Itâs the start of a brand new week with shopping opportunities! And you can watch our Senate and House members leave for their undeserved vacation without doing much. Try that at your house. On to cartoons.
Trump told us what he plans to do:
Trump thinks he has an âItâs Easyâ button:
Voters then and now:
The Republican Party sleeps through a real crisis:
The MAGAts are all in:
The economy sucks and the checkout lines are too long:
Tuberville feels heâs entitled to more obstruction:
The Daily Escape:
Wild surf, Shore Acres SP, OR – December 2020 photo by Alan Nyri Photography
Instead of a soothing Saturday, Wrongo has decided to wade into the hot steaming pile that is the controversy over whether the presidents of various prestige universities are sufficiently anti-genocide. What they said at the House hearings has raised a chorus of voices who think that the leadership at Harvard, MIT and UPenn just arenât anti-genocide enough.
From Bloombergâs Noah Feldman:
âThe lowlight of the House hearings on campus antisemitism…came when Congresswoman Elise Stefanik (R-NY) asked the presidents of Harvard, MIT, and the University of Pennsylvania whether it would be bullying and harassment if someone on campus called for a genocide of Jews. The presidentsâ answers â that it depended on context â landed about as badly as it could have. Stefanik, a Trumpist Republican election denier, browbeat them and called it âunacceptable.â
Feldman is a law professor at Harvard. He went on to say:
âThe core idea of First Amendment freedom is that the expression of ideas should not be punished because doing so would make it harder, not easier, to find the truth. That freedom extends to the most hateful ideas imaginable, including advocacy of racism, antisemitism, and yes, genocide.â
Wrongo isnât a lawyer and this isnât a court or a classroom, so what follows is his take on this matter.
Can speech be constrained? In 1969, the Supreme Court protected a Ku Klux Klan member’s speech and created the “imminent danger” test to determine on what grounds speech can be limited, saying in Brandenburg v. Ohio that:
“The constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a state to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force, or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.”
Speech promoting violation of the law may only be restricted when it poses an imminent danger of unlawful action, where the speaker has the intention to incite such action, and there is the likelihood that this will be the consequence of that speech.
In 2017, the Court affirmed this in a unanimous decision on Matal v. Tam. The issue was about government prohibiting the registration of trademarks that are “racially disparaging”. Effectively, the Supreme Court unanimously reaffirmed that there is no âhate speechâ exception to the First Amendment. Such speech can be prohibited when the very utterances inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace.
There is plenty of case law on the First Amendment out there to read or about hate speech if you prefer to do your own research. From Wikipedia:
âIn the 1980s and 1990s, more than 350…universities adopted “speech codes” regulating discriminatory speech by faculty and students. These codes have not fared well in the courts, where they are frequently overturned as violations of the First Amendment.â
So, while University presidents may sound lawyer-like when asked if âcalling for genocide of Jewsâ should be prohibited, think about the long history of case law that says there are few limits on hate speech that do not result in action intended to produce harm. Also think about the losing streak these universities have been on when they have tried to restrict speech in the past.
As it happens, the three presidents were accurately describing their universitiesâ rules, which do depend on context. Yascha Mounk in The Atlantic had this to say:
âIn a narrow, technical sense, the three presidents were correct to state that their current policies would probably not penalize offensive political speech. In a more substantive sense, universities should defend a very broad definition of academic freedom, one that shields students and faculty members from punishment for expressing a political opinion, no matter how abhorrent.â
Mounk goes on to say that the university presidents were disingenuous when they claimed that their response to anti-Semitism on campus was hamstrung by a commitment to free speech. Recent history at all three institutions shows that their rules about free speech are unevenly applied. So the problem with their answers wasnât about making a judgement call about calls for genocide.
Weâre stepping into muddy waters here. When students say: “From the river to the sea. Palestine will soon be free” theyâre using a political slogan that on its face is aspirational. While some may hear that and say it implies genocide of Jews, it should be protected speech. It’s stupid and ignorant, but 100% protected. Widening out our view, blaming all Jews for Netanyahuâs excesses or blaming all Palestinians for the atrocities of Hamas is wrong but itâs still protected speech.
People like Stefanik are too high on their own agenda to appreciate the distinction.
Still, itâs true that many (most? all?) universities have become hypocritical. There are plenty of examples of professors being expelled, or outside speakers being cancelled because the administration doesnât care for the viewpoints being expressed.
