Month: July 2016

One thing about Bernie Sanders supporters, some of them will go above and beyond the call to act like four years olds, throw hissy fits and just make total morons of themselves. By all accounts, Hillary Clinton had a great convention. Unlike Donald Trump’s convention, which was full of doom and gloom, Clinton’s was very upbeat, fun, enlightening and hit Trump on all the things that Trump should be hit for.

The only sour note were Sanders supporters, still moaning like a bunch of juvenile delinquents, trying to disrupt the convention by shouting obscenities, drowning out speakers and pathetically saying they will vote for Trump.
Now these die-hard Sanders morons never did get very far with their protests, and never really got their protest off the ground. As for Bernie, he did the right thing, albeit weeks late. He was gracious and endorsed Hillary, to the utter gall of Sanders dead enders. Gee Bernie backers, is Sanders a traitor now?? Will you ever forgive him for his transgression?? I would like to say it’s time for them to grow up, but they will never grow up. They are incapable of growing up.

Hillary Clinton is now the Democratic nominee for president She earned it. She got more votes than Bernie and won. Bernie Sanders is now relegated to the back lot of losers. Thank God many people saw through the Bernie charade and rejected it. If the dead end Bernie supporters who will not vote for Hillary are going to continue to act like the fools they are, we don’t need you. Hillary will win the election without you sad sacks. Time for a reality check. Time to be counted, or step out of the way. After the convention, you are irrelevant to the election.

This is a bugaboo with me.  With all the hacks in the DoD, banking, etc…. electronic voting machines are very vulnerable.  At the very least, a hardcopy record needs to be kept and examined.

http://www.salon.com/2016/07/31/cyberattack_on_america_how_vulnerable_to_hacking_is_our_election_cyb
er_infrastructure_partner/

Ridge

The DNC Platform: “The new platform articulates support for parents who opt their children out of standardized tests, and opposes the use of test scores to evaluate teachers and administrators. The platform also is more conditional in its support for charter schools–stating that they must “accept and retain proportionate numbers of students of color, students with disabilities, and English language learners,” and that charters must not “replace or destabilize traditional public schools.””

I have wondered what are the “asks” of HC’s loyal base of POC supporters and not gotten much feedback. So I was surprised to come across this clear ASK, that gets almost NO MSM coverage…Stopping the privatization of public schools.

A comprehensive article on the anti-charter efforts of NAACP since 2010.  I would hope there is better support than the DNC platform admits.
https:/cloakinginequity.com/2016/07/28/naacp-has-weighed-in-do-charterscivil-rights

Donald Trump asked Ghazala Khan to speak, so she did. I doubt that Donald likes the result, since it’s devastating for him.

I was viciously attacked by Mr. Khan at the Democratic Convention. Am I not allowed to respond? Hillary voted for the Iraq war, not me!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 31, 2016

Sure. You’re also entitled to go beyond your foot and put your entire leg in your gaping maw. https://t.co/JLXhAPopSZ

— Martin Longman (@BooMan23) July 31, 2016

Trump has demonstrated an astounding capability to overcome gaffes and outrages that would sink any other candidate for office, but this blow-up is truly isolating for him because there’s literally no one in the Republican Party who is going to stick their neck out to defend attacking a Gold Star mother and father.

That’s not to say that he doesn’t have a point about being viciously attacked, but he instigated the attack by scapegoating Muslims over and over again. And, while that’s the wrong thing to do, his basic position of curtailing or cutting off Muslim immigration until we have a better screening process in place is something that enjoys a lot of support. People are afraid when they see attacks like the ones in Paris and Nice, and they think it’s common sense to take serious precautions about who we let come into our country. But you can have that conversation in a respectful and adult way, and reach out to the other party to initiate a conversation about how some more thorough screening might be done in a way that is consistent with the Constitution and our values.

Trump doesn’t do any of that. He just maligns Muslims and increases people’s anxiety and dislike for them. And he does it for transparent political advantage in a way that brings out the worst in people.

So, he took an issue where he was probably getting some mileage politically and he waddled right into the thresher blades.

He can complain that he was attacked and should have the right to respond, but the suicidal nature of his response is his fault, and his fault alone.

