Dickitude – Page 25 – The Wrongologist

Can You Trust Your Local Government?

Citizens are supposed to be able to trust their elected governments, local, state and national. But, surveys show that Americans have very little trust in government. In fact, an October 2015 Pew Study shows that only 19% trust the federal government “all or most” of the time.

This brings us to Flint Michigan. Flint’s citizens have been drinking, cooking and bathing in poisonous water.

The decision to expose Flint residents to known risks of lead poisoning were made by an unaccountable “emergency manager” who was installed by the governor, Republican Rick Snyder, in order to solve the fiscal problems created by the city’s declining tax base.

In April 2014, Flint’s emergency manager, in order to save money, directed the water company to begin drawing water from the Flint River rather than from Detroit’s water system, which was deemed too costly ($1.5 million/month). But the river’s water was high in salt, which helped corrode Flint’s aging lead water pipes, leaching lead into the water supply.

Problems were apparent almost immediately: The water started to smell like rotten eggs. Engineers responded to that problem by increasing the chlorine level. GM discovered that city water was corroding engines at their Flint factory and switched sources.

Then children and others started getting rashes and falling sick. Marc Edwards, a Virginia Tech environmental-engineering professor, found that the water had nearly 900 times the recommend EPA limit for lead particles. Yet as late as February 2015, even after tests showed dangerous lead levels, officials were telling residents there was no threat.

But in September 2015, two independent studies found that the lead levels in Flint’s water were absurdly high, and in October, 2015, Flint once again began buying water from Detroit.

On January 5th, 2016, Governor Rick Snyder declared a state of emergency due to lead in the water supply. The same day, the US Department of Justice announced that it is investigating what went wrong in the city. Several top officials have resigned, and Snyder apologized. But that’s cold comfort for Flint residents, particularly children, who are being poisoned by lead, which can cause irreversible brain damage and affect physical health.

And it could cost $1.5 billion to fix the problem, a staggering sum for a city struggling financially like Flint. Worse, six months ago, Rick Snyder’s Chief of Staff knew about it and expressed concern:

These folks are scared and worried about the health impacts and they are basically getting blown off by us (as a state we’re just not sympathizing with their plight).

So, the Flint story is hands down one of the worst abuses of government power in a long time. Money took precedence over people’s health. An unaccountable emergency manager who in a possibly well-intended effort to save the city $1.5 million a month in water fees, changes the source to the Flint River. In December 2014, a city employee tested the water of a woman whose son had gotten a rash after swimming in a pool.

He found that the lead level in her water was 104 parts per billion, about seven times greater than the lead level the EPA deems “actionable.”

BTW, Michigan voters repealed the Emergency Manager Law in 2012, but the Republican-controlled state legislature then passed a more far-reaching, emergency-manager law, one that could not be repealed.

So, what conclusions can we draw? Could the failure in Flint be used by conservatives to say?

See? You can’t even trust government to provide you with clean water anymore. We need to privatize the water company right now!

Or, the really damning take away is the emergency manager tried to save some money in a way that actually requires more money be spent, but did it anyway, apparently after being told about the problem, which poisoned people!.

OTOH, the fine citizens of Michigan re-elected Mr. Snyder, who took away the democratically elected team in Flint, and granted power to his appointed Publican. But the voters are not to blame. It is one thing to accept some right-wing economic BS, or to be too lazy to vote.

The penalty for either of those shouldn’t be that your government poisons you and your children.

St. Ronnie told us government was the problem, not the solution. And Rick Snyder’s cost-cutting steps seem to prove Ronnie was right (at least if government is run by the GOP).

It is hard to care about “Islamic terrorism” when your government knowingly poisons your city’s water supply in order to save money (in the short term).

And what is the criminal penalty for 10,000 cases of child endangerment?

2015 Is On The Run

Time to put our boot on the throat of 2015:

COW New Year

Perhaps Toles means “shred of dignity”. It was certainly an indecorous year.

News you can’t use:

The Onion’s 2015 Year in Review. This sends 2015 off with all due respect.

