The fogs of Iowa and Nevada have raised cries to do away with the caucuses. But maybe it's time to ask about primaries in general. What if the cigar-smoke rooms came back but over-hung with the sweet odor of marijuana. Could that work? In the meantime....
The caucus fumble came to mind this AM reading Karl Rove's analysis (WSJ) of the Democrat's current dilemma. Sanders is the front runner insofar as he's collected more delegates (45), than Buttigieg (24), Biden (15), Warren (8), Klobuchar (7). But as math whizzes have pointed out (at least in our house) that means the moderates have 46 among them. Rove adds to the calculus that Sanders won so far with low shares of the vote--compared to previous primary seasons. A candidate needs 1990 pledged delegates to get the nomination in July. So everyone, including Sanders, is a long way from the crown. Yet he has been designated the front-runner, in some headlines the sure nominee. Is the media calling a false finish?
Still in play, South Carolina and Bloomberg, as well as Super Tuesday after which some of the candidates will have run out of money, if not steam. That doesn't mean they'll drop out. The bottom line: It's premature to call Sanders the nominee. Rove believes Trump is very likely to beat him (even if he is now seen as electable and ahead of Trump in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania).
That brings me to Bloomberg's town hall performance on CNN last night (Wednesday). What you see is what you get: a technocrat who has his facts and money lined up and has been working on climate change, gun control, education, and every other Dem favorite for several years. He sounds more realistically connected to the challenges than any of the others (including my favorites Biden, Pete, and Amy). We could do worse than a President Bloomberg. Will we?
"We could do worse than a President Bloomberg. Will we?" Right this minute, we are.
ReplyDelete1990/45 = 398/9 (reduced) = 2.3% It is on that basis that Bernie is now cosidered mathematically unbeatable. (The Cubs could use such math every September.)
One-A, one of the many NPR talk shows, did a section yesterday on open primaries, like South Carolina's, in which anyone can vote without being registered in the party allegedly holding the primary. Some Republicans, who think open primaries (they are held all over the South) are nuts have decided to vote for Sanders in hopes of creating a scandal that will get the state to at least CLOSE the primaries so only registered Rs can vote in the R primary and only Ds can vote in the D primary. The problem with primary elections is that people who have no dog in the fight, or who have a dog but in a different fight, can muck around to their heart's content and have their mucking counted as Vox Populi. The parties have got to regain some control, or they are just barber shops with 501 (c)3 status.
Open primaries, like primaries, like Super-delegates: Weren't they once upon a time the reforms that would finally give us the people's choice?
DeleteReplyDelete
"The parties have got to regain some kind of control..." Tom, I agree. I don't want to offend those who like Bernie, but I think he can't beat Trump.
DeleteIt appears that Nancy Pelosi is getting quite a bit of pressure to "do something". She is so far maintaining neutrality. I don't really know what she can do. Maybe our best hope for a candidate who can beat Trump is a brokered convention
Unfortunately the WSJ is behind a paywall so I won't be able to read Rove's complete analysis. In my post Stopping Sanders, a few posts below this one, I note that Super Tuesday is shaping up to be pretty super for Sanders. Even with proportional allotment of delegates, he should come away with the biggest chunk of California delegates, a goodish hunk of Texas, and big pieces of NC, Virginia, Colorado, Massachusetts et al.
ReplyDeleteI suppose the way to game this out is to note that, as long as Sanders doesn't win majorities in the remaining primaries, he'll go into the convention without the requisite number. Rove notes that other candidates will start dropping; but which ones, and when? If Biden has enough money to stick around, he could be the last opponent standing. Does Warren have enough money? Bloomberg does, but let's see if anyone actually votes for him.
Here's the thing, though: the gravitational field in the GOP in 2016 was such that, as other candidates dropped out, otherwise-non-Trump voters didn't coalesce around Cruz or Rubio or Kasich; quite a few of them went over to Trump. Whether that is because they genuinely liked Trump better, or because, as it became clear that the Trump nomination was inevitable, the party's gravitational field exerted itself - it played out that way. Party unity is a real factor.
I daresay that the same gravitational field exists in the Democratic Party. And it would work in Bernie's favor. If that is true, then as other candidates drop out, Sanders actually becomes stronger - maybe strong enough that his nomination becomes inevitable.