The question of exactly when political/hate speech becomes sufficiently threatening and specific toward a given individual or groups so as to constitute legally (and by extension administratively) a violation of a universityâs code of conduct is, not surprisingly, a massive gray area. On Thursday a man saying “Free Palestine” fired shots at a synagogue near Albany NY. Thankfully, nobody was harmed. He wasn’t on campus and he did back his words with a serious threat, so he was arrested.
The university presidents failed to be clear. The US case law and the schoolâs codes of conduct are sufficiently difficult to adjudicate on a hypothetical basis. These three presidents should learn that first, the US Congress isnât the academy. Second, they should admit they are fuzzy thinkers about free speech at their institutions. Third, they should develop better codes of conduct.
Letâs give the last word to Feldman:
âFree-speech nuance is something to be proud of, not something to condemn.â
A final thought. Stefanikâs gotcha game with yes/no answers to complex questions shouldnât be the way the game is played, but for now it is. Many Republicans think that colleges and universities deserve specific blame for the liberal political views of young Americans. It has become an article of faith on the right despite little supporting evidence that colleges are turning young people into liberals. Stefanik is a willing tool of this viewpoint.
On to our Saturday Soother. Weâve had snow overnight for the past two days on the Fields of Wrong. Still, itâs expected to be around 60° on Sunday. Given our uneven weather, the arborist isnât coming here until the middle of February.
Letâs get comfortable in a big chair near a window. Now, try to let go of the arguments about the âpeople we hate and I want to talk about themâ and empty our minds of complicated ideas, even if they are foundational to our democratic experiment.
Letâs listen to the Academy of St. Martin-in-the-Fields Chamber Ensemble perform Maurice Ravelâs âIntroduction and Allegro for harp, flute, clarinet and string quartetâ. He composed this work in 1905 and it was first performed in 1907.
The Daily Escape:
First snow, Doubling Point Lighthouse, Kennebec River, ME – December 2023 photo by Rick Berk Photography
Wrongo may have stumbled upon the reason why people say the economy is bad when so many economists say it isnât. From a LendingClub report from last May: (emphasis by Wrongo)
âFor some Americans, earning a six-figure income doesnât guarantee a comfortable lifestyle….many Americans are struggling to make ends meet â with 61% of those surveyed saying they feel stretched too thin, and 49% of those earning $100,000 or more saying theyâre living paycheck to paycheck.â
This ties together with other information, some of which comes from the issue, who reported this from the Aspen Institute: (emphasis by Wrongo)
âThough routinely positive cash flow is the starting point for financial stability, it remains largely out of reach for many Americans. Even before the fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic, nearly half (46.5%) of households reported that their income did not exceed their spending over the course of a year. For households with annual income of less than $30,000, this number increases to three in five (61.5%).â
Now there may be many reasons why people spend beyond their means. Some seem to be unable to defer gratification until thereâs money in the bank, so they buy on credit. There was a $48.5 billion jump in spending from September to October 2023. For others who make less than a living wage, the problem isnât one of choice, itâs existential.
The searing takeaway from the above is that negative personal cashflow was a problem even before the post-Covid inflation drove prices through the roof in America. The Aspen Institute provides this handy chart showing how individuals build financial security:
Financial security starts with having a routinely positive cashflow. But, nearly 50% of Americans today arenât cash flow positive (see quote above), while 49% of people earning more than $100k are living paycheck to paycheck.
This dovetails with Wrongoâs Monday column which showed that âNearly 3 in 10 Americans say they have had to forgo seeing a doctor in the past year due to costs.â If youâre one of the 7.5% of uninsured Americans, and have money in your checking account that isnât going to necessities, you can definitely go to the doctor.
Aspen has another chart that shows the breakdown of who lives paycheck to paycheck by income levels:
Seventy-four percent of those making less than $50k are living paycheck to paycheck, and while the percentage gets smaller as annual income rises, itâs still 48.7% for people making more than $100k, in an economy where the median income is around $54K! FYI, the percentage of Americans who make $50k or less is 37.8%.