2015 in mass shootings (Rolling Stone). There have been 353 mass shootings in the US to this point, according the Mass Shooting Tracker, a crowd-sourced database. (The tracker defines a mass shooting as one in which at least four people are killed or wounded; the FBI uses three dead or wounded as its criteria.)

10 of the Worst Cable News Moments of 2015 (MoJo). We’ve barely survived another 12 months of cable news. Mother Jones gives you a few of the best of the worst the M$M had to offer in 2015.

Lower Jobless Claims Don’t Point to A Robust Labor Market (WSJ). less than 15 million American made first-time requests for government assistance this year, about half as many claims as were made in 2009, and far fewer than the number filed during the 1980s and 90s when the economy was expanding at a strong clip. The greatest concern in the labor market isn’t those who recently lost their jobs, it is the persistently large number out of work for months or years, and those stuck in low-paying and part-time jobs.

Heavily redacted Benghazi emails released on Christmas Eve (The Hill). Politicians release bad news on slow news days because they think the opposition isn’t listening, but the GOP ALWAYS listens to Hillary.

Meet a Koch-like family working to influence State Legislatures (Political Research Associates). The DeVos family (Amway) is one of the most influential families in conservative politics. Though they share the Kochs´ commitment to corporate welfare, the DeVoses also promote a Christian Right cultural and social agenda.

Sunday Cartoon Blogging – December 13, 2015

(This is the last column until Thursday 12/17. Wrongo and Ms. Right are in San Francisco. Talk amongst yourselves, keep hands inside the blog at all times.)

The hits keep coming! The San Bernardino killings continue to reverberate in our psyches. People are scared beyond what should be reasonable, given the statistics about killings by Islamic terrorists. The Paris climate agreement is signed, but what will it really do? The Supreme Court considered affirmative action again, with predictable BS from both sides. Trump continues, and Rahm Emmanuel looks to be on the wrong side of justice in Chicago.

Here come the same tired solutions once again:

COW Tom Tomorrow 2

It’s Trump’s world, but so few can live in it:

COW Trump World

Chicago’s mayor finally decides to get rolling on solving the problem:

COW Rahm Truck As mayor, he sat on that video for over a year. He had to know, because the $5 million payment to the victim’s family didn’t come from petty cash at the Chicago PD. He was the chief architect of the cover-up. And he needs to go.

Justice Scalia again covers himself with glory:

COW Scalia Bad Thing

Won’t matter what Paris says about climate change:

COW Climate Change

Oligarchs Seek Indentured Servants

Just when you thought that there couldn’t be another scheme to further mess with college students as they embark on their post-college journey, along come Income Share Agreements (ISAs).

The ISA is a contract whereby an individual investor (or a fund) would agree to provide a student with a lump-sum payment to be used for education costs, in exchange for receiving a share of the student’s income for a fixed period (5-10? years). The repayment would most likely be structured as a dividend on a security, thereby allowing the investor to pay a lower tax rate than on interest income.

Individual ISA contracts would be pooled and sold to investors. These are the kind of contracts that could only flourish in our growing oligarchy.

We have a student debt bubble. Student debt has tripled in 10 years, now totaling more than $1.3 trillion, or more than the country’s total debt for credit cards, auto loans and any other category except for home mortgages. Student debt default rates are equal to those of the 2008 subprime housing loan crisis, and the debt continues to grow, up this year by an estimated 8% with an estimated average debt of $35k each. About 70% percent of students have graduated with debt this year.

And now, ISAs are the new idea to siphon off student debt into the private sector. WaPo reported on Friday that Purdue University signed an agreement with Vemo Education a Virginia financial services firm, to look into the use of ISAs to help Purdue students pay for their educations. In an earlier WaPo op-ed, Mitch Daniels, former Republican governor of Indiana and President of Purdue, said:

From the student’s standpoint, ISAs assure a manageable payback amount, never more than the agreed portion of their incomes…Best of all, they shift the risk of career shortcomings from student to investor: If the graduate earns less than expected, it is the investors who are disappointed; if the student decides to go off to find himself in Nepal instead of working, the loss is entirely on the funding providers, who will presumably price that risk accordingly when offering their terms. This is true “debt-free” college.