Sorry about the WSJ. Was reading the print edition.
DeleteJim, try this link. I think it's the same article.
DeleteKatherine - yes, thank you!
DeletePeggy, re: WSJ: I paid for a subscription for quite a few years as a Christmas gift for my dad in his retirement - he had previously subscribed for decades when he was in the workforce. I enjoy the paper. When I travel for business, I frequently stay at hotels that give free copies to its guests. But it's a pretty expensive subscription. If I'm not mistaken, if a subscriber doesn't get one of those new-subscriber discounts, it costs $400/year, or somewhere around there. I already subscribe to two "paper" papers, plus an e-subscription to the NY Times (in part so I can keep up with discussions around here), and I can't justify paying for the WSJ when I barely have time to read what I'm already trying to read. That pesky day job keeps cutting into my reading time :-). Anyway, those are my excuses.
At one time there was talk of an Internet service that would allow readers like us to pay a small amount (a few cents, or maybe even a fraction of a cent) to access content behind paywalls as needed, with convenient monthly billing. I don't know if it ever got off the ground, but I'd seriously consider subscribing to a service like that, if the publishers would agree to participate. Seems to me it would open up new revenue streams for them. Does it already exist and I don't know about it?
Well, there is "Medium" which keeps showing upin my email dangling custom curated articles from multiple sources for a $5 monthly fee. But thus far I haven't taken the bait, because some of the stuff they are offering is at least 2 years old, and there is a preponderance of blog posts which only appear on their site. Basically what that tells me is that they're a blog hosting platform with a side of mostly stale news.
DeleteThanks Katherine. Your research skills are formidable.
DeleteJim: Peter gets a gift sub..so he "can keep up with the enemy." But who is our enemy I ask. I actually find some of their econ news helpful. And some of their columnists: Jason O'Reilly seems to have the pulse of conservative-middle of the road African-Americans, and he has a long memory, some of which matches my own. He reminds me that the African-A community is not a monolith...or maybe the loudest voices don't represent everyone's views. And Peggy Noonan! good for checking on the bien-pensant.
Even with the gift sub, we don't get access to the on-line...which you do with the NYTimes.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAdequately addressing climate change technologically is one thing. Doing it while minimizing economic impact to poor and ordinary people is another. Can we trust a stop-and-frisk billionaire oligarch in these matters? I would prefer not to. I think I can safely say that a billionaire oligarch has little idea about what it's like to be me, let alone a poor person scraping by. I would also trust jewish Bernie to recalibrate our relationship with Israel. Jewish Bloomberg not.
ReplyDeleteI cannot stand Bloomberg, but I don't think he's gonna get us all killed. So, yah, we could do worse.
ReplyDeleteB'berg gave the most cogent analysis of the dismantling of the pandemic squad and budget slashing in the CDC that puts us at risk in dealing with corona virus. Trump can't even spell it right in his tweets, the dumb ass, probably because he isn't reading reports where he could see it written out.
Meantime, my financial advisor is sending me daily updates about the stock market, and my doc has told me to wash my hands and avoid sick people and crowds. No sticking fingers in the holy water. I hope Father puts a stop to hand holding at the Our Father. Moot for me because I am on hiatus from Mass due to gastro bug going around, but have urged Raber to follow precautions.
Jean, good idea for immune-compromised people to avoid crowds.
DeleteI am going to rock the boat with our pastor and suggest that we not do Communion under both kinds for Holy Thursday and Holy Saturday Masses. I hate to do that, because it's the only time our parish does it, and it does add meaning. But as one of the EMHCs at those services, I am not comfortable this year consuming the rest of a chalice of consecrated wine after the rest of the congregation has had a crack at it. We'll see what he says. Knowing the guy, my guess is he'll offer to "take one for the team" and consume what is left over back in the sacristy after Mass. But he isn't illness proof either.
Churches in Italy (Siciley)? seem to be pulling back (no communion on the tongue!). I noticed last Sunday that more people than usual passed by the cup bearers.
DeleteDuring the last flu pandemic, Italy installed motion detector holy water gizmos in some churches. Kids would have fun with those, I imagine.