More from LendingClub: (brackets and emphasis by Wrongo)
âThe share of consumers in the US earning over $100,000 per year who live paycheck to paycheck increased 7 percentage points in April year over year. High-income consumers are particularly likely to live in urban areas, at 36%, and these tendencies toward higher incomes…[donât] prevent almost 70% of urban dwellers from saying they live paycheck to paycheck.â
Itâs hard not to conclude that the majority of Americans are currently experiencing dire financial conditions, including many who live with negative cashflow. When your cashflow is negative, you either cut back, borrow or sell assets. For most people selling assets isnât a real choice. So while some cut back, the majority borrow to make ends meet. According to the issue, the:
â…highest risk, and most expensive forms of debt are now growing fastest. Payday loans, online insta-loans, and so forth. That means that people are exhausting the more mundane forms of debtâcredit cards, bank loans, government loans, etcetera.â
This squares with a report by Achieve, a personal debt management firm, that shows:
âIn the first nine months of 2023, the average monthly participation in debt resolution programs increased by 119% compared to 2020, even though the average earnings rose by approximately 37% during the same period.â
It gets worse:
“In 2023, the typical household income of individuals enrolled in debt resolution programs was $59,900, which is a notable increase from $43,598 three years prior.â
Americans are earning 37% more but are still struggling with debt. Not a pretty picture to take before the voters.
Meanwhile, Democrats still are touting how “strong” the economy is. The aggregate numbers hide terrible personal experiences that are happening out of sight of our politicians and surprisingly, our economists. However, itâs clear from the polls that few Americans are buying that message apart from the true believers, the media and pundits.
The disconnect between economic data and the lived experience of average people needs to be addressed by Biden and the Democrats. If nothing is done to at least acknowledge the actual problems of many Americans specifically, their negative personal cashflow, these angry folks will certainly tilt toward giving Trump another chance.
Letâs give the issue the last word:
âWhat is this? What do we call it when the majority of people can’t make ends meet, as in, they’re literally spending more than they make, because they don’t make enough to live a stable or secure life?
Today the averages are hiding a truth: that a near-majority of American citizens are financially underwater. These are big numbers. The Census Bureau says as of now, 258.3 million Americans are adults. And the Aspen Institute says that 46.5% of them canât make ends meet. Thatâs 120 million of us that are going deeper in debt every month.
That can only happen when those at the very top are skimming off more than 100% of the growth in the economy. This suggests that Biden et al need to run on policy that will help the majority of voters, not simply the moneyed people who finance political campaigns.
The Daily Escape:
Cypress trees, Lake Verritt, LA – November 2023 photo by Rick Berk Photography. Note the egret in the background.
For todayâs Wake Up Call, we return to a staple of yesteryear, some hot links that caught Wrongoâs eye over the past few days.
Wrongo isnât happy with how the Ukraine War has slipped from the consciousness of Americaâs media and thereby, from our view. Saturdayâs WSJ offered an intriguing idea with its column, âDoes the West Have a Double Standard for Ukraine and Gaza?â (free link). The article makes two excellent points. First, how these two wars have divided the world. Hereâs a view of the division:
From the WSJ: (emphasis by Wrongo)
âOutrage and political mobilization have become subordinated to geopolitical allegiancesâa selective empathy that often treats ordinary Ukrainians, Palestinians and Israelis as pawns in a larger ideological battle within Western societies and between the West and rivals such as China and Russia.â
Second, the article concludes by saying that the main difference between the two wars is that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with all its complexities, lacks the moral clarity of the Ukrainian resistance to Russia. They quote British lawmaker Alex Sobel:
âThere is no moral justification for the Russian invasion. Zero. Itâs just about Russian imperialism….But in Israel and Palestine, itâs about the fact that there are two peoples on a very small amount of land, and political and military elites on both sides are unwilling to settle for whatâs on offer.â
Yes, America may have the moral high ground in both cases, and views can differ on how both wars are being waged. But as the article says in its second paragraph:
“The Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 was unprovoked, while Israel sent troops into Gaza because of a mass slaughter of Israeli civilians…â.
Make of the article what you will, but itâs important to think through why you (like Biden) think both wars are morally equivalent.
Link #2 is apropos of the COP28 conference now underway in Dubai. Grist Magazine has an article: âWhere could millions of EV batteries retire? Solar farms.â As solar energy expands, itâs becoming more common to use batteries to store the power as itâs generated and transmit it through the grid later. One new idea is to source that battery back up at least in part from used electric vehicle batteries:
âElectric vehicle batteries are typically replaced when they reach 70 to 80% of their capacity, largely because the range they provide at that point begins to dwindle. Almost all of the critical materials inside them, including lithium, nickel, and cobalt, are reusable. A growing domestic recycling industry, supported by billions of dollars in loans from the Energy Department and incentives in the Inflation Reduction Act, is being built to prepare for what will one day be tens of millions of retired EV battery packs.â
More:
âBefore they are disassembled…studies show that around three quarters of decommissioned packs are suitable for a second life as stationary storage.â
Apparently there are already at least 3 gigawatt-hours of decommissioned EV battery packs sitting around in the US that could be deployed, and that the volume of them being removed from cars is doubling every two years.
