results achieved by the Democratic House members over a 2-year period? Mostly nothing, and this will be long discussed by the public. Some might even go and suggest that we need two Houses....one doing strictly impeachment around the clock, and the other doing business related to the nation and the public.
At some point, a Fox news reporter will rename the Democratic Party to the Impeachment Party, and this will be laughed about for weeks.
The saving 'grace'? Well, assuming Trump and heavy House numbers go to the Republicans in November....it all ends in early January, and the nation can finally go back to work.
As for the news media and trust? I would suggest that the networks will be tired of the message and confirming a lack of trust among the general public. Sad times.....if you think about everything talked about.
I sat and pondered over this.
In general, this impeachment episode will be handled to the Senate around Christmas week (assuming it passes the House with 218 votes). The Seante won't pick up the impeachment until 6 or 7 January. You can figure that within 30 days....it will end, and likely be voted 'down'.
So the odds of a second impeachment coming up? Presently, I'd say it's near a 99-percent chance.
But here's the big problem lingering. The news media will have burnt every single bit of enthusiasm to get the public all pepped up, and once that January episode ends, the public enthusiasm will drop like a rock.
So getting into March, with new evidence? More than likely. So more hearings in the House will occur, and by May....I would anticipate a new series of charges to be done by the House.
The Senate? They will take this....spend two weeks on this....with half as much interest by the general public, and vote it down.
So by August, another impeachment hearing period will start, and run through the same results....with impeachment handed to the Senate by late November (after the election).
Results achieved by the Democratic House members over a 2-year period? Mostly nothing, and this will be long discussed by the public. Some might even go and suggest that we need two Houses....one doing strictly impeachment around the clock, and the other doing business related to the nation and the public.
At some point, a Fox news reporter will rename the Democratic Party to the Impeachment Party, and this will be laughed about for weeks.
The saving 'grace'? Well, assuming Trump and heavy House numbers go to the Republicans in November....it all ends in early January, and the nation can finally go back to work.
As for the news media and trust? I would suggest that the networks will be tired of the message and confirming a lack of trust among the general public. Sad times.....if you think about everything talked about.
That Pelosi Moment
House Speaker Pelosi had finished up her comments late yesterday, and then started to proceed to walk off the stage....when this reporter asked if she 'hated' Trump.
She's almost off the stage....maybe two more steps and she's clear and done.
But this hate-question draws her back....oddly enough.
Blood pressure up? Yeah....way up. She turns and points to this guy (front row) and she's doing a lot of finger-pointing at him. Eyes twitching? Well....yeah, this is another odd part of this 90-second tirade.
There's at least a dozen 'hand-signals' involved, and direct eye-to-eye contact. At the 30-second point, she's maneuvered herself back to the podium to start another comment or two on the President.
There at the podium, she then delivers another dozen-odd hand-signals. Eyes still twitching.
Medicated? My humble opinion is that she is on some type of medication and this 90-second situation was just the stress and medication acting together.
She's almost off the stage....maybe two more steps and she's clear and done.
But this hate-question draws her back....oddly enough.
Blood pressure up? Yeah....way up. She turns and points to this guy (front row) and she's doing a lot of finger-pointing at him. Eyes twitching? Well....yeah, this is another odd part of this 90-second tirade.
There's at least a dozen 'hand-signals' involved, and direct eye-to-eye contact. At the 30-second point, she's maneuvered herself back to the podium to start another comment or two on the President.
There at the podium, she then delivers another dozen-odd hand-signals. Eyes still twitching.
Medicated? My humble opinion is that she is on some type of medication and this 90-second situation was just the stress and medication acting together.
Thursday 5 December 2019
What Happens if 'Fantastic Five' are Subpoenaed to the Impeachment?
The 'Fantastic Five'? Shifty, Pelosi, Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, and the whistle-blower.
Well....I think all will subject the subpoena to the court system, and draw this out for six to eight weeks....meaning that the Impeachment is stalled in the Senate.
If the Supreme Court says they must appear? They will simply say nothing and use their lack of speech to motivate the situation.
McConnell will then say the Impeachment can't move on, and settle it with a end-vote.....no impeachment.
A one-star ending to all the drama? Well....yeah. McConnell will go and say that they could have brought the house down (like the fat lady singing)....if they'd just spoke up.