DeleteOne of my sons recommends the Feedly service/app. Can customize for sources, topics etc
ReplyDeleteKatharine, I am surprised that your church doesn’t offer communion as both bread and wine all the time. Why not? I thought that had been SOP in RC churches for many, many years.
ReplyDeleteDo you know what wine COSTS??! Better to put the money into new carpeting so no one slips and falls.
DeleteAnne, I don't know any parishes which do it for daily Masses. One of the parishes in town have Communion under both kinds for Sunday, the other one has it once a month. Our parish never has, except for Holy Week. I don't know why, just not their custom, I guess. It does make it seem more meaningful, but we still get the "whole Jesus" with just the host.
DeleteKatherine, FWIW, the perception around here (and by "around here", I mean "my wife and I") is that dioceses that do not offer the cup regularly do so for 'conservative' reasons. That perception is based on the very scientific and utterly statistically-grounded observation that, around the Chicago Archdiocese (kinda-sorta 'progressive'), the cup is offered regularly, whereas in the neighboring Rockford Diocese (assuredly 'conservative'), it is not offered regularly.
DeleteOur further supposition is that the cup is not offered regularly because, well, before these newfangled Vatican II reforms, nobody needed to drink from the dadburn cup.
Apologies if I'm mischaracterizing your parish and diocese.
And ... but ... at least once in a blue moon, we don't offer the cup, either. Why? Because we can't find enough EMs. More frequently, we might have a mismatch between host stations and cup stations, e.g. 6 host stations but 4 cup stations.
I wouldn't call our parish exceptionally conservative. But it is an old ethnic parish, and we are maybe a little set in the way we've always done things. I think logistics are part of it. We would need extra EMHCs. And there is the matter of "doing the dishes" afterwards.
DeleteSince we only have Communion under both kinds during Holy Week,we have to have a meeting ahead of time to remember how we do it. The space is a little cramped up by the altar and we usually get in one another's way. And afterwards everyone heaves a sigh of relief and says, "Well, we got through that for another year!"
I actually do get to receive from the chalice more often because I am on EMHC duty for Saturday evenings three months out of the year. I do wish we got to all the time, but there is the matter of germs.
We had Dunkin' Dominus (aka intinction) at the Episcopal Church and was always both kinds. The rail was still used, so you only needed priest with host followed by an EM with cup. At very small services (Maundy Thursday), Communion was passed hand to hand. Church Ladies were scandalized by this as sacriligious, but when I went to the Melkite Church with a friend, they intincted a crouton type thing and put the whole schmeer on the back of your tongue with a long-handled spoon. The priest was very deft. Having umpteen EMs hanging around with Body and Blood at separate feeding stations is confusing.
DeleteJean, "Dunkin' Dominus", LOL!
DeleteTom, doesn’t your parish offer wine either?
ReplyDeleteSacred blood on Sunday. Host only on weekdays. The church is not well-designed for both species. The cup bearers stand in the side aisles, and move back (in theory) as people return to their seats. There is plainly not enough room for all the EMHCs in front without people crashing into each other. Of course, the people who insist on going to the altar with their walkers, instead of waiting for the wandering EMHCs, screw up everything. But we grin and bear it.
DeleteI traveled through San Franciso airport a couple of weeks ago and was surprised by the numbers of airport workers who were wearing masks. They were not workers who deal with the traveling public though. CDC says that only infected people need to wear masks - that ordinary masks from the local CVS won’t protect the non-infected. I think Tom mentioned that also in relation to his daughter who is teaching in Taiwan.
ReplyDeleteYes. Face masks do not help. I do wear latex gloves when cleaning. I never touch has pumps, grocery cart handles, door knobs, etc. with my bare hands. I I have also made it a habit to wash my hands every time I pass a bathroom. I have not been sick with anything in over a year, so hope it all helps.
DeleteA piece on NPR says, "Washing your hands frequently, as well as avoiding touching your face, eyes and nose, is a tried-and-true way to cut down on respiratory infections . . . ." I doubt that I will ever wear a mask, but the one thing any decent mask will do is prevent you from touching your face, which most people do with great frequency without being aware of it. So there really is at least one good reason to wear a mask. Even a catcher's mask would do!