Link #3 also shows the impact of the Inflation Reduction Act. Wolf Richter writes that:
âIn October, $18.5 billion were plowed into construction of manufacturing plants in the US ($246 billion annualized), up by 73% from a year ago, by 136% from two years ago, and by 166% from October 2019.â
More:
âThe US is the second largest manufacturing country by output, behind China and has a greater share of global production than the next three countries combined, Germany, Japan, and India.â
All of this construction spending will take time to turn into production. When these new plants are up and running and producing at scale, manufacturingâs share of US GDP will rise. And much of the new construction is happening in fly-over America, which can use the help.
Finding factory workers in sufficient numbers to support the new capacity will be a key. America has energy in abundance and has robotic manufacturing. So pulling production from overseas with fewer workers needed will be a giant plus for the US.
Link #4 is a downer. Civic Science says in this weekâs 3 things to know column, that âNearly 3 in 10 Americans say they have had to forgo seeing a doctor in the past year due to costs.â Hereâs their chartâ:
Civic Science says that 12% of US adults have had to miss or make a late payment on medical bills in the last 90 days, a two percentage point increase over September 2022.
A far larger percentage of Americans â 27% of the general population and about 30% of respondents under 55 years old or with an annual household income under $100,000 â report they could not go to a doctor in the past 12 months because they could not afford the cost. Gen Z adults and households making between $25K-$50K are more likely to have held off seeing a doctor due to cost (34% and 31% respectively).
We all know that medical costs have continued to rise and that medical debt is the leading cause of personal bankruptcy in the US. If Congress was really interested in helping provide for the general welfare, they would deal with this out of control problem.
Time to wake up America! Thereâs plenty going on that isnât getting visibility in the mainstream media or on social media. You have to cast your net widely to be on top of the good and bad happening in the US.
To help you wake up, we turn to Shane MacGowan, frontman for the Irish group the Pogues who died last week. He left behind a body of work that merged traditional Irish music and punk rock. He wrote many songs that could easily be mistaken for traditional Irish tunes including this one, which was also used as the music for wakes by the Baltimore Police Department in the great, great HBO series, “The Wire“. Hereâs âThe Body Of An Americanâ from their 1986 album, âPoguetry in Motionâ:
RIP Shane.
Again, it wasnât a terrific week for cartoons. Here are the best.
Biden tries but isnât young enough for some people:
Santos is out:
Only 105 out of 217 Republicans voted against Santos:
Kissinger gets a roommate:
Wise men have correct answer:
Sandra Day OâConnor joins the band:
The Daily Escape:
San Juan river cuts through monocline ridge, UT – November 2023 drone photo by Hilary Bralove. It is believed by many that the Navajo people based their rug and basket weaving patterns on what they saw in these geologic formations.
The temporary truce in the Israel/Hamas war is over. Reprobate Congresscritter George Santos (R-NY) was ousted from the House, and former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day OâConnor died. She was the swing vote in the Bush v. Gore case that stopped the Florida recount and handed the 2000 presidential election to GW Bush. This was the first time that Republicans realized that if they controlled the Court, they could fix elections.
But on a pretty Saturday in southern New England, letâs turn our attention to a news article that hasnât gotten much interest. From the issue, we learn that:
âMore people died from suicide in the United States last year than any other year on record, dating to at least 1941, according to provisional data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.â
They quote the Kaiser Family Foundation who measure the suicide deaths per 100,000 of population: (brackets by Wrongo)
âSuicide deaths are increasing fastest among people of color, younger individuals, and people who live in rural areas. Between 2011 and 2021, suicide death rates increased substantially among people of color, with the highest increase among AIAN people [American Indian and Alaska Native people]Â (70% increase, from 16.5 to 28.1 per 100,000), followed by Black (58% increase, from 5.5 to 8.7 per 100,000), and Hispanic (39% increase, 5.7 to 7.9 per 100,000) people….The suicide death rate also increased in adolescents (48% increase, from 4.4 to 6.5 per 100,000) and young adults (39% increase, from 13.0 to 18.1 per 100,000) between 2011 and 2021….â
Suicide rates are up by nearly 50% in adolescents over the last decade, while suicides among Black people are up by almost 60%. These arenât trends, theyâre explosive changes. What weâre seeing in the data is our world in chaos.
