Year Two Day 278 Obama Administration October 26, 2010 - History

Year Two Day 278 Obama Administration October 26, 2010 - History

10:15AM THE PRESIDENT departs San Francisco, California en route Los Angeles, California San Francisco International Airport


11:20AM THE PRESIDENT arrives in Los Angeles, California Los Angeles International Airport

12:45PM THE PRESIDENT delivers remarks at an event for Senator Boxer Ronald Tutor Campus Center, University of Southern California

1:55PM THE PRESIDENT delivers remarks at a DNC rally Alumni Park, University10:10AM THE PRESIDENT receives the Presidential Daily Briefing Oval Office Closed Press

10:40AM THE PRESIDENT meets with senior advisors Oval Office Closed Press 

11:00AM THE PRESIDENT meets with Secretary of State Clinton

2:30PM THE PRESIDENT departs the White House en route Andrews Air Force Base South Lawn  

2:45PM THE PRESIDENT departs Andrews Air Force Base en route Warwick, Rhode Island  

3:55PM THE PRESIDENT arrives in Warwick, Rhode Island T. F. Green State Airport

4:40PM THE PRESIDENT tours American Cord & Webbing Co. Inc American Cord & Webbing Co. Inc, Woonsocket, Rhode Island

4:55PM THE PRESIDENT delivers remarks to workers American Cord & Webbing Co., Inc, Woonsocket, Rhode Island

6:30PM THE PRESIDENT delivers remarks at a DCCC reception Rhode Island Convention Center, Providence, Rhode Island

7:30PM THE PRESIDENT delivers remarks at a DCCC dinner Private Residence, Providence, Rhode Island

8:15PM THE PRESIDENT departs Warwick, Rhode Island en route Andrews Air Force Base T. Green State AirporT  9:25PM THE PRESIDENT arrives at Andrews Air Force Base 

9:40PM THE PRESIDENT arrives at the White House South Lawn  of Southern California

2:50PM THE PRESIDENT departs Los Angeles, California en route Glendale, California 

3:25PM THE PRESIDENT tapes an interview for the Piolin Show

Piolin Productions Studio, Glendale, California

4:05PM THE PRESIDENT departs Glendale, California en route Los Angeles, California 

4:30PM THE PRESIDENT departs Los Angeles, California en route Las Vegas, Nevada Los Angeles International Airport 

5:30PM THE PRESIDENT arrives in Las Vegas, Nevada McCarran International Airport  

6:10PM THE PRESIDENT delivers remarks at a DNC rally Orr Middle School Park, Las Vegas, Nevada

7:45PM THE PRESIDENT attends a dinner for Senator Reid Private Residence, Las Vegas, Nevada


The election prediction game: The winners and the losers

During the long presidential campaign, pundits, polls and prognosticators of all stripes weighed in on the final outcome. Some were brave enough to commit to actual numbers on the electoral vote count. The Times asked a few to talk about how they arrived at their predictions and why they got them right — or wrong.

Kenneth Bickers and Michael Berry are professors of political science at the University of Colorado Boulder and the University of Colorado Denver, respectively. Romney 330 / Obama 208.

Our state-level economic model incorrectly projected the outcome of the presidential election. So this Thanksgiving when others are eating turkey, we’ll be having crow.

Our model projected state results based on the vote in the 2008 election, the unemployment rate and changes in personal income. Historically, these metrics and incumbent performance have been strongly correlated. In 2012, unemployment remained high by historical standards and income growth was stagnant, meaning that President Obama faced significant head winds. Given these challenging economic conditions, he accomplished something rare by winning a second term.

Although the model proved incorrect, it nevertheless provides a baseline for beginning to analyze exactly how the incumbent party outperformed a poor economy. It appears now that campaign effects were unusually large and decisive, such as the early attack ads on the Republican nominee and the positioning of women’s issues at the campaign’s forefront.

Obama’s success is also attributable to a better ground game. His field offices in battleground states more than doubled those of Mitt Romney. The mobilization of Democratic-leaning voting blocs was impressive. The Latino and youth vote — key to Obama’s win in 2008 — increased their share of the electorate in 2012, each breaking decisively for the president.

Lastly, the president clearly benefited from the “October surprise” of Superstorm Sandy. Exit polls indicate that 41% of voters claimed that the president’s response to the disaster influenced their vote, with 15% stating that the response was the single most important factor when they cast their ballot for the nation’s highest office.

Benjamin Domenech is a research fellow at the Heartland Institute and editor of the Transom. Romney 278 / Obama 260

My prediction of a narrow 278-260 victory for Romney was based on the assumption that the high turnout for Obama in 2008 would revert toward the historical mean. I’m generally skeptical of the top lines of polls, and I relied on consistent signs from key demographics in October that pointed toward a Romney victory. Romney’s support remained constant after adding Paul Ryan to the ticket, which also healed the rift with the conservative base. In the wake of the presidential debates, Obama’s base showed signs of being less engaged, less active and less eager to vote than in 2008. Meanwhile, Romney appeared to be gaining ground in the white religious sector, just as Obama’s contraception and abortion stands caused concern among religious groups. Church attendance is one of the best signifiers of voting likelihood, and I believed this would help Romney among the white working class in the Midwest, mitigating the damage from his “47%" video and more.

However, this election instead turned out to be what Obama’s Chicago brain trust claimed it would be: one in which Republicans were hampered by an out-of-touch candidate simultaneously deemed heartless and severe. The Democratic ground game proved vastly superior and the president’s lost ground among white voters was made up for by maximizing the minority and youth vote. Although Obama got 9 million fewer votes than in 2008, Romney added only two states to John McCain’s electoral total. And while Romney won voters ages 30 and up, and even won white voters under 30, young minority voters just crushed him, delivering historic highs for Obama among Asians and Latinos.

Exit polls found that the majority of Americans simply did not believe Romney cared about people like them. Bill Clinton once said that the No. 1 rule of competitive politics is having a narrative rooted in the lives of people. Until Republicans get that right, they are unlikely to expand on their increasingly homogenous 48% of the electorate.

Dave Weigel is a political reporter at Slate.com: Prediction: Romney 276 / Obama 262.

I traveled to every swing state this year, which gave me a somewhat false sense of what they were actually like. The Republican effort in Virginia looked strong, bolstered by new outreach to the Asian community. The Colorado suburbs seemed to have fallen away from the Democrats.

If I were Romney, I’d say that conservatives gave me just about the greatest brainwashing you can have. While I didn’t doubt the polls, I assumed that more ties would go for the Republicans because so many of their 2008 losses could be traced back to McCain’s meandering campaign and low base enthusiasm.

For all that, I flipped my prediction at the last minute, seeing that Ohio would stay in the Obama camp. I was wrong, but less wrong.

Sam Wang is an associate professor of molecular biology and neuroscience at Princeton University and founder of the Princeton Election Consortium. Obama 303, Romney 235.

I promised my readers that if I was wrong in my prediction about the outcome of the presidential race, I would eat a bug. I didn’t have to pay up. I called 50 out of 50 races correctly, as well as the popular vote and 10 out of 10 close Senate races.

I did this by analyzing polls, relying on the fact that individual pollsters may make small errors but, as a group, they are wise. Applying the right statistical tools collects their wisdom to give a sharp picture of one race — or of the electoral college. For example, if we at the consortium have three polls for Ohio showing Obama up by 3, Obama up by 2 and Romney up by 3, then the middle value — the median — is likely to be closest to the true result. This kind of information can be used to calculate the odds that a candidate is ahead. Combining the probabilities requires more advanced math.

We used similar approaches to pinpoint the race’s pivotal events. Michelle Obama’s speech at the Democratic convention, for example, improved 20 million opinions about her husband’s job performance — overnight. And the largest swing in candidate preference occurred after the first debate, when Romney nearly closed the gap with the president. However, this change did not last long.