He keeps pushing any allies he might have away, and it’s getting to the point that pretty much every candidate for office in the fall, regardless of party, is going to disown him.

I was glad when I finally got a goal this morning. Up to that point, I was feeling snakebit. I’d blasted a long shot just over the crossbar. I’d had a one-timer from in close ruined by an amazing play by the goaltender. I’d snuck a left-footed wormburner through their entire defense only to see it go wide by less than the width of a soccer ball. I’d taken a touch that I shouldn’t have and ruined an easy chance to score.

When the goal finally came, it was pretty routine. A simple give-and-go where I sent it out wide, made a short run, and had all the time I needed to slot the return pass past the helpless goalie.

The wait was made easier because my passing was the best it’s been since I went back on the pitch after a twenty-five year hiatus. I had three assists in the first half. I think the final score was 5-3, but all I know for sure is that we won.

And now I need an ice bath.

First decent poll since the end of the Dem convention, basically shows the conventions cancelling each other out. Which is how it usually is.

Clinton saw an uptick in her favorable rating to 45-51 -a significant improvement.

Clinton leads the two was 50-45, and the three way 46-41

I have longed believed this is a 10-12 point race in the end.  I got into a pretty good argument with Ed Goes at the realclearpolitics forum in Philadelphia about it.

There are two groups that haven’t come home: non-trump voting evangelicals and Sanders supporting young people.  Ed says these groups are about the same size, and NEITHER is likely to come home.  He was nice about it – and I don’t think he is voting for Trump.

He has better access to data than I have.  

The gap to focus on is under 30.  Note:
Obama 67-31
Clinton 51-34, 15% undecided

In all other age groups, the undecided is below 5.  What is out is young, and would vote for Obama.  The convention did not close the deal with that group.  

Here is PPP on this:
“It’s also important to note that most
of the remaining undecided pool is very
Democratic leaning. They give Barack Obama a 55/33 approval rating, and they’d
rather have him as President than Trum
p by a 59/10 spread. If they ended up
voting for Clinton and Trump by those prop
ortions, it would push Clinton’s lead
up from 5 points to 8. But they don’t li
ke Clinton (a 4/83 favorability) or Trump
Phone: 888 621-6988
Web: www.publicpolicypolling.com
Email: information@publicpolicypolling.com
(a 2/89 favorability). A lot of these fo
lks are disaffected Bernie Sanders voters,
and even after the successful convention this
 week they’re still not sold on Clinton
yet. She and her surrogates will have to
keep working to try to win those folks
over and if they can the election enters landslide territory”
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_National_7302016.pdf

The pig is such a hateful mess of the garbage found down deep in the humanoid gene pool that it’s hard to pick any one horror to focus upon, but i’ll try.

It’s this:

Apophasis is a rhetorical device wherein the speaker or writer brings up a subject by either denying it, or denying that it should be brought up. Accordingly, it can be seen as a rhetorical relative of irony.

He regularly relies upon this to convince his (easily convinced) core self (not quite a soul, but close enough for purposes of this discussion) that he can weasel his way out of anything he wants, just by being the biggest asshole in the room.

Nobody ever seems to call him on it, that i have noticed.

Here is today’s example, speaking about the wife of this person:

Donald Trump responds to the Khan family: `Maybe she wasn’t allowed to have anything to say’

“She probably, maybe she wasn’t allowed to have anything to say. You tell me,” Trump continued. “But a plenty of people have written that. She was extremely quiet, and it looked like she had nothing to say. A lot of people have said that.”

Get it ? There are two parts:

1. i’m not saying this … don’t blame me … my hands are clean … i would never say such stuff
2. i’m just repeating what others say … here it comes

So he gets his garbage out there, while simultaneously claiming that his hands are “clean”.

He pulled the same stunt on Ted Cruz’s dad, quoting the National Enquirer. Paid for that one.

Problem is, apophasis may appear to be a get-out-of-asshole card, but only to dimwits. Guess what … the stink persists.

And when you stink of trump, and deny it, it becomes quite revealing to watch who claims not to notice.