Wrongo often says that American life has fallen apart over the past 30 years. People struggle to pay their bills; many do that by accumulating debt. For some, that struggle turns them to embrace demagogues, people who scapegoat innocents, or promise to take their rights away, robbing them of  their personhood.
When we see suicide rising particularly among groups who struggle the most for their existence, it says that something has gone terribly wrong with the American model. And in the suicide statistics, there is confirmation that our nearly Darwinian model is whatâs wrong. Adolescents and minorities aren’t committing suicide at these rates because they can’t get therapy, but because they feel as if thereâs little or no future for them. Sadly, they are told by many pundits and politicians that everythingâs fine.
Perhaps this partially explains why Biden seems to be doing so badly in polls of young voters.
As one of the commenters at the issue says:
âIt shouldn’t be âThe pursuit of happinessâ it should be âThe amelioration of miseryâ. Being free to pursue happiness when there isn’t enough…left to go around doesn’t do âWe the peopleâ any good.â
So, itâs time to forget about Santos, Kissinger and Hamas for a few minutes. Tune in to your Saturday Soother, where we try to get distance from the news for long enough to be able to handle whateverâs coming next.
Here on the Fields of Wrong, weâve completed our fall clean-up and now itâs on to putting up the deer fencing that protects the bushes around the Mansion. The tree is up and illuminated, and the first members of our family are coming to see it today.
While itâs a beautiful day in the northeast, it makes sense for you to stay indoors for now. Start by brewing up a mug of âThe Antidoteâ coffee ($19.50/12oz.) from Apocalypse Coffee in Melbourne, FL. Now grab a comfy chair by a south facing window and watch and listen to Schubertâs âSerenadeâ. Written two years before his death, itâs a perfect example of the melancholic music Schubert was so well known for:
Â
The Daily Escape:
Cholla Cactus at sunrise, Joshua Tree NP – November 2023 photo by Michelle Strong
Yesterdayâs column described how confusing current polling data is with less than a year to go before the 2024 presidential election. We can easily overdose on polls, but in general, they seem to be pointing toward a very difficult re-election for Biden.
At the risk of contributing to the OD, hereâs another example of terrible poll for Biden. It comes from Democratic stalwarts Democracy Corps, run by James Carville and Stanley Greenberg:
âPresident Biden trails Donald Trump by 5 points in the battleground states and loses at least another point when we include the independent candidates who get 17% of the vote. Biden is trying to win these states where three quarters believe the country is on the wrong track and 48% say, âI will never vote for Biden.â
What to make of all this? Wrongo thinks itâs time to take a different approach to the Democratâs messaging. Letâs start with a quick look at the NYTâs David Leonhardtâs new book, âOurs Was the Shining Futureâ. Leonhardtâs most striking contention is based on a study of census and income tax data by the Harvard economist Raj Chetty: Where once the great majority of Americans could hope to earn more than their parents, now only half are likely to. From The Atlantic:
âOf Americans born in 1940, 92% went on to earn more than their parents; among those born in 1980, just 50% did. Over the course of a few decades, the chances of achieving the American dream went from a near-guarantee to a coin flip.â
As we said yesterday, the American Dream is fading. Leonhardt says that the Democrats have largely abandoned fighting for basic economic improvements for the working class. Some of the defining progressive triumphs of the 20th century, from labor victories by unions and Social Security under FDR to the Great Society programs of LBJ, were milestones in securing a voting majority. More from The Atlantic:
âRonald Reagan took office promising to restore growth by paring back government, slashing taxes on the rich and corporations…gutting business regulations and antitrust enforcement. The idea…was that a rising tide would lift all boats. Instead, inequality soared while living standards stagnated and life expectancy fell behind…peer countries.â
Today, a child born in Norway or the UK has a far better chance of out-earning their parents than one born in the US. More context from The Atlantic: (emphasis by Wrongo)
âFrom the 1930s until the late â60s, Democrats dominated national politics. They used their power to pass…progressive legislation that transformed the American economy. But their coalition, which included southern Dixiecrats as well as northern liberals, fractured after…Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Richard Nixonâs âsouthern strategyâ exploited that rift and changed the electoral map. Since then, no Democratic presidential candidate has won a majority of the white vote.â
The Atlantic makes another great point: (emphasis by Wrongo)
âThe civil-rights revolution also changed white Americansâ economic attitudes. In 1956, 65% of white people said they believed the government ought to guarantee a job to anyone who wanted one and to provide a minimum standard of living. By 1964, that number had sunk to 35%.â
Americaâs mid-century economy could have created growth and equality, but racial suppression and racial progress led to where we remain today.