Why did experienced pundits such as Karl Rove fail in their predictions? Those who expected Romney to win were selectively questioning polls that they found disagreeable. When evaluating hard data, it is essential to avoid such reasoning errors, whether with polls or with evidence for climate change. On Tuesday we saw an example of the consequences.

Drew Linzer is an assistant professor of political science at Emory University. Obama 332 / Romney 206

On Nov. 6, I predicted that Obama would win 332 electoral votes, with 206 for Romney. But I also predicted the exact same outcome on June 23, and the prediction barely budged through election day.

How is this possible? Statistics. I did it by systematically combining information from long-term historical factors — economic growth, presidential popularity and incumbency status — with the results of state-level public opinion polls. The political and economic “fundamentals” of the race indicated at the outset that Obama was on track to win reelection. The polls never contradicted this, even after the drop in support for Obama following the first presidential debate. In fact, state-level voter preferences were remarkably stable this year varying by no more than 2 or 3 percentage points over the entire campaign (as compared to the 5% to 10% swings in 2008).

The actual mechanics of my forecasts were performed using a statistical model that I developed and posted on my website, votamatic.org. While quantitative election forecasting is still an emerging area, many analysts were able to predict the result on the day of the election by aggregating the polls. The challenge remains to improve estimates of the outcome early in the race, and use this information to better understand what campaigns can accomplish and how voters make up their minds.

Markos Moulitsas is the founder and publisher of Daily Kos. Obama 332 / Romney 206.

This election delivered a triumph to data junkies — those of us who view politics through numbers as opposed to ideological conceits or biases. At Daily Kos, we have long prided ourselves on our slavish devotion to that data. How can we move the nation toward a more progressive path unless we accurately understand the public?

We partnered with the pollsters at Public Policy Polling, which was just declared the most accurate pollster of 2012 in a Fordham University study. But I never rely on any single point of data. By definition, five out of every 100 polls will be wrong, and the more polling responses you aggregate, the smaller the margin of error. So I did what the smartest political prognosticators did: lump all the polling together and average it out.

I then predicted the vote differentials in the nine battleground states and the national vote. I was within 2 percentage points of the final results in eight of the 10. None of this required any fancy insider sources — just a realization that political campaigns aren’t magic, and a handy-dandy calculator.

Larry Sabato is the director of the University of Virginia Center for Politics and editor of the Crystal Ball newsletter. Obama 290 / Romney 248.

Before the presidential election, many conservatives claimed that the polls were biased against Romney. If they had been right, we would have been very wrong in our predictions — polling averages are a big part of how we make our pre-election calls. As it turned out, the poll averages were generally right, just as they were in June when Republican Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin won his recall victory amid Democratic grumbling about polls. Those averages, along with electoral history and our private conversations with insiders on both sides, informed our picks. We called 48 out of 50 states correctly, assuming that Florida goes for Obama.

The Crystal Ball is distinctive in that we call every contest for the Senate, the House and governor, in addition to the electoral college we leave no toss-ups on the table. We selected 31 of 33 Senate winners and, assuming the leaders in races not yet called eventually prevail, 10 of 11 gubernatorial winners and about 97% of the 435 House races. Again, these selections are based on polls (when available), electoral history, election modeling and conversations with our sources.

The real question is, why try to predict winners that will be known for sure in due time? For us, the answer is easy. The central mission of the UVA Center for Politics is civic education. Prognostication is a useful, enjoyable hook to get people talking about politics. We link our Crystal Ball to our Internet mock election for elementary and secondary students — the largest such election in the nation, with 2 million votes cast this year.

A cure for the common opinion

Get thought-provoking perspectives with our weekly newsletter.

You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.


Thursday, December 23, 2010

Christmas Break.

One might think, with all the time I have off from work for the Christmas holiday, I would have more time to write.

Not only am I on an extended vacation, but my wife and son are on holiday as well. More time together with the family means less time at the PC.

Writing anything Friday will be completely out of the question. We'll be having a Christmas Eve get-together dinner with family and friends before going to church that evening and - of course - I'll be doing most of the cooking. The choir at church will begin their program at 10:00 PM Christmas Eve with Mass to follow at 11:00.

I don't return to work until January 3rd. that will be a 16 hour work day for me. When I do return to work, I'll take advantage of every bit of over-time available. So, it looks as if regular blogging may be a thing of the past for me. I'll come back when I can.


Year Two Day 278 Obama Administration October 26, 2010 - History

There just can't be that many mailbags out there that include RNC anagrams, trans equality, debates about election projections, the Uyghurs, online teaching, the clam chowder wars, T&A, and "Star Trek."

The 2020 Election
  • 2016: 303 Clinton / 191 Trump [291 Clinton / 156 Trump]
  • 2012: 326 Obama / 212 Romney [225 Obama / 191 Romney]
  • 2008: 278 Obama / 247 McCain [270 Obama / 176 McCain]
  • 2004: 270 Kerry / 259 Bush [161 Kerry / 182 Bush]
The Conventions

    The Orange One seems to be running as if he is the challenger, not the incumbent. They have been touting some of the "accomplishments" of his term, although everything seems to be distorted and exaggerated. The main theme seems to be attack, misrepresent, and out-and-out lie about Joe Biden and his proposed policies, let alone the Democratic Party. (I think we expected a lot of this.)

J.T.B., Brookline, MA, writes: Best fact I learned this week—an anagram of "Republican National Convention" is "Con Vulnerable Nation into Panic."

M.W. in Glendale, AZ, writes: My takeaway after watching the Retrumpican Convention is that if Joe Biden gets elected we will have riots in the streets, storm troopers attacking citizens, a rampant virus plaguing the country, an economic recession worse than in 2008, with record high deficits and dishonesty the likes of which we have never seen before, and the President under the thumb of a Communist dictator. (That doesn't exist now, does it?) Trump the Savior is the only one who can fix it. He's shown us how he can "fix" things: (1) keep up the Orwellian gas-lighting projections (2) damn the ethics and legal torpedoes! (3) full speed lies and corruption ahead: Putin/Trump/Pence 2020.

I'm just not sure which slogan(s) the Retrumpicans should go with this fall:

  • Support Kidnapping and Caging Children: Vote Retrumpican
  • Support Misappropriation of Funds: Vote Retrumpican
  • Make Health Care Unaffordable for the Masses: Vote Retrumpican
  • Support Blatant Violations of the Constitution: Vote Retrumpican
  • End Social Security and Medicare: Vote Retrumpican
  • Kill the Post Office: Vote Retrumpican
  • Gut Public Education: Vote Retrumpican
  • Increase Income and Wealth Gaps: Vote Retrumpican
  • Destroy NATO: Vote Retrumpican
  • Power for Power's Sake: Vote Retrumpican
  • Support Presidential Profiteering: Vote Retrumpican
  • Support Bounties on American Soldiers: Vote Retrumpican

B.M. in Birmingham, AL, writes: As I read daily the reviews of the DNC last week and now (through day 2) of the RNC, I am disappointed in the analysis (Z) gives. I will call out only one example from today, but it epitomizes the increasing lack of objectiveness that continues from him about all things Trump. The "Gimmickry" segment was just poorly argued. Clearly, Trump needing some good optics on immigration is a fact. Opportunities to show this would and should be displayed by his campaign to overcome the candidate's perceived weakness. What Trump said to the newly naturalized citizens is a widely held Republican position: that all people of every tribe and tongue are welcome to the U.S. as long as they come legally. Trump praised their diligence and welcomed them as freshly minted citizens. Instead of giving any credit for at least trying to show why the party is not "xenophobic," (Z) said, " It is interesting that when these set pieces involve white people, the President generally asks them to tell their stories themselves. When they involve people of color or immigrants, he takes care of it."