What a nice way to say “indentured servitude.” And universities get to keep raising tuition faster than inflation. Sounds like a real winner for Mitch and other Republicans.

The argument by the free-market types is that ISAs shift risk from the backs of students to the investors. If the student has not earned enough over the period of the agreement to return the original capital to the investor, the student would have no further money obligation.

Sounds good. But, why would the investors agree to fund any low-paying degrees? It is logical that they would look to fund only those who represented a low risk of achieving significant earnings in the initial 10 years of working. So they would want to finance medical and engineering degrees while leaving the social workers and teachers to public sector finance. If private sources (investment funds) are providing the money and setting the terms, then loans will only go to those who are most likely to be successful.

And, Mr. Market will tell us which degrees and careers are worthy.

The investment fund will have access to voluminous private data that will allow it to make a precise (nearly riskless?) ISA negotiation with the student, while students are likely to only have access to their University’s aggregate data on expected salaries by type of degree.

If there was any doubt that this is a neo-con approved idea, consider that Republican presidential candidate Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Rep. Tom Petri, (R-WI) proposed ISA legislation with a maximum contract length of 30 years and the share of income capped at 15%. This is touted by Sen. Rubio’s supporters as evidence of his “innovative ideas.”

Sadly this idea has been around since the 1950s, when it was first floated by conservative economist Milton Friedman.

One of the most significant factors in our uneven economic recovery since 2008 is how we’ve become beholden to the oligarchs. The gig economy has replaced permanent jobs. Wages have stagnated, and companies are motivated solely by returning money to shareholders, often through share repurchases.

Now, college students are supposed to provide another class of equity return for the investors. They are to syndicate themselves to “shareholders”?

It’s a sick idea, one that only the greediest among us would support.

Monday Wake Up Call – November 2, 2015

From the WaPo:

Keith Moore, a 40-year-old military veteran recovering from post-traumatic stress disorder in Oklahoma, remembers the day last year when he sold off a chunk of his pension.

He had left the military after 21 years of service, because his disabilities — PTSD, arthritis and other injuries — made it difficult to work. But the transition to civilian life came with a different struggle: the need to provide for his family and pay the same bills with only half the paycheck.

The article says that Moore was two months behind on rent and 10 days from his next paycheck. He saw a TV ad for Future Income Payments, an Irvine, CA company that buys pensions in exchange for a lump sum of cash. The company said it had worked with military personnel and government workers. Moore called them. More from WaPo: (brackets and emphasis by the Wrongologist)

The next day, a company representative…explained that he [Moore] would receive a $5,000 cash advance for selling part of his pension. In exchange, Moore would have to pay the company $510 a month for five years, a total of $30,600.

If it were a typical loan, that would amount to $25,600 in interest — a rate of 512%.

Can you say deceptive and predatory?

We are ending year seven of our recovery from the Great Recession, but the recovery has largely benefited those at the top of the income ladder, while bottom-feeders like these pension advance companies work to profit from poverty, charging more than 500% annual interest.

This is particularly egregious when companies target income streams that are riskless since they are backed by the federal government.

But these are not treated as loans by the pension advance companies. They are treated as an installment “sale”. The pensioner sells the income stream to the pension advance firm, rather than making a loan against the future payments, which would be subject to usury laws.

Some will say that Mr. Moore entered into a dumb deal, that he is a victim of his own personal choices.

Others could say that view makes you an apologist for loan sharking. Following the argument to its logical conclusion, any fraud or con game should be legal under the premise, “the victim should have known better“.

Some in the government are looking into the grift: In a 2014 report, the GAO identified 38 companies that offered pension advances. At least 30 of them were affiliated with one another in some way. The Senate Special Committee on Aging held a hearing on the issue last month, and reported that only two states, Missouri and Vermont; have laws regulating pension advance companies. If 30 operators are really one company, why can’t states or the Feds regulate this?