Leonhardt argues that what Thomas Piketty called the âBrahmin leftâ must stop demonizing working-class people who do not share its views on cultural issues such as abortion, immigration, affirmative action and patriotism. From Leonhardt:
âA less self-righteous and more tolerant left could build what successfully increased access to the American Dream in the past: a broad grass-roots movement focused on core economic issues such as strengthening unions, improving wages and working conditions, raising corporate taxes, and decreasing corporate concentration.â
Can the Dems adapt both their priorities and messaging to meet people where they are today?
The priorities must change first. What would it take to establish the right priorities for the future? Stripping away the wedge issues that confuse and divide us, Americaâs priorities should be Health, Education, Retirement and Environment (âHEREâ). Itâs an acronym that sells itself: âVote Hereâ.
(hat tip to friend of the blog, Rene S. for the HERE concept.)
Wrongo hears from young family members and others that all of the HERE elements are causing very real concerns. Affordable health care coverage still falls short. Regarding education, college costs barely seem to be worth shouldering the huge debt burdens that come with it.
Most young people think that they have no real way to save for retirement early in their careers when thereâs the most bang for the buck. They also feel that Social Security wonât be there for them. From the NYT:
âIn a Nationwide Retirement Institute survey, 45% of adults younger than 27 said they didnât believe they would receive any money from the program.â
Today, only about 10% of Americans working in the private sector participate in a defined-benefit pension plan, while roughly 50% contribute to 401(k)-type, defined-contribution plans.
Finally, people today feel that their elders have created an existential environmental threat that will be tossed into their laps. A problem for which there may not be a solution.
As Leonhardt argues, these HERE problems should have always been priorities for Democrats. But for decades, the Party hasnât been willing to pay todayâs political price for a long term gain in voter loyalty. That is, until Biden started working on them in 2020.
But every media outlet continues to harp on inflation and the national debt. Much of what would be helpful in creating a HERE focus as a priority for Democrats depends at least somewhat on government spending. No one can argue that our national debt is high. It is arguable whether it can safely go higher or if it must be reigned in at current levels.
To help you think about that, we collected $4.5 trillion in taxes in 2022, down half a $trillion vs. what we collected in 2021. Estimates are that the Trump tax cuts cost about $350 billion in lost revenue/year.
Looking at tax collections as a percentage of GDP, itâs less than 17% in the US, well below our historical average of 19.5%. There are arguments to keep taxes low, but if you compare the US percentage to other nations, Germany has a ratio of 24%, while the UKâs is 27% and Australiaâs is 30%.
If we raised our tax revenue to 24% of GDP, which is where Germany is now, we would eliminate the US deficit.
Thereâs a great deal of tension in the electorate between perception and reality. And itâs not caused by partisanship: Democrats and independents are also exhibiting a disconnect, too.
Democrats have to return to being the party of FDR and LBJ. They need to adopt the HERE priorities and build programs around them.
The Daily Escape:
Oak Creek, Sedona AZ – November 2023 photo by Jim Lupton
Over single malt and martinis, our Thanksgiving guests talked about what a confusing time weâre living in. Americans are angry and anxious, and the polls continue to show problems for Biden across the board, despite that overall, the economy is fine.
Inflation has slowed significantly. Wages are increasing. Unemployment is near a half-century low. Job satisfaction is up. Yet Americans donât necessarily see it that way From the NYT:
âIn the recent New York Times/Siena College poll of voters in six swing states, eight in 10 said the economy was fair or poor. Just 2% said it was excellent. Majorities of every group of Americans â across gender, race, age, education, geography, income and party â had an unfavorable view.
To make the disconnect even more confusing, people are not acting the way they do when they believe the economy is bad. They are spending, vacationing and job-switching the way they do when they believe itâs good.â
Continuing with the confusion, the new WSJ/NORC survey of the American dreamâthe proposition that anyone who works hard can get ahead regardless of their background, has moved out of reach for many Americans. Only 36% of voters in the survey (conducted between Oct. 19-23 with a margin of error of ± 4%) says that the American dream still holds true: (emphasis by Wrongo)