A convention thus far that has featured several people of color telling their own stories contradicts this excessively skeptical viewpoint, especially given that (Z) has repeatedly stated that Trump is "producing" the entire event. You can't have it both ways. I know (Z) hates Trump, but in his capacity on this site I would think that he would at least try to be intellectually fair-minded. When reading most of his views these days, it reminds me that I could just turn on CNN. It just saddens me to see this site become more and more of an echo chamber of the left-leaning media. In the words of Nick Sandmann: "I look forward to the day the media returns to providing balanced, responsible and accountable news coverage." Fox News is included here as well. I truly hope this site will return to the "slightly left" leanings of (V) from when I began reading this site prior to the 2008 election.

D.N. in Panama City, FL, writes: With regard to the question about the importance of prosecuting Hatch Act violations without looking like victors' justice, I have a suggestion, something akin to marrying a truth and reconciliation commission with the penalty incentives of Operation Varsity Blues. You can separate the wheat from the chaff by offering every rank-and-file participant the opportunity to sign a statement that says, "I've reviewed the prohibitions of the Hatch Act. I can see how the things I've done appear to violate the provisions of the Act." Those who sign immediately are required to perform 20 hours of community service, and it's over. What to do with the ringleaders in the West Wing and the Cabinet, however, would be a more thorny question. And the biggest question of all: figuring out how to reconstitute the Act, so that it will never again be toothless and useless in real time.

V & Z respond: Some readers wrote in to point out that Hatch Act violations are not criminal. That is true, of course we took that part of the original e-mail as a broad allusion to the various civil offenses allegedly perpetrated by members of the administration.

D.G. in Los Angeles, CA, writes: I am amazed and dismayed that the Democrats did not to go to court and obtain an injunction against the RNC on using the White House (and a lot of federal employees) to stage this show on Thursday night, with Donitto Mussolini performing.

V & Z respond: We assume the members of Team Trump missed the irony of concluding the evening with some Italian opera.

R.M. in Long Valley, NJ, writes: Having recently watched Shark Week, I'm now confronted with Trump Week. Each day featuring a story on the great orange and the various remoras hanging on for dear life. So sad, so sad.

M.A.H. in Akron, PA, writes: Here are some former Obama staffers talking about the conventions. One makes a point that Al Gore and John McCain both got convention bounces because they, like Trump, were under-performing during their conventions.

R.K. Denver, CO, writes: You repeatedly referred to RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel by including the former "Romney" portion of her name. Is there a reason you continue to mis-name her in your posts?

While this may seem a minor point for pedantry, I find this kind of deliberate naming to be a little more than problematic. As a transgender individual (or whatever the appropriate terminology is these days), I have a simple expectation that people use my legal name. I try to extend the same courtesy to others and use appropriate names/pronouns as preferred. Deliberately mis-naming someone against their stated intentions comes across as a bit petty, and frankly, unprofessional.

I do understand the background behind it, namely that she likely made the change to please Trump, rather than as an issue of claiming a personal identity (perhaps one and the same?), but that is something that should be somewhat off-limits to scrutiny.

V & Z respond: It is crystal clear to us that this was not her personal choice, as she kept "Romney" for her entire married life, right until a powerful man (Trump) demanded that she change her name as part of the terms of employment. She was obviously (and rightfully) proud of the accomplishments of the Romney family. We view this as an unacceptable exercise of power in an imbalanced relationship, and a form of sexual harassment, and we choose not to be a part of it.

S.B. in New Castle, DE, writes: Thanks for your wonderful coverage of the DNC and RNC conventions. I don't own a television, so I depend upon sites like yours for great summary coverage. As a transgender woman and LGBTQ+ activist, I want to add that the RNC Day 2 "red meat" frenzy included transgender lies and loathing stoked by Cissie Graham Lynch, Billy Graham's granddaughter.

In her speech to the RNC, she repeated the ongoing lie that transgender people, especially male-to-female, pose safety risks in restrooms. The opposite is true. Transgender people are far more likely to be harassed and harmed, regardless of which public restroom they are using. Many articles covered this story, but here are links to stories from The Advocate and Buzzfeed News.

I do agree with Ms. Lynch that President Trump has repeatedly supported this false, transphobic narrative.

N.A. in Cambridge, UK, writes: I spent most of last week trying to pluck up the courage to e-mail you with my own personal perspective on last week's letters and the item Trumpworld is Divided on Transphobia. I chickened out, but A.B.'s letter last week about her experiences in Texas has changed my mind.

I am trans-feminine and non-binary and I live in the United Kingdom, but I have worked in a traditionally conservative industry since I left university and my current and previous employer have their global headquarters in Texas. Both have been led by people I believe are staunchly Republican and when I came out two years ago, I was worried about the reaction that my U.S. coworkers and management might have.

I was, it turns out, wrong in that worry. I have been treated with respect, warmth, and understanding by both U.K. and U.S. coworkers and management. No one in the industry I've dealt with has been less than polite, and I've had no intrusive questions or comments.

Some of my U.S. coworkers, I expect, will vote Republican in the autumn but based on my own experiences I'm sure that none of them will do so because of transphobia.

A.B. in Wendel, NC, writes: I may be the only person who picked up on this, and I swear you have could knocked me over with a feather! That two-minute Joe Biden ad, the one you posted Friday, talks about the ideal that is America, and he says that it is for everyone, no matter their gender identity, no matter their sexual orientation.

OMG! I am so not used to being thought of at all, much less, for once, put first ahead of LGB! I could literally weep with joy, to not only be remembered without having to ask to be remembered. but in fact, for once to be put first! I am in utter disbelief! I haven't felt this good since Obama became the first President to ever use the word "transgender" in a SOTU address, which happened in 2015. For the first time, I mattered! My community mattered!

Today, at least for a while, I feel that again. And it is good.

P.Z. in Great Falls, VA, writes: I had the privilege of working for Joe Biden for about 3 years in the early 2000s. I know Joe Biden. He was the easiest and most attentive person I ever briefed on complex issues he could master the fundamentals of almost anything in just a few minutes, and he always read his briefing books. My friends on his staff today indicate that hasn't changed.

Nothing he said at the convention surprised me. VP Biden cares deeply about people, all people. He surely didn't get into politics to enrich himself, unlike his opponent.

I still remember his compassion for his shocked and frightened staff after 9/11. He told us he knew we didn't sign up for combat duty, and that if, in the wake of the 9/11 events and the subsequent anthrax attack, we were afraid to come to work, then we should stay home. But nobody did if the boss could come in, so could we.

In one word, Joe is a Mensch.

Casual Mail

J.D. in Massapequa, NY, writes: I thought I'd send you some of my own experiences on the results of the recent crippling of the USPS. I live in Long Island, NY and overall have been very happy with the Postal Service. I like my mail carriers, personally. My mail usually arrives before noon every day.

In the past few weeks, I've noticed some big changes. In some weeks, mail delivery is skipped one day. For the other weeks, it can come as late as 6 or 7 p.m.

I have been signed up with USPS for "Informed Delivery" for years, where I get an email every morning showing what the day's mail delivery will contain. With it, I can report missing mail. Very often in the past month or so, 50% or more of the mail has been a day or more late.

But here's the real interesting part. I recently placed a large number of orders on eBay while trying to put together a set of out-of-print cooking show DVD sets for my daughter. I ordered dozens of packages, all with tracking numbers. Most arrived within a few days. However, one package had a very interesting journey. It was scheduled to arrive to me on August 16. It was mailed at the post office in Claremore, OK on August 13 at 10:45 am. It arrived at USPS in Tulsa on August 13 at 11:45 pm and departed there on August 14 at 6:27 am. It arrived at the USPS in Dallas on August 14 at 2:15 pm. So far, so good. It now had 2 days to get to New York. But it didn't. The package showed up in my "Informed Delivery" email on August 18, but I didn't receive it. So I tracked it using the tracking number and it said it was delayed and arriving late, but it was in transit to its destination and would be delivered to me by 8 p.m. It wasn't. That tracking status remained the same for several days, except the "by 8pm" part disappeared after a day or so. Eventually, the tracking was updated when the package departed Dallas on August 21 at 3:47 pm. So it sat in the Dallas post office for more than a week.