The public perception of this type of ending? I would suggest that people will sit there for days....admiring how this subpoena was the 'golden goose', and this really turned into a Sugar Bowl game between a number 88-ranked NCAA team and a 104-ranked team.
A drama without drama? More or less.
But here's the one odd thing. Trump can pick up the phone, call the Ukraine on the day after the impeachment is tossed out in the Senate, and do the exact same thing all over again.....this time with forty 'weasels' in the room (maybe even that US Army Lt Col). He might even call Nancy Pelosi over to the White House, and let her listen into the call.
Well....I think all will subject the subpoena to the court system, and draw this out for six to eight weeks....meaning that the Impeachment is stalled in the Senate.
If the Supreme Court says they must appear? They will simply say nothing and use their lack of speech to motivate the situation.
McConnell will then say the Impeachment can't move on, and settle it with a end-vote.....no impeachment.
A one-star ending to all the drama? Well....yeah. McConnell will go and say that they could have brought the house down (like the fat lady singing)....if they'd just spoke up.
The public perception of this type of ending? I would suggest that people will sit there for days....admiring how this subpoena was the 'golden goose', and this really turned into a Sugar Bowl game between a number 88-ranked NCAA team and a 104-ranked team.
A drama without drama? More or less.
But here's the one odd thing. Trump can pick up the phone, call the Ukraine on the day after the impeachment is tossed out in the Senate, and do the exact same thing all over again.....this time with forty 'weasels' in the room (maybe even that US Army Lt Col). He might even call Nancy Pelosi over to the White House, and let her listen into the call.
Wednesday 4 December 2019
The Thing About Too Much Knowledge
Every three years, the PISA education assessment comes out over test results and the ratings given to countries. Asian countries tend to do well.....western countries tend to do less well.
I sat and picked up the standard test from 2015, and looked over the language and math tests (used for Brit kids, 15 year old). The language test was a breeze. The math test? It was a fairly indepth test with a worded scenario.
So they show up an oddly shaped apartment (four rooms and a terrace), and then they ask you to select from the nine possible images below (showing different ways to reach a formula with the measurements)....to reach the square footage for the apartment.
Yes, it is a trick question because the terrace isn't part of the interior. Because of the nature of this and the nine potential layouts of the measurement-game....you will sit and waste a good five minutes over the drawings to find the appropriate one (or plural).
This brings me around to this two-year period of high-school where I took algebra and geometry. It's a vast amount of knowledge that this teacher puts on the table, and you (around age 16 and 17) are assembling this, and trying to grasp where exactly you will need this in the future.
Then you go and wonder about the 500 students that he handled in a decade period, and if any of them went onto engineering classes, did explosives work, built dams, had to calculate cubic feet of a man-made lake, or needed to figure the amount of concrete needed for a 1,388 feet driveway from the main road to their house. Out of the 500 kids who were 'blessed' with the knowledge....probably less than 40 ever used this algebraic formula situation or geometric formula ever again in life.
It is part of this problem about value of knowledge, and if you are handing over to people who will readily admit for the next forty years of their life....they just won't ever again touch it again.
I sat and picked up the standard test from 2015, and looked over the language and math tests (used for Brit kids, 15 year old). The language test was a breeze. The math test? It was a fairly indepth test with a worded scenario.
So they show up an oddly shaped apartment (four rooms and a terrace), and then they ask you to select from the nine possible images below (showing different ways to reach a formula with the measurements)....to reach the square footage for the apartment.
Yes, it is a trick question because the terrace isn't part of the interior. Because of the nature of this and the nine potential layouts of the measurement-game....you will sit and waste a good five minutes over the drawings to find the appropriate one (or plural).
This brings me around to this two-year period of high-school where I took algebra and geometry. It's a vast amount of knowledge that this teacher puts on the table, and you (around age 16 and 17) are assembling this, and trying to grasp where exactly you will need this in the future.
Then you go and wonder about the 500 students that he handled in a decade period, and if any of them went onto engineering classes, did explosives work, built dams, had to calculate cubic feet of a man-made lake, or needed to figure the amount of concrete needed for a 1,388 feet driveway from the main road to their house. Out of the 500 kids who were 'blessed' with the knowledge....probably less than 40 ever used this algebraic formula situation or geometric formula ever again in life.
It is part of this problem about value of knowledge, and if you are handing over to people who will readily admit for the next forty years of their life....they just won't ever again touch it again.