Joint Force 2035: Lasers, Biotech and Global Instability

WASHINGTON — The US military of 2035 will have to deal with the breakdown of global norms, the proliferation of dangerous technologies via the commercial sector, and hypersonic weaponry, according to a recent document issued by the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Titled “Joint Operating Environment 2035” [pdf], the document seeks to lay out what the Pentagon will be facing in 20 years time in order to help guide how the department is spending its resources today.

…
There is also an acknowledgement that defense technologies are going to be spun off from the commercial sector, and not vice versa – again, a theme Carter has brought up in almost every speech he has given as defense secretary.

Just what those issues look like in 2035 versus now, however, is where the document’s authors begin to dig into the details. They identify six broad geopolitical challenges the Joint Force will have to deal with 20 years from now:

• Violent Ideological Competition: irreconcilable ideas communicated and promoted by identity networks through violence.
• Threatened US Territory and Sovereignty: encroachment, erosion, or disregard of US sovereignty and the freedom of its citizens from coercion.
• Antagonistic Geopolitical Balancing: increasingly ambitious adversaries maximizing their own influence while actively limiting US influence.
• Disrupted Global Commons: denial or compulsion in spaces and places available to all but owned by none.
• A Contest for Cyberspace: a struggle to define and credibly protect sovereignty in cyberspace.
• Shattered and Reordered Regions: states unable to cope with internal political fractures, environmental stressors, or deliberate external interference.

That, in turn, comes with a set of technological challenges. As Carter likes to remind audiences, the vast majority of technology now is developed in the private sector, but the Pentagon has often struggled to adapt it for military use. The authors of the report warn that the department will need to find an easier way of using that technology, because the commercial world will continue to lead development efforts.

The report also warns that the rise of non-state actors such as the Islamic State group – described in the report as “privatized violence” – will continue, as will the rapidity of those groups coming together. The spread of 3D-printing technologies and readily available commercial technology such as drones means those groups can be increasingly effective against a fully prepared military force.

Donald Trump was in Colorado on Friday and he’s sending his caddie, Mike Pence, to campaign there next week. He must think he has a chance in the Centennial State, but things don’t look too positive in that regard. The Real Clear Politics polling average gives Clinton an eight point advantage, every recent poll shows a clear lead for her, and the most recent polls (Fox– Clinton +10, Monmouth– Clinton +13) are the worst ones in the bunch.

Most troublesome for Trump, he’s lagging behind Clinton with white voters. For example, the latest NBC-Wall Street Journal-Marist poll found Trump trailing Clinton by 19 points with college-educated whites. That’s too big of a deficit to overcome with his 11-point lead with whites who have no college degrees. There isn’t one chance in hell that Trump will will any racial group other than whites, so if nothing changes this is checkmate.

Thus:

In a sign of confidence, Clinton is ratcheting down her investments on the air here: Earlier this week, her campaign ended a statewide television buy that began in mid-June.

With nine Electoral College votes, Colorado is a medium sized prize [bigger than Oregon and Connecticut (7) and smaller than Missouri (10) and Arizona (11)]. It’s not likely to be a key state, as most plausible scenarios don’t have it serving as a tipping-point. I can come up with at least one scenario, though, where Colorado would be decisive. If Trump were to win every Romney state and also win Florida, New Hampshire, Ohio, and Iowa then Colorado would give him a very narrow 272-266 victory. Of course, in that scenario, Virginia could serve the same purpose.

On the whole, though, Clinton probably is happy to have Trump and Pence stumping out in the Rockies instead of in states where they stand a better chance and where the results are more likely to matter.

Various and sundry things I’ve read on this blog over the months I’ve visited have reminded me of this essay in The New Republic about Howard Zinn.

Excerpt:

“At many times in our national experience, there have been radicals who have applied needed pressure to those in the seats of institutional power, forcing them to change unjust practices, reconsider self-serving conclusions, and honor unfulfilled principles. At such times, the radicals’ work has been most salutary, bringing greater equality and justice to the political sphere, opening horizons in the intellectual world. But there have been times, too, when some radicals–political and intellectual–have embraced zealotry and maximalism, or betrayed their own ideals, and allowed their impatience with the imperfections of those in power to lead them into deluded or destructive movements.”

Agree or disagree, or ignore. I’m not going to advocate for a position, but do look forward to reading people’s reactions.