Instead of sending it to the general distribution center in New York City (as would usually happen for packages coming here), the good folks in Dallas sent this package to the Regional Facility in Jersey City, NJ, where it finally arrived at 9:38 am on August 24 and departed at 10:50 pm that night. According to USPS's tracking website, it remained "in transit" until 8:01 am on August 28, when it arrived at my local Post Office in Massapequa, NY, (roughly 40 miles from Jersey City). It was then put out for delivery 11 minutes later and in my mailbox within 2 hours!

Considering that the mayors of Dallas and New York City (where Long Island mail usually goes before coming here) signed the letter to Congress yesterday to protect the Postal Service, I thought this might help illustrate that the problem is not at all imaginary. Nor is it imaginary that Dallas is a big blue dot in a potentially purple state.


M.D. in Monroe County, PA, writes: The narrative of R.H. in Macungie, PA, scares me. Not that they haven't received a ballot yet, since those won't be printed until the middle of September after any court challenges are completed and the State has certified the ballots. What scares me is that they say the only sorting machine in the Lehigh Valley was removed. All mail in my county goes to the Lehigh Valley to be sorted, even if it is to a local in-county zip code. That in itself has added 2-3 days to mail delivery within our county. Add in the COVID-19 situation, which will flare up in the Fall, and it will definitely add days if not weeks to processing our mail. Just in our one small county (111k registered voters) there could be thousands of ballots that arrive late and aren't counted. Further, our county Commissioners see no need for ballot dropoff boxes beyond the one they have in the County Election Office.


B.G.M. in Newton, MA, writes: I know your site has a fair number of readers in Massachusetts so I hope you'll help me publicize this.

In light of the recent changes to the USPS, I've created a survey for Massachusetts primary voters who are using mail-in ballots. The purpose of the survey is to get some data on how long it really takes ballots to get from elections offices to voters through the mail, and—if voters return their ballot by mail—how long it takes to travel from their mailbox to the elections office.

My hope is that gathering some real-world data from the primary on Sept. 1 might give more insight into what kinds of unofficial deadlines might need to be communicated to voters for the general election (Is three weeks really enough, or might it take longer? Maybe it's safe to send ballots less than three weeks out?). I know that the Massachusetts Secretary of State has just recommended that anyone voting by mail in the primary use drop boxes or hand deliver their ballots, so that option is accounted for in the survey. I think it's just as important to know how long it might take a ballot to reach you once the local elections office puts it in the mail. Personally, mine was mailed last Saturday (8/15) and hasn't reached me as of this writing (morning of 8/22).

This survey isn't guaranteed to be scientific, it's the best I can do as an individual. I'm not affiliated with the State and the survey collects no personal information. Data will be public and shared with state and local elections officials.

FiveThirtyEight
  • &le60%: "It's a toss-up"
  • &le70%: "slightly favored"
  • &le80%: "favored"
  • &le97%: "clearly favored"
  • 97%: "very likely"

In 2000, George W. Bush led Al Gore in national polls by 3 percentage points, on average. Before the election, much of the talk was that Bush might win the national popular vote but lose the Electoral College. Of course, the opposite happened: Bush won the Electoral College but lost the popular vote. When races are so close, errors like that are possible. State polls can have errors as large as national polls can, and they can benefit different candidates.

All of this is to say that even if Clinton's lead over Trump doesn't shrink anymore, Trump might still win. He would need only a normal-sized polling error.

Claiming that this is something they started saying after the election is just not true.

Personally, I look at The Economist's forecast to get a feel for how big Joe Biden's lead is right now (i.e., if the election were held today, Biden has a 90% chance of winning the Electoral College and 98% chance of winning the popular vote). FiveThirtyEight's model more heavily emphasizes the volatility of our times right now, giving Biden a 70% chance to win. That does not make him an overwhelming favorite in my mind, and a good reminder that a lot can change from now to the election. Your map is good at quickly pointing out the favorite at the moment, so you all complement each other giving me a complete picture of the race.

V & Z respond: There is no question that FiveThirtyEight raised the possibility of a Trump victory before the election but it is also true that they've framed their predictions as unusually bullish for Trump, and so more accurate than anyone else's. This is not true others gave Trump an equal (or better) chance of winning, most obviously the USC/Dornslife tracking poll. In any event, we agree entirely with your approach of looking at multiple sources to get a better overall picture. Nobody has a monopoly on the truth.

L.E. in Santa Barbara, CA, writes: I would like to second J.T. in Greensboro, NC's sentiment regarding your Q&A and Comments pages. "Entertaining, erudite, and civil. " sums it up so nicely.

Additionally, what J.T. wrote about Web 2.0 is also true. Like the FiveThirtyEight comment section, every Disqus discussion group I've ever read through becomes so aggressive and negative that I have never wanted to participate, much less have a Disqus account. Ugh. So please don't change—even if it means publishing fewer letters or taking a break to get a breather.

V & Z respond: The late, great, sports commentary blog FireJoeMorgan decided after much thought and reflection, at one point, to open up comments. That lasted about six hours.

The Libertarians

C.K. in Albuquerque, NM, writes: First off, like many readers have written in to say before, I'd like to thank you for fostering such lovely and intelligent discussion in your weekend sections. Please keep up the great work!

I wanted to take a moment to respond to B.B. in Bangor, ME, regarding their objection to classifying the Libertarian Party as "conservative." I can sympathize, for I was aligned with them during the George W. Bush administration. I made my way in after reading Peter McWilliams' Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do, and the party at that time spoke to the social issues about which I cared deeply: ending the War on Drugs and sodomy laws and other moralizing statutes, things like that. One of my prouder moments was when I donated to them to help them defeat Bob Barr (R-GA), a then-Representative who had drawn their ire for the Defense of Marriage Act and various other bigoted stances on social issues of the day. Their efforts worked, and he was defeated. I felt at home in a party that had just done a good deed and made the country better. Had the story ended here, I would completely agree with B.B.'s objections.

However, in 2008, things changed. It was easy to agree with them as the opposition party when it was George W. Bush they were opposing—to criticize the Iraq war, all the aforementioned social issues. Under President Obama, though, they became the party that hardly ever said a word about those issues, and instead spent all their time opposing the stimulus and economic recovery efforts, the Affordable Care Act, and the overall size of the government in general. Their candidate for the 2008 Presidential election was. Bob Barr, whom they warmly welcomed after he realized how much he really, really hated taxes.

Rust, and Steel, and Snow, Oh My!

A.P. in Holland, MI, writes: In reference to the term "Rust Belt," you wrote: "We just can't find a better term. 'Great Lakes states' would include Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and New York. Philadelphia is not in the Midwest. MIWIPA maybe. We're open to a better term. Maybe 'the three former blue wall states,' but it is kind of long."

This response was very helpful, because it enabled me to understand that the term is not only demeaning but is also problematic when the context is political and the units to be considered are states. What immediately jumped out was your utterly implausible (to me) suggestion that Ohio did not belong to the "Rust Belt." What this made me realize is that the term "Rust Belt," insofar as it has a descriptive use, is in the first instance applicable not to states, but to a collection of urban areas that experienced industrial decline a couple of generations ago. Cities like Youngstown, Akron, and Cleveland, Ohio clearly belong to the "Rust Belt." Ditto for Gary, Indiana, and (at least in my view) Buffalo, New York. Thus, the term "Rust Belt" when used to refer to Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania exclusively is doubly inapt: it is a disparaging way to refer to a region (and one that happens to be electorally significant this cycle), and it is geographically inaccurate by leaving out many of the industrial centers that the expression is intended to include.