The Weak Choices
Someone stood up and made a pronounced judgement statement this morning....saying that the general problem in this upcoming election year....is that the Democrats have sent up a rather weak and marginal group as candidate possibilities.
I sat and thought about this for a while.
The last time that the primary system had a strong delivery of three potential candidates (roughly divided evenly around the 50 states)....was 1972 (Humphrey, Wallace, and McGovern). If you remember the outcome....while Humphrey arrived at the convention with slightly more votes, the convention ended up drifting over to McGovern. Most will say it was a terrible choice, and that Humphrey might have taken a minimum of twenty states in the national election....McGovern took one single state, and it was a dismal defeat for the party.
The 1976 primary season was mostly about Jimmy Carter, a marginal Jerry Brown from California, George Wallace, Henry Jackson and Mo Udall. Carter had no trouble in winning that primary period.
The 1980 primary? Carter found himself in deep competition against Ted Kennedy. Had Ted done better on Super Tuesday, this would have been a curtain-call for Carter, and the convention would have been a more interesting situation.
The 1984 primary? It was for Gary Hart to lose (which he did). The competition was Jessie Jackson and Walter Mondale (who won in the end).
The 1988 primary? A list of nobodies: Jackson again, Simon (who no one really knew), a young Al Gore, and a governor out of Massachusetts (Dukakis) who couldn't connect to southern voters.
The 1992 primary? Paul Tsongas (who no one really remembers), Bill Clinton, and Jerry Brown once again.
The 2000 primary? It was a fairly weak primary season....Bill Bradley and Al Gore.
Since 2000, you can skip that talk. Even in 2016, people do remember Hillary and Bernie, but beyond that....the other two guys names are mostly forgotten.
The chief purpose of a primary period is to stir people up and get them dedicated to voting in November. If they aren't stirred up.....then a low-turnout will occur. Presently? I would suggest that at least one Democratic voter out of each three....isn't that thrilled and probably laughs over the bitter marginalized fighting among the dozen-odd candidates left at this point. The debates? They didn't really help.
As for the convention? It really needs to have some type of crazy action coming out of it....if they hope to get 65-million people to show up in November. Course, maybe they are hoping that three-million dead folks show up and make up for the lack of enthusiasm.
I sat and thought about this for a while.
The last time that the primary system had a strong delivery of three potential candidates (roughly divided evenly around the 50 states)....was 1972 (Humphrey, Wallace, and McGovern). If you remember the outcome....while Humphrey arrived at the convention with slightly more votes, the convention ended up drifting over to McGovern. Most will say it was a terrible choice, and that Humphrey might have taken a minimum of twenty states in the national election....McGovern took one single state, and it was a dismal defeat for the party.
The 1976 primary season was mostly about Jimmy Carter, a marginal Jerry Brown from California, George Wallace, Henry Jackson and Mo Udall. Carter had no trouble in winning that primary period.
The 1980 primary? Carter found himself in deep competition against Ted Kennedy. Had Ted done better on Super Tuesday, this would have been a curtain-call for Carter, and the convention would have been a more interesting situation.
The 1984 primary? It was for Gary Hart to lose (which he did). The competition was Jessie Jackson and Walter Mondale (who won in the end).
The 1988 primary? A list of nobodies: Jackson again, Simon (who no one really knew), a young Al Gore, and a governor out of Massachusetts (Dukakis) who couldn't connect to southern voters.
The 1992 primary? Paul Tsongas (who no one really remembers), Bill Clinton, and Jerry Brown once again.
The 2000 primary? It was a fairly weak primary season....Bill Bradley and Al Gore.
Since 2000, you can skip that talk. Even in 2016, people do remember Hillary and Bernie, but beyond that....the other two guys names are mostly forgotten.
The chief purpose of a primary period is to stir people up and get them dedicated to voting in November. If they aren't stirred up.....then a low-turnout will occur. Presently? I would suggest that at least one Democratic voter out of each three....isn't that thrilled and probably laughs over the bitter marginalized fighting among the dozen-odd candidates left at this point. The debates? They didn't really help.
As for the convention? It really needs to have some type of crazy action coming out of it....if they hope to get 65-million people to show up in November. Course, maybe they are hoping that three-million dead folks show up and make up for the lack of enthusiasm.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)