So, it’s past time for state and federal regulators to wake up and look carefully at pension advance firms. To help them rub the sleep from their eyes, here is Minus the Bear, an American indie rock band from Seattle, with their tune “Knights”:

Sample Lyrics:
I owe you, don’t I?
A little light today but tomorrow
Oh, tomorrow

This usury’s so typical
A piece of you for a piece of me
It’s hard-coded
A piece of you for a piece of me

Is it really a sin if we both come out even?

Those who read the Wrongologist in email can view the video here.

More GOP Dickitude

Dickitude was on display at the House Oversight Committee hearing into Planned Parenthood (PP). Committee Chair, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) repeatedly interrupted PP President Cecile Richards as she tried to answer his questions Tuesday. Richards’ testimony was part of an investigation into PP’s business practices after sting videos were released that allegedly showed company executives discussing the sale of fetal tissue. Chaffetz took the time to note Richards’ salary.

Your compensation in 2009 was $353,000. Is that correct? he asked. ‘I don’t have the figures with me, but —‘Richards said. ‘It was,’ Chaffetz replied, ‘Congratulations.’

That had to be the first time in the recorded history that a Republican has criticized a CEO for making money. But, Richards provided the best moment of the day when Chaffetz was caught in a Fiorina-like lie after he pontificated on a projected slide:

CHAFFETZ: You’re going to deny that…
RICHARDS: I’m going to deny this slide that you just showed me that no one has ever provided us before! We’ve provided you all the information about everything — all the services that Planned Parenthood provides. And it doesn’t feel like we’re trying to get to the truth here. You just showed me this.
CHAFFETZ: I pulled those numbers directly out of your corporate reports!
RICHARDS: [legal team tells her something] Excuse me. My lawyers have informed me that the source of this is Americans United for Life, which is an anti-abortion group. So I would check your source.
CHAFFETZ: [looking caught off-guard, stammering] then we will get to the bottom of the truth of that.

Shouldn’t they call the anti-abortion groups that created the fake chart (and the fake videos) to testify?

But, Dickitude doesn’t require a dick. We know that Carly Fiorina did not start the PP fire, but fanned the flames by her vivid comments during the 2nd Republican debate on Sept. 16th. Then, no one could find the section of the video that Carly said she saw.

Things seemed to go from bad to worse when a new video entitled “Carly Fiorina was right”, issued by The Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, and purporting to show a PP abortion showed up this week. It quickly got traction in the media, but then things went from bad to worse: Dr. Jennifer Gunter, a board-certified OB/GYN took to her blog after viewing it. Dr. Gunter’s conclusion is that it was a premature delivery. She disputed Greg Cunningham, curator of the video, and the founder of the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform’s finding, who told Time Magazine that it had to be an abortion:

Owing to the lack of medical treatment offered to the fetus.

Dr. Gunter says that Cunningham was wrong, since the fetus is 17-18 weeks and thus, previable, and that no doctor would render care in that circumstance. She goes on to say:

A neonatologist who attempts to resuscitate a 17 week delivery would be considered unethical.

Her final point was that there is no proof this video is in a PP clinic much less in the US. And hours after the publication of the video, several medical experts contacted by Time Magazine raised questions about whether the video showed an abortion.

These attempts to defund PP are a form of pandering to the anti-abortion wing of the Republican base. The base doesn’t care about literal truth when all them little angel babies are being massacred by the socialists.

Fiorina’s description of video evidence of PP performing a horrible procedure looks to be untrue, particularly since the footage:

• Didn’t come from the videos Fiorina was discussing
• There’s no evidence that the footage comes from PP
• There’s very good evidence that it doesn’t involve an abortion

Even if we grant that Fiorina was confused on the night of Sept. 16th when she made her statement about the video, the only way to explain her continued insistence that what she saw is real is to say she’s too stupid, too stubborn to admit she’s wrong, and/or that she’s a liar.

None of these are good qualities to have in a president.

Yet, the Right sees it exactly the other way: They think these are great qualities to have in a president. It’s a perfect projection of themselves onto an extremely powerful person, one who doesn’t give two fucks about reality, facts and evidence, and will lead from the gut.