It seems to me, on further reflection, that if one is forced to preserve states as the unit of discussion, "Great Lakes States" is not only a more neutral phrase, but more successful at including the cities that are naturally but negatively captured by the term "Rust Belt." Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania as a group are just going to need their own name. Anyway, thanks for your response, which helped me to think through this matter in a way that at least for me seemed to clarify things.


J.G. in Fredonia, NY, writes: I was born and raised and schooled in northeast Michigan, moved around the East Coast for college and grad school and some jobs, and have spent the last few decades in western New York near Lake Erie. I don't consider "rust belt" to be a derogatory term. I am a bit surprised that you have been bullied into changing to "Midwest" as the designation. Does "Midwest" include Pittsburgh? "Great Lakes" doesn't include Philadelphia, but is Philadelphia in the "Rust Belt"?

The manufacturing area developed from iron ore deposits near Lake Superior and the coal deposits in western Pennsylvania and West Virgina. Transport by shipping and rail brought the raw materials to Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and Buffalo. The steel produced provided the basis for car frames, engines, fenders, railroad rails, among a myriad of other metal products. And then the boom busted.

I have done some hiking in the state and national forests in northwestern Pennsylvania. Off the standard trails with a little bushwhacking, it is easy to come across abandoned oil wells, rusty pipes and metal structures. Whether the wells have been properly capped, who knows, but the general area has certainly not been cleaned up. The remnants of the early booms are dwindling away but have not been dealt with well.

Locally, there are some new wind turbines on the escarpment. The transmission lines are carried on poles that are constructed of steel. The steel is CORTEN, which is a steel that forms a surface oxidation layer that is stable.

Moving from manufacturing products like steel to other endeavors is a little like moving from rusty old pipe to Corten. I believe that recognizing the boom to bust to recovery is covered well in "rust belt." The recovery can be a point of pride.


A.C. in Columbus, OH, writes: Your use of the moniker "Rust Belt" seems to have stirred up quite a few passionate feelings. Being born and raised in Ohio, I get it, but I also don't think "Rust Belt" is entirely inaccurate, especially if you spend time around the Akron-Canton-Youngstown area of the state. Even though I personally don't find the term offensive, I can see how some could. That said, an alternate term for the region that has long been in use and does not have the negative connotations is "Snow Belt." We Midwesterners like to think of ourselves as a hardy bunch, and in particular we pride ourselves on our ability to handle the harsh winters that sweep through the region as a result of the lake-effect snow. The "Snow Belt" is generally understood to include the states of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and northern New York, especially the city of Buffalo, which is culturally indistinguishable from Cleveland or Milwaukee.

Further, I find using the term "Rust Belt" can be somewhat confusing, as there are other major industrial cities that have experienced decline but are not considered part of the region, such as St. Louis, Missouri, or Baltimore, Maryland. With the name "Snow Belt" there is no confusion about which states you are talking about. So if you want to prevent your readers breaking out the torches and pitchforks in the future, take it from this Buckeye and consider using "Snow Belt" instead of "Rust Belt."

Uyghurs
  • The U.S. went to war in Afghanistan to kill Muslims
  • The U.S. went to war in Iraq to kill Muslims in 1991, 2003, and 2014
  • The U.S. went to war in Pakistan to kill Muslims
  • The U.S. bombed Libya to kill Muslims in 1986, 2011, and 2015
  • The U.S. abandoned the Kurdish Muslims to be killed en masse
  • The U.S. banned all travel from Muslim countries
  • But, Uyghur Muslims in China are really special
Teaching.com

    Teachers were not adequately prepared. Many districts here in Georgia spent the summer hoping that the virus would go away, and doing nothing to actually prepare for the realities of virtual teaching, including preparing the internal physical infrastructure, ensuring adequate saturation of technology in the community, and preparing teachers.

The Historical Profession

C.R. in Pelham, AL, writes: Two additional debates for historians, both related, are the objectivity and public engagement questions. Old line historians saw a need to remain above the political fray and provide unbiased analysis (while acknowledging that everyone has their own bias) intended to inform decision-makers. They tended to focus on political, economic, and military history. Younger historians, many of whom work in gender, social, and environmental history, see an obligation to use their research to fuel and accelerate social change, which often leads to a backlash against the discipline by both students and administrators, in the form of declining enrollments and reduced budgets.

V & Z respond: Yes, it turns out that the old-school stuff tends to be much more popular with students, albeit totally unpalatable to many of today's academics.


T.W. in Murfreesboro, TN, writes: I read with interest your answer to the question about controversial issues among U.S. historians. I've noticed a divide you didn't mention between those who still organize their writing around great figures or major socioeconomic currents (your 1920s divide) and those who see history as also made of ordinary people whose collective life stories can be assembled to portray the history of a particular time or place.

I often read manuscripts for proposed books and articles for academic editors, some written by historians, and I've been impressed with recent efforts of the latter sort that place considerable emphasis on the lives of ordinary people. This is most evident among feminist historians, but I am also encountering it elsewhere (case in point, John Nevin, The Grim Years, University of South Carolina Press, 2020).

V & Z respond: Yep, "history from the bottom up" (as opposed to "history from the top down") got its start in the 1960s (for obvious reasons, namely the influence of the Civil Rights Movement and other grassroots activism) and became a dominant mode in the 1970s and 1980s. There were also sub-schools when (Z) started grad school, just about everyone seemed to be doing community studies where they closely examined a small or smallish town over a very short period of time (i.e. "Change and Continuity in El Segundo, 1946-51").

Gallimaufry

D.A. in Brooklyn, NY, writes: You wrote that the only way Joe Biden could lose Massachusetts is: "Maybe declare that the only "real" clam chowder is Manhattan-style clam chowder."

Truly grateful that you didn't bring up the Pats or the Yankees, and that you are focusing on the really substantive difference between New York and Massachusetts. What you don't realize is that Joe would lose a lot of cred in New York with a declaration like that. Each summer, tens of thousands of New Yorkers migrate to Cape Cod to eat the only true real clam chowdah. Trust me, nobody comes to NYC for its phony excuse of clam chowder. Evvvaahhh.

V & Z respond: Based on the responses we got, it would seem the one thing that everyone can agree on is that Manhattan clam chowder is a mistake of nature.


F.S. in Cologne, Germany, writes: On August 21, you wrote wrote "If Biden is busy with other stuff, a split could develop in the administration on foreign policy. On one side are neoliberals, who want to return to the status quo ante Trumpum." So apparently you think that the term "neoliberal" is not meaningless. But on August 13, you wrote "As expected, some progressives were not happy with the pick, with some of them slamming Harris as yet another neoliberal (a word that, like 'socialist,' has been deployed so many times as a weapon that it has become almost meaningless)." In my opinion, this is inconsistent. Either you think that the term "neoliberal" is meaningless or not meaningless.

V & Z respond: This seems like a little bit of a "gotcha" comment. In any event, there is no inconsistency at all. The first passage was written and signed by (V), the latter by (Z) it's entirely possible we feel differently on this particular point. Beyond that, (Z)'s formulation leaves open the possibility that the term can be meaningful, but only when used properly (which it was in V's sentence). It's the difference between "Bernie Sanders identifies as a socialist" (which is true and correct) and "If the Democrats are elected, they will turn America into a socialist country" (which is empty rhetoric).


S.T. in Glen Rock, NJ, writes: "The T & A News Channel (Trump & America News Channel)." Ha! I see what you did there.

I know you run a family-friendly website but I'm sure "Saturday Night Live's" "Network Battle of the T's and A's" would fit in on the "T&A Network."

V & Z respond: Who's been spreading the vicious slander that we're a family-friendly site?


J.C. in Tysons, VA writes: I smiled broadly at your reference to Humphrey's Peak with respect to Kanye West collecting enough signatures to appear on Arizona's ballot. For those readers that may not know, Humphrey's Peak represents the highest point of elevation in the Grand Canyon State. As a native of Flagstaff, which sits at the mountain's base, I can tell you that the climb and trail are deceptively tough. Kanye likely couldn't handle the elevation gain or lower oxygen levels, let alone the lightning that plagues the ascent this time of year. A fitting metaphor for his nascent campaign!