DeleteThat's a good point, though I also hear that masks can make a nice warm, moist environment for bugs that get in there. I don't know. I rub my eyes a lot. Maybe a bindfold? :-)
DeleteDavid - I've never agreed to sleep with a CPAP face mask because of the inability to touch the part of my face covered by the mask. As soon as they strap me into the mask, the area under my nose starts itching, and I can't touch it or rub it. Drives me crazy. Makes me so stressed I just want to tear the d*****d thing off.
DeleteKatie explained to us that the surgical masks you see in so many photos of people keep your germs in, but do not keep other people's germs out. Makes sense, considering their original purpose was to protect the patient.
DeleteJim, hopefully you don't suffer from sleep apnea. I finally convinced DH to be checked for it and he had something like 40 episodes of it in a night. He wears the CPAP now and is much less fatigued.
DeleteMaybe something like a dog cone for people.
DeleteI might like a dog cone if it were sound proof.
DeleteA few years ago they diagnosed me with sleep apnea. I had great difficulty using a CPAP mask. After about a year and losing about ten pounds I was retested, and the sleep apnea had completely disappeared. The doctor attributed it to the weight loss.
DeleteHowever being a scientist I remembered that the first test was done in a regular bed at a motel, and the second test was done in a hospital bed which I had adjusted at an angle.
I had bought an adjustable bed, and an app that measures my snoring. If level I snore terribly. If I adjust it to the right angle, I snore less than ten minutes a night.
I don't understand why the standard diagnostic protocol is not done in an adjustable bed, first level and then elevated to see if that corrects the problem.
Jean: re hand-washing and not touching specific public handles, knobs etc. We travel a fair amount, and spend way too much time on airplanes. In recent years I began to dread every longish flight (most of our flights are 5-6 hours or longer - Europe is about 8 each way, and Australia is forever each way) because I would get a miserable cold shortly after the flights. I read an article that said plane passengers should carry bug-killing wipes to wipe down the most germ laden surfaces - the armrests, seat-belt fasteners, and especially the seat back in front of you and the tray table, top and bottom. Also, don't use the air nozzles above the seats as that draws in any germs floating through the air nearby.
DeleteI also take the wipes to use on the handle to the bathroom, the soap dispenser handle, the water dispenser handle, the countertop, etc when using the bathroom. Since we take mostly longish flights, I usually have to visit it at least once during the flight.
Finally, I wipe my hands with the sanitizer. I haven't gotten a cold after a flight since I started doing the wipe down as soon as I am in my seat.
Now I am also being careful at the grocery store too, doing what you do. I also thoroughly wash my hands when I get home and put away all the boxes and cans and bottles. Because those have been handled also before I bought them and bring them home.
I hope everyone here stays healthy - no regular flu, no coronavirus flu.
I am swearing off reading the news for Lent. (or at least not reading nearly as much of it!)
Just thirty six more hours of health and I can make it to the yearly Viennese Ball I attend. After that, the germs can have their way with me.
DeleteJack, if I sleep in a fetal position, I don't snore. On my back, I do. But I'll have to find that app you're using. In my case, a seismograph might do.
Enjoy the ball, Stanley. That sounds like fun. I am picturing one of those ornate PBS stage sets for a special on the Hapsbergs or something.
DeleteStanley, I use the SnoreLab app. I like the data it provides, also the ability to label and analyze data. For example during allergy season I labeled data according to pollen counts. Essentially no effect. Also tested out different pillows. One with an indent for my head was best for minimizing snoring. Also tested out various angles to get the optimal one.
DeleteThanks, Jack. I may try it out.
DeleteStanley, send pictures of the ball! Wishing you a wonderful time and a full dance card.
DeleteJack, yes, beds and pillows make a huge difference in quality of sleeping. Doc had me set up for a sleep test, which is a bigger racket than mammograms. They do the first test at home with a recorder gizmo after they call to make sure you can pay $350 up front b/c insurance won't pay for it. Then they tell you that your home test was concerning and to come to their facility for an overnighter. You will almost always be told you need CPAP.
I got a new mattress and a mouth guard that keeps my throat from closing. Problem solved.
Anway, setting sanitation aside and going back to the national infection that is Karl Rove ...