That’s how we ended up in Iraq.

Sunday Cartoon Blogging – September 20, 2015

Pope Francis, Russia’s President Putin and China’s President Xi walk into a bar…Well, it won’t be that type of week exactly, but all will be in the US over the next few days. There will be summits and mini-summits, and a few hallway meetings between them and individually, with Mr. Obama. But the game-changer is likely to be Pope Francis, who is bringing his message about Mr. Market, and how Mr. Market isn’t working for the average Joe. In fact, many Republicans are suspicious of the Pope:

Rep. Paul Gosar, (R-AZ) says he’s boycotting Pope Francis’ appearance before Congress. He said:

If the Pope wants to devote his life to fighting climate change then he can do so on his personal time.

Rep. Gosar, who has received campaign contributions of $12,500 from oil and gas companies and $28,850 from electric utilities, doesn’t believe in climate change. Apparently, he would rather the Pope devotes his speech to abortion, Planned Parenthood, and to the threatened religious liberties of County Clerks.

This Pope’s message causes discomfort for people on both sides of the aisle. Conservative Catholics used to welcome Francis’ predecessors ecstatically, and with open arms, but that was in the old days, when Popes were Popes:

Even when in the Reagan Library, today’s GOP candidates can’t duplicate St. Ronnie’s message:

The GOP debate brought the smell of roasted pig:

Views now differ on Paradise:

Monday Wake-Up Call – September 14, 2015

Gov. Bobby Jindal, a Republican contender for the presidency, moved to cut off $730,000 in Medicaid reimbursements to the state’s two Planned Parenthood clinics in late August. The question then arose, where would Louisiana women get these services in the event the funding was cancelled? From MoJo:

The task seems straightforward: Make a list of health care providers that would fill the void if Louisiana succeeded in defunding Planned Parenthood. But the state, which is fighting a court battle to strip the group of hundreds of thousands of dollars in Medicaid funds, is struggling to figure out who would provide poor women with family planning care if not Planned Parenthood.

So the state’s attorneys did some research. They said in a court declaration that there are 2,000 family planning providers ready to accommodate new female patients. John deGravelles, a federal judge who reviewed the list in a September 2nd court hearing, found hundreds of entries for specialists such as ophthalmologists; nursing home caregivers; dentists; ear, nose, and throat doctors; and even cosmetic surgeons. From Judge deGravelles:

It strikes me as extremely odd that you have a dermatologist, an audiologist, a dentist who are billing for family planning services…But that is what you’re representing to the court? You’re telling me that they can provide family planning and related services?

Dentists? Don’t dentists who do “Pap smears” wind up losing their licenses?

Anyway, the judge’s disbelief sent the state back to the drawing board. They came forward with a new list that did not include dentists, dermatologists, ophthalmologists and others. You will be shocked to learn the state was lying: Their new filing listed just 29 health care providers.

But even with this pared down list, it only got worse. MoJo reports that in Baton Rouge, the site of one of two Louisiana Planned Parenthood clinics, the state lists five alternate providers. But according to the state’s own filing, only three of those offer contraception, and two of those have wait times ranging from two to seven weeks. One of the Baton Rouge clinics the state suggested is not accepting any new patients for STI, breast cancer, or cervical cancer screenings.

Since Reagan, Republicans have been able to say whatever stupid or completely false thing they want. They keep doing it because their supporters don’t mind, and they almost never get called on it by the media. It’s been “regarding shape of the earth, opinions differ” for decades.

This tendency to make shit up or say ridiculous things is particularly pronounced whenever the subject is abortion, birth control, or any other aspect of female sexuality. Sadly, the notion that patients could turn elsewhere remains a key rationale when Republicans attempt to strip Planned Parenthood of $528 million in federal funding as part of this month’s budget talks.

So what Jindal’s minions are attempting is more of the same. But, perhaps you remember Mr. Jindal saying in 2013 that the GOP had to “stop being the stupid party”? He didn’t mean that. The GOP reserves the right to be as anti-abortion, anti-women, and anti-science as they want to be.