J.K. in Silverdale, WA, writes: I find it puzzling that followers of QAnon think that Q is anonymous. Q is a well known antagonist of humanity:

V & Z respond: Blasphemy! You're lucky we don't cast you out, or smite you, or something.


Thursday, November 25, 2010

George Washington’s Thanksgiving Proclamation

Thanksgiving Proclamation
City of New York
October 3, 1789
by: George Washington

Whereas it is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favor, and Whereas both Houses of Congress have by their Joint Committee requested me “to recommend to the People of the United States a day of public thanks-giving and prayer to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness.”

Now therefore I do recommend and assign Thursday the 26th. day of November next to be devoted by the People of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being, who is the beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be. That we may then all unite in rendering unto him our sincere and humble thanks, for his kind care and protection of the People of this country previous to their becoming a Nation, for the signal and manifold mercies, and the favorable interpositions of his providence, which we experienced in the course and conclusion of the late war, for the greatest degree of tranquility, union, and plenty, which we have since enjoyed, for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enabled to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national One now lately instituted, for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge and in general for all the great and various favors which he hath been pleased to confer upon us.

And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech him to pardon our national and other transgressions, to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually, to render our national government a blessing to all the People, by constantly being a government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed, to protect and guide all Sovereigns and Nations (especially such as have shown kindness unto us) and to bless them with good government, peace, and concord. To promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and Us, and generally to grant unto all Mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as he alone knows to be best.

Ruth Marcus to America, "Grow Up!"

In her recent piece for the Washington Post, Ruth Marcus tells us that any American leery of the new TSA security procedures should grow up.

She admits that the "pat-downs" are intrusive, but she assures us that we might not have to submit to the groping if we agree to simply walk through the "souped-up screeners". Besides, she writes, ". where is the harm if some guy in another room, who doesn't have a clue who I am and doesn't see my face (it's obscured on the machine), gets a look at my flabby middle-aged self? "

Abortion advocates have been telling us for years that abortion should remain legal because of the Constitutional Right to Privacy. So now, with the present administration, this Constitutional Right to Privacy is abandoned for the sake of national security.

We must, she tells us, put up with any inconvenience and the lack of privacy because Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab had been able to board a plane with explosives in his underwear. On Christmas Day 2009, Abdulmutallab boarded a plane in Amsterdam, headed for Detroit. To the best of my knowledge, Amsterdam does not use the same intrusive security procedures that the TSA uses. Our security methods would only catch would be terrorists already in the USA.

I don't understand the government's obsession with airplanes. A terrorist in this country can travel anywhere he chooses by car. Anyone hellbent of terrorizing the citizens of our nation could do more damage to our national psyche by killing 20 people at 2 different Walmarts than by killing 300 in a plane flying from one American city to another. How long before we can look forward to being subjected to "pat-downs" and "souped-up screeners" before we can enter a theater, subway or football stadium?

Referencing a recent Washington Post Poll, Marcus is certain that most Americans are not bothered by the new TSA regulations. She was wrong about the Tea Party as well.

Obama's approval rating is the lowest it's ever been. The brouhaha over airport security certainly won't bring his rating back up.


America after Trump

In your lifetime Clinton had the highest employment rate and best economy. Obama had to deal with the big dive Bush left him and didn't do a very good job and now Trump has to deal with the latter.

Reagan hit the all-time low and he was a republican.

Does that mean that the Republicans are to blame? No. It all comes down to the world economy, wars, inflation, who gets the period during which eras.

United States Employment Rate | 1948-2021 Data | 2022-2023 Forecast | Historical

Teach Me Sensei

I dunno?

Also, bankloans, intrest-rates, inflation, deflation, bubbles and so on has nothing to do with the president, but all to do with the top 1% rich people, the companies and banks.

The Forbes 400 2020: The Richest People in America

Forrestgump01

Maga fan

Obama had to deal with the big dive Bush left him and didn't do a very good job .

United States Employment Rate | 1948-2021 Data | 2022-2023 Forecast | Historical

I have no love for Bush . but a big dive that Bush left him. your confused . Bush didn't cause the housing market bubble to burst , that was thanks to leftist policies from Fannie Mae , and Freddie Mac that gave loans to broke ass people with no dam money .
And you must have got your graph/ employment statistics straight off of AOC's website
Do you really want me to believe there is a 39 percent unemployment rate . Sorry I'm not a millineal and don't do common core math. I was taught if you minus 61.20 percent from 100 that leaves 38.80 percent , please tell me what Im missing here.

You stated that a person's life doesn't change depending on the president , well here is a fact.
I drive a truck for a living. For 8 years under Obama you couldnt pull into a truckstop or stop for fuel without somebody beating on your door begging for money . 3 years of trump , i can count on 1 hand how many people have asked me for money.

Atomic41

Sergeant

Dunraven

Major Hide Member

Dunraven

Major Hide Member

I have no love for Bush . but a big dive that Bush left him. your confused . Bush didn't cause the housing market bubble to burst , that was thanks to leftist policies from Fannie Mae , and Freddie Mac that gave loans to broke ass people with no dam money .
And you must have got your graph/ employment statistics straight off of AOC's website
Do you really want me to believe there is a 39 percent unemployment rate . Sorry I'm not a millineal and don't do common core math. I was taught if you minus 61.20 percent from 100 that leaves 38.80 percent , please tell me what Im missing here.

You stated that a person's life doesn't change depending on the president , well here is a fact.
I drive a truck for a living. For 8 years under Obama you couldnt pull into a truckstop or stop for fuel without somebody beating on your door begging for money . 3 years of trump , i can count on 1 hand how many people have asked me for money.

NY700

Sergeant

Dunraven

Major Hide Member

The Trump Juniors need to go back to hotels, casinos, fashion accessories, condos, golf clubs and maybe NRA Chairman. etc. I never want to hear from them in politics after Feb 1 2025.

Back to Ted. he was not ready in 2016. But he will be in 2024. And I'd get behind him.

Rand Paul is nuts. Nuttier than squirrel-poo. His dad was worse!

There are some other rising stars in the Conservative world, too. Many of them women. I'll make a prediction here. the first Woman President will be a Republican. And she will make Margaret Thatcher look like a socialist.

NY700

Sergeant

Your view on economic history isn’t correct

yes loans were expensive By today’s standards. They are supposed to be to a certain degree. We have essentially had free money for the better part of 10 years now. There has been steady job growth over the last 6 years yes but wages are flat.

free money but also no interest. I remember a time when my saving account earned 5% with my credit union and my checking earned 1.5% and CDs were worth wile and home values went up significantly in most markets. The 80s were all about inflation and that was with 12-15% home loans not 3.5-4.5%

Sirhrmechanic

Command Sgt. Major

Not an angry, shrill, bitchy, PMSing, lecturing, corrupt, lying, identifies-as-sitting-bull, dykish, trust fund, “blew-My-way-into-office” NAACP-wanna-be-who-never-was conniving Communist Merkal-clone, twat-waffle anyway.

Oh look at that. I just went and described liberal women!

Oneshot86

Full Member

Lesch

Banhammer

Whiskeytower

Private

Sixfivesavage

Sergeant

Waco Kid

Not a sniper.

Gunman_7

Sergeant

With the total shit storm that was being dumped on him daily from both sides of the isle and relentless media attacks, just be happy he didn't succumb to more of it.

I'm pretty impressed he kept them all at Bay with only the bump stock ban. He seems to have gotten his head on straight and now repeatedly voiced support openly. How long has it been that a president did that during a state of the union speach?