ReplyDeleteThe Atlantic had a little piece about Trumpism with Lowry of the National Review and Rove back in June. Both see Trump as more or less an anomoly with, like most populists right and left, with no successor. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/06/rove-lowry-gop-future/592903/
C-PAC is going on this week, and some of those folks say that Trump has 95 percent of Repub approval because the party has shrunk to Trumpists.
Is ex-Repub Bloomberg the best person to gather in the disaffected?
Did ex-Dem Trump gather in the disaffected?
DeleteIMO, the disaffected are an overrated minority anyway. They don't vote.
Trump got nothing but disaffected voters, as far as I can see. Bloomberg perhaps could pick up those.disaffected by Trump. Disaffected people don't vote? Non-Trump Repubs won't vote? I don't understand your comment, I guess.
DeleteThe disaffected are, almost by definition, those who don't vote. Like the apocryphal lady who said, "I don't vote. It only encourages them." They are perfectly happy to mind their own business and hope the government sticks to minding its own business (so long as the disability checks keep coming). They either don't understand or don't accept the democratic experiment. They make up about 44-45% of the voting-age citizens.
DeleteVoter turnout in the past four presidential elections has been:
2004 -- 55.7
2008 -- 58.2
2012 -- 54.9
2016 -- 55.7
The 45% always tempts newbie political consultants. Obama even got a few of them in '08. But promptly lost them in '12 and won anyway. Trump was greatest of all, no doubt, at attracting them but didn't do as well as Obama in '08 and only tied W. Bush.
Bernie is claiming he can get them now. Trump thinks he has them. Truth is, they don't vote enough to sway elections
My parents always preached that it was one's civic duty to vote. But I know a lot of people don't. There was a guy at work who maintained that they pulled names for jury duty off the registered voter list. I tried to tell him that wasn't true, but he said that he had never registered to vote, and had never been called for jury duty, so there. He was a Trump enthusiast, so just as well he doesn't vote.
DeleteIf the disaffected don't care enough to vote, what is the point of trying to motivate them? There are those who favor making voting mandatory like in Australia. But do we really need more low information voters?
DeleteThanks, Tom. By disaffected, I'm talking about politically engaged Republicans who cannot bring themselves to vote for Trump, not the people who never vote. I guess I would call them apathetic vs. Disaffected.
DeleteA small nut lodged in the election chaos.
ReplyDelete538 lost some of its sheen after Trump won in 2016 (unfairly lost it, I thought). Even so it still inspects the shady groves between big data. I thought this observation about the effect of PCism in the Democratic party is a good reminder of what can stick a pin in anybody's enthusiasm for any of the Dem candidates (and may help explain Trump's lasting popularity from his base, who can smell political correctness across the continent.
"The testing of these “anti-PC” boundaries will continue to follow the Democrats well past the presidential election, though the wide array of primary candidates makes for a neat demonstration of the various threads in the knotty concept. Much of the conversation this primary has been about how liberal the Democratic nominee should be. Inherent in that is how politically correct the nominee should be in order to appeal to Democrats. Bloomberg’s record of anti-PC actions might prove to be too much for these voters but it also might be that there’s such a thing as too much PC, even for a Democrat. The balance is delicate and evolving and it’s possible that equilibrium won’t be reached in 2020, despite the high stakes."
The whole post is not a gem of clear-writing but the conclusion is illuminating.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/bloombergs-rise-and-stall-tells-us-a-lot-about-democrats-and-pc-culture/
"The idea that he might say what’s on his mind, however inappropriate or however much it goes against the grain of what’s polite in well-educated liberal circles — what’s politically correct — is perhaps one of the reasons why some Democratic voters like Bloomberg."
DeleteSo there we have one definition of "political correctness," but it seems to be one of those hot button terms (like sexism, racism, socialism) without a common understanding. As derogatory terms, these labels are generally stand-ins for hypersensitive bleeding hearts with too much book learning and not enough common sense.
I think it would be more helpful to talk in specifics: How much smutty talk about sex from candidates are Democrats willing to put up with? How much government assistance for certain populations? How much use of ethnic and gender slurs? To what extent ethnic diversity is enforced in public and private institutions by law?
P.s., link didn't work for me, but found the story by typing "politically correct" in the site's search engine.
I think this is a topic for a whole nother thread.
DeleteFeel free, Tom.
Delete