Let’s make an effort to wake up Mr. Jindal and his fellow GOP’ers, even if it may be futile. Here is Bon Jovi with “We Weren’t Born to Follow”, a top 10 hit for them in 2009:

For those who read the Wrongologist in email, you can view the video here.

Sample Lyrics:
We weren’t born to follow
Come on and get up off your knees
When life is a bitter pill to swallow
You gotta hold on to what you believe
Believe that the sun will shine tomorrow
And that your saints and sinners bleed
We weren’t born to follow
You gotta stand up for what you believe

Anger is an Energy

We are witnessing the convergence of several trends, which may take politics as we know it and turn it on its head. First, a political trend in which both angry Republicans and angry Democrats now believe that there is zero chance that the government will do anything to improve their lives.

Second, the American Exceptionalism movement is morphing into something that says we must win, and win now. Never mind trying to figure out exactly what “winning” means. We’ve now spawned two generations of Trump wanna-be’s who have no time for losing. They must win, win, win, and they will say or do whatever it takes to win.

Third, people have sorted themselves into groups that are impervious to fact. Presenting people with the best available information doesn’t change many minds. Like a psychic immune response, they reject ideas that they consider harmful. Regardless of whether the subject is climate, vaccines or politics, they prefer and are much more susceptible to, appeals to emotion.

So we live in a time of angry rage. We can’t change most of what we see, but we sure can be pissed about it. The angry voter has been blamed for the insurgent candidacies of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump, and the possible emergence of a third-party presidential run in 2016.

In the midst of this shit storm, political scientists Alan Abramowitz and Steven Webster of Emory University last week posted an intriguing analysis at Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball Blog on the role of anger in the 2012 presidential election. They conclude that voters are indeed angry. But their anger is directed mainly at the opposing party, and this anger is increasingly correlated with ideology. In other words, the most liberal and most conservative voters are also the most likely to be angry. Looking forward to 2016, they conclude: (emphasis by the Wrongologist)

The most important influence on the 2016 presidential election as well as the House and Senate elections will be the division of the American electorate into two warring partisan camps. In the seven decades since the end of World War II, Democrats and Republicans have never been as divided as they are today.

Earlier this year, Abramowitz and Webster released a paper cataloging the sharp increase in party-line voting in recent decades. Once upon a time, it was not uncommon for Republicans to vote Democratic and vice versa. In 2012, the authors tell us, the US saw:

The highest levels of party loyalty and straight-ticket voting since the American National Election Studies first began measuring party identification in 1952.

What’s the reason for the polarization? Abramowitz and Webster call it “negative partisanship”, the tendency of voters to think of their ballots not as a way to help their party but as a way to hurt the opposition. In other words, it’s not that our side is so great; it’s that the other side is so awful.

How do we know the other side is awful?’

Abramowitz and Webster say that a crucial element in negative partisanship is the assignment of negative characteristics to the other party. From 1972 to 2012, the proportion of voters who believed there are significant differences between the parties rose from 55% percent to well over 80%. We can argue over why, but, as the authors point out, these changes in perception are rational, since the parties themselves have become more ideologically rigid.

A thought experiment: Is there a party where the voter who is for abortion rights, but against same-sex marriage is comfortable? How about the voter who supports the Affordable Care Act, but is a skeptic on climate change? And if you don’t believe such complex voters exist, you are part of the evidence for the authors’ thesis about party rigidity.

All of us have met political partisans who believe that those on the other side are irredeemably stupid or evil. Yet we know that view of superiority is ultimately enforceable only at the point of a gun — just the opposite of what we expect of our democracy.

So, is anger good for our democracy? In a world of twitter and other social media, there are just way more outlets for anonymous anger. And that anger reproduces itself with every re-tweet.

And if there’s one thing anger loves, its attention.

Maybe we can learn something from what Johnny Rotten said in his book, “Anger is an Energy”, (which is a line from his song “Rise”): (emphasis by the Wrongologist)

When I was writing the Public Image Ltd song ‘Rise’, I didn’t quite realize the emotional impact that it would have on me, or anyone who’s ever heard it since. ‘Anger is an energy’ was an open statement, saying, ‘Don’t view anger negatively, don’t deny it – use it to be creative...’