Now I'd like to see some forward movement in his next term. He's recognized the 2A crowd and our strength otherwise he'd have never brought it up. With the right pressure from the gun community I'd bet we could get something done when the Dems loose the house in November.

So many up and coming politicians are seeing what's working for Trump and emulating it. With the influence he now has over members of the Senate and if he goes into his final term with a "fuck 'em" attitude, you never know what could get accomplished. Especially now the economy is doing this well.

Teach Me Sensei

I dunno?

And Obama didn't cause people to lose their jobs.
And Trump didn't make America great again.

It's all just how the worlds revolves. there will be another economic crash at some point, and it won't be the presidents fault. There will be highs and lows and it will come in waves.

US will be just fine after Trumps presidency.

Zeroit

Gunny Sergeant

Your view on economic history isn’t correct

yes loans were expensive By today’s standards. They are supposed to be to a certain degree. We have essentially had free money for the better part of 10 years now. There has been steady job growth over the last 6 years yes but wages are flat.

free money but also no interest. I remember a time when my saving account earned 5% with my credit union and my checking earned 1.5% and CDs were worth wile and home values went up significantly in most markets. The 80s were all about inflation and that was with 12-15% home loans not 3.5-4.5%

I think my experience in business running successful multi-million dollar operations from Jimmy Carter on gives me a pretty clear idea as how a president can have a effect on the economy.
Around 1980 one of my locations was in Pa. Near three mile island, Bethlehem steel had a big layoff because of subsidized steel imports.
Ask those people if a president had effect?
Why did Obama ask Trump if he had a magic wand?
Trump didn't create jobs, he Just gave the people who do the tools necessary.
Trump hasn't done anything any other president could have, but he balls to do it.
He set the bar so high it will be difficult for anyone replicate.
As far as flat wages go, wrong.
Good economic times automatic increases wages (without government intervention) , as businesses have to compete for employees
Same applies to taxes.
I'm not sure about the free money explanation? Apparently I didn't grasp the concept.

Just a small example of some of my
Personal/professional observations.
I could be wrong?

SonicBurlap

Major Hide Member

Employment cant be blamed on the sitting president. It has to do with the worlds current state

In your lifetime Clinton had the highest employment rate and best economy. Obama had to deal with the big dive Bush left him and didn't do a very good job and now Trump has to deal with the latter.

Reagan hit the all-time low and he was a republican.

Does that mean that the Republicans are to blame? No. It all comes down to the world economy, wars, inflation, who gets the period during which eras.

United States Employment Rate | 1948-2021 Data | 2022-2023 Forecast | Historical

SonicBurlap

Major Hide Member

Forrestgump01

Maga fan

Armorpl8chikn

Colonel Angus

Not an angry, shrill, bitchy, PMSing, lecturing, corrupt, lying, identifies-as-sitting-bull, dykish, trust fund, “blew-My-way-into-office” NAACP-wanna-be-who-never-was conniving Communist Merkal-clone, twat-waffle anyway.

Oh look at that. I just went and described liberal women!

Dunraven

Major Hide Member

Not an angry, shrill, bitchy, PMSing, lecturing, corrupt, lying, identifies-as-sitting-bull, dykish, trust fund, “blew-My-way-into-office” NAACP-wanna-be-who-never-was conniving Communist Merkal-clone, twat-waffle anyway.

Oh look at that. I just went and described liberal women!

Dunraven

Major Hide Member

SonicBurlap

Major Hide Member

NY700

Sergeant

well half the country thinks it will implode due to trump. Prior to that about half thought it was going to implodedue to obama. Before that half thought it was going to implode because of bush.

history tells me the US government as we know it will not go on forever. Many past dynasty’s have established that.

what we have to become tired of is looking at a 51/49 split as a victory.

fact is 80% of America generally agrees on about 80% of the topics.

too many topics are made out to sound like the sky is falling because it sells

if your political groups biggest stance is refusing to work with the other guy they are wrong and have fundamentally failed at their job.

the day the government first “shut down” there should have been recall votes in 50 states. Above all else there only f’n job is to keep the country running.

there was a time when compromise was a victory.

now we view a stalemate as a victory

we plan for next fiscal quarter and I use the word plan liberally. China plans in detail for the next 50years

They invest their money into power plays for the future. We spent the last 20 years blowing up big rocks in Afghanistan into little rocks

No it won’t end if Bernie or Warren get elected. Once again America in fear of any change just as they did a year will vote congress the opposite of the president to desperately hold onto the status quo

Gunny Sergeant

Zeroit

Gunny Sergeant

Why would you tax a millionaire at a higher rate than any other?
Newsflash: this Just in, mathematicaly
If they pay the exact same rate as you do they automatically pay more already, so all you would be accomplishing by sticking it to them is taking their money and letting the government put it to "better use" ?.

Just a plain old flat tax rate might be
a little bit more rational and more inline with the constitution.

Just so you know I'm not a millionaire.
Yes, I have been around a shit ton of them, some are real, some are nuttier than a two peckered billy goat like the rest of the population.

Not only that you can take all their money and still wouldn't fix health care.

No offense intended, just food for thought.

Kwkidd2000

Private

How much did your life change during Clinton? And Bush? And Obama? And Trump?

It's all the same one way or the other.

Gunny Sergeant

Zeroit: If they pay the exact same rate as you do they automatically pay more already, so all you would be accomplishing by sticking it to them is taking their money and letting the government put it to "better use" ?.

They can afford to pay the increase in prices when inflation goes up. I cannot. Hopefully, it will make things a little more even!

SonicBurlap

Major Hide Member

Armorpl8chikn

Colonel Angus

Reverie Ranges

11B3HB4 1997-2007

Zeroit

Gunny Sergeant

Zeroit: If they pay the exact same rate as you do they automatically pay more already, so all you would be accomplishing by sticking it to them is taking their money and letting the government put it to "better use" ?.

They can afford to pay the increase in prices when inflation goes up. I cannot. Hopefully, it will make things a little more even!

Pmclaine

Gunny Sergeant

Zeroit: If they pay the exact same rate as you do they automatically pay more already, so all you would be accomplishing by sticking it to them is taking their money and letting the government put it to "better use" ?.

They can afford to pay the increase in prices when inflation goes up. I cannot. Hopefully, it will make things a little more even!

Who are you to decide what anyone can afford to pay?

Im no millionaire, well actually I guess I am if I added up all my non liquid assets, that term does not mean what it did when I was a kid.

The fact of that change is not due to people making greater money. Its due to our own government making a joke of our money. Inflation most benefits a 23T in debt US Govt. Currency manipulation isn't just a China thing. Its quantitatively easy to understand this - Econ 101 shit. Thing is though the raising of rates will kill the razors edge balance we currently exist in. Govt cant afford for rates to rise so We the People have had safe investments and savings interest taken away in order to become gamblers in the stock market.

The govt is the problem so how does giving them evern more money remotely begin to fix the problem.

Ever notice last election Bernie railed against the Millionaires and in this one he rails against the Billionaires. Since becoming a Millionaire he has had to adjust his Kentucky Windage - Precious huh?

Thing is they wont simplify the tax code to a one paragraph document so the top will still evade taxes, the bottom will be exempt in exchange for servitude and votes while the middle as usual will shoulder the burden.


Don't fall for the FSA bullshit.

The wealthy are paying plenty of taxes and getting the same shitty services. Get the bottom to take on some skin in the game and get the govt under control.

Trump is actually failing on this front unless he actually is playing 4D chess and I just haven't caught it yet. Granted he does have a lot of historical damage to undue.

Perhaps he needs to get the strong economy running on a domestic footing in order that it can survive the shock to come.


CDZ Barack Obama. Greatest President of Modern times

Are the hospitals run by the government? Are Doctors assigned by the government? Are live or die decisions about individual health procedures made by the government?

Doesn't look like anything close to a government takeover of the healthcare industry no matter how often the conservatives lie about it

Oldsoul

Gold Member

In Obama's last day as President, it is clear that he is the greatest modern President (post war)


If anyone disagrees. you must name a President with more accomplishments

Are the hospitals run by the government? Are Doctors assigned by the government? Are live or die decisions about individual health procedures made by the government?

Doesn't look like anything close to a government takeover of the healthcare industry no matter how often the conservatives lie about it

Oldsoul

Gold Member

Rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster

Lincoln
Washington
FDR
MLK
Obama

Rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster

In Obama's last day as President, it is clear that he is the greatest modern President (post war)


If anyone disagrees. you must name a President with more accomplishments

Are the hospitals run by the government? Are Doctors assigned by the government? Are live or die decisions about individual health procedures made by the government?

Doesn't look like anything close to a government takeover of the healthcare industry no matter how often the conservatives lie about it

You are required to have insurance

YOU get to pick the plans and coverages. That is not a government takeover

Oldsoul

Gold Member

Lincoln
Washington
FDR
MLK
Obama

Oldsoul

Gold Member

Are the hospitals run by the government? Are Doctors assigned by the government? Are live or die decisions about individual health procedures made by the government?

Doesn't look like anything close to a government takeover of the healthcare industry no matter how often the conservatives lie about it

You are required to have insurance

YOU get to pick the plans and coverages. That is not a government takeover


Year Two Day 278 Obama Administration October 26, 2010 - History

A recent article from World Net Daily tells us Wikipedia scrubs Obama eligibility.

" Wikipedia, the online "free encyclopedia" mega-site written and edited entirely by its users, has been deleting within minutes any mention of eligibility issues surrounding Barack Obama's presidency, with administrators kicking off anyone who writes about the subject, WND has learned.

A perusal through Obama's current Wikipedia entry finds a heavily guarded, mostly glowing biography about the U.S. president. Some of Obama's most controversial past affiliations, including with Rev. Jeremiah Wright and former Weathermen terrorist Bill Ayers, are not once mentioned, even though those associations received much news media attention and served as dominant themes during the presidential elections last year. "

George Bush, of course, isn't being treated so charitably

" The Wikipedia entry about former President George W. Bush, by contrast, is highly critical. One typical entry reads, "Prior to his marriage, Bush had multiple accounts of alcohol abuse. . After his re-election, Bush received increasingly heated criticism. In 2005, the Bush administration dealt with widespread criticism over its handling of Hurricane Katrina. In December 2007, the United States entered the second-longest post-World War II recession. "

The entry on Bush also cites claims that he was "favorably treated due to his father's political standing" during his National Guard service." It says Bush served on the board of directors for Harken and that questions of possible insider trading involving Harken arose even though a Securities and Exchange Commission investigation concluded the information Bush had at the time of his stock sale was not sufficient to constitute insider trading. "

Political correctness has run amok. We mustn't speak ill of the Messiah.
The Left will not allow any criticism.
It's only going to get worse.


Year Two Day 278 Obama Administration October 26, 2010 - History

We were supposed to be different.

Growing up in the 1960's, we "baby-boomers" were convinced that we had, somehow or other, created a new world unlike any that had come before. We were, in our minds, revolutionaries. Our music was unsurpassed. Unlike "popular" music of the (ancient) past, ours would forever remain on the forefront of the culture. We smirked, in our smug, superior way, at the Muzak of Lawrence Welk blissfully unaware that John Lennon and Paul McCartney would become the Lawrence Welk of the 1990's and beyond.

As the recent controversy surrounding Connecticut attorney general Richard Blumenthal proves, my fellow baby boomers who seek to advance in the political ranks continue to bring us all (willingly or not) back to the days of the Vietnam war. Today, 35 years after the fall of Saigon, 64 year old politicians running for the U.S. Senate view service in Vietnam as a resume enhancement so much so, that stretching the truth misspeaking lying about having served in Vietnam comes easy for them.

O,the stained souls, the small-hours doubts, the troubled manhood of so many American men who didn't go to Vietnam when they could have -- the strange guilt they seem to feel when they confront Vietnam veterans.

I may have, for a brief moment, felt that same said "strange guilt" this past weekend while I listened to a Vietnam vet as he attempted to mesmerize someone young enough to be his son with tales of his year long stay in Vietnam. As much as I would have liked to join in the conversation with similar stories, I was not, however, tempted to do as Richard Blumenthal had done.I would not lie about having been in that war myself when the truth was that I have never been in the military.

Like many of my generation, I had absolutely no desire to fight in Vietnam. The reasons we may have given in those days for not wanting to go were far more noble than the actual truth. We would go on and on about the immorality and illegality of the war. We would speak of the corrupt South Vietnamese regime. But, we were, contrary to Richard Cohen, "spoiled shirkers". We were, by and large, more inclined to remain in the world of "sex, drugs and rock and roll" that was the United States.

We were undisciplined and anti-authority. The uncensored "Fish Cheer" was our anthem.

Anti-war protests were the order of the day. I submit that these protests were actually more anti-draft than anti-war. A wikipedia article claims
"The draft lottery had social and economic consequences because it generated resistance to military service and the resisters, draft evaders or "draft dodgers", were generally young, well educated, healthy men."

My recollection of those days is different. As I recall, those of us, like myself, who managed to get high numbers in the lottery didn't bother protesting any longer.

Over the years, I've come to realize that much of what we hear from those of us who protested the Vietnam war is a colorized, glossy version of reality. I believe that it is this fantasy version of the Vietnam era (error?) which fuels much of the Liberalism of today. I, for one, am willing to admit that I was not as noble then as I should have been. I wish more of my fellow baby-boomers would admit the truth as well.


This is a nasty, rotten business.

Robert L. Crandall, CEO & President of American Airlines.

You fucking academic eggheads! You don't know shit. You can't deregulate this industry. You're going to wreck it. You don't know a goddamn thing!

Robert L. Crandall, CEO American Airlines, 1977

There is an interesting article from AoM on traveling like a Gentleman.  Women are free to translate to ladies or Gentlewomen.  Based on my latest travels, civility is lost.  On my next adventure I am sure to use the tips from AoM.  Except with the TSA thugs and the theater of security!

Sure, the Golden Age of Air Travel had its own drawbacks. Less flights, not as safe, and, a whole lot more expensive. The drop in ticket prices since the days when Pan Am ruled the skies has been a boon for the man of modest means who still wants to see the world (or, just his family a few states away for the holidays).

On the flip side, the democratization of flight has turned it into something that has to be endured, rather than enjoyed. When you’re being herded through security and made to wait an hour and a half on the tarmac, it’s easy to feel more like a head of cattle than a traveling gentleman.

http://artofmanliness.com/2012/11/21/how-to-fly-like-a-gentleman/

The TSA has issued some special packing tips for travelers before Thanksgiving weekend. They say not to bring food, sharp tools, or any shred of dignity.

"Last week, I picked up a 'TSA Customer Comment Card.'  First, it's important that we get one thing straight: I am not the TSA's 'customer.'  The term 'customer' denotes an honorable relationship in which I and a seller voluntarily trade value for value.  There's nothing voluntary about my relationship with the TSA.

A much more appropriate term for our relationship is 'subject.'  The TSA stands between me and those with whom I would like to trade, and I am not allowed to without their blessing.

Forbes

An airline pilot wrote that on this particular flight he had hammered his ship into the runway really hard. The airline had a policy which required the first officer to stand at the door while the passengers exited, smile, and give them a, "Thanks for flying XYZ airline." He said that in light of his bad landing, he had a hard time looking the passengers in the eye, thinking that someone would have a smart comment. Finally, everyone had gotten off except for this little old lady walking with a cane. She said, "Sonny, did we land or were we shot down?"

Airline announcements are here: Snopes.com

Let's make a statement to the airlines just to get their attention. We'll pick a week next year and we'll all agree not to go anywhere for seven days.
Andy Rooney