Anger doesn’t necessarily equate directly to violence. Violence very rarely resolves anything. In South Africa, they eventually found a relatively peaceful way out. Using that supposedly negative energy called anger, it can take just one positive move to change things for the better.

Maybe, a third party presidential run in 2016?

The Political Stylings of Donald Trump

We see a torrent of Trumpism, and viewed from the sidelines, it is a presidential candidacy based on emotion, while shockingly lacking in policy. It is difficult to see him succeeding, unless Republicans believe that being a vain, obnoxious and unapologetic old uncle is all that it takes to run the world’s largest superpower.

If that’s what they think, they have found their man.

The Donald has co-opted Tea Party rage. But, there’s nothing to grab onto, except the rage itself. He and his supporters hate immigrants. They hate Mr. Obama’s withdrawal from our blundering wars in the ME. They hate the vastly expanded access to healthcare coverage, and apparently, they hate being rescued from a Republican Depression. They do love them some American Exceptionalism, though.

As Bloomberg’s Melinda Henneberger comments about a recent Trump rally in New Hampshire:

Very little of what the conservatives in the hall were going wild over could be characterized as conservative, and most of it wasn’t political at all.

What Trump wants us to believe is; “I’ve got this.” His strategy is to have us believe he is a strongman brimming with rage. His “tell it like it is” approach has a true populist appeal, but his slogan “Make America Great Again” is as vague as it can be. Here are a few NH quotes: (brackets by the Wrongologist)

We will make great trade deals.

We will have Social Security without cuts.

We will come up with health care plans that will be phenomenal, phenomenal, [and] that will be less expensive.

Describing a future-perfect conversation between President Trump and the Ford Motor Co. officials, he’ll change their minds about building cars in Mexico. He says:

This is too easy, too easy! This is a couple of phone calls.

Some Trump supporters will vote for him, some will not, but all like his honesty, his lack of PC, his ability to run without outside money, his success, his independence from America’s political elite.

Krugman says the conservative explanation of the GOP’s onset of Trumpism is that their base voters are victims of celebrity. What they really want is a true conservative, but they’re being hoodwinked by someone who is entertaining on TV.

Krugman thinks the liberal version is that Trump is appealing to resentment that ultimately rests on economic failure: working-class whites have been left behind by growing income inequality, while they mistakenly blame immigrants taking their jobs. But he thinks Trump’s supporters look a lot more like the Tea Party, who are:

For the most part not working-class…They’re relatively affluent, and not especially lacking in college degrees.

Republicans seem to be in a mood to require heavy doses of impatience, resentment and outrage from any successful 2016 presidential candidate. Trump realized that sooner than his competitors, and neatly fills the bill. He is disorienting the Establishment Right. His supporters don’t give his political platform much thought, which works, since thoughtlessness is at the base of most of Trump’s policy cure-alls. He is cleaving the Republican Party into one camp that gawks helplessly at its past and a new camp that is inserting a shiv in the Establishment Right’s tired old body.

For progressives, what’s not to love? Trump said on Meet The Press: (brackets by the Wrongologist)

And if I’m president, we’re going to have a great country…And then we will really have [it] better than Reagan, better than anybody. We will make America great again. That’s what it’s all about.

Ok, Chuck Todd, you can’t ask: “How?”

Trump is the expression of today’s conservatism: loud, abrasive, and vacuous. Forget data, forget policy. Why search for evidence when you can rely on belief and tradition?

There are two options: Republicans either oust Trump and his Trumpeteers, perhaps forcing them to form a third party. Or, Republicans can accept that Trump is in their mainstream, and run a populist platform, laced with doses of anger and vague policies. If he is the Republican nominee for President, Republicans will then witness the Trumpocalypse, and be picking up the pieces for years.

Those are the choices. Either way, contemporary conservatism will be in ruins.

What’s not to love?

The Wrongologist

Geopolitics, Power and Political Economy

Category: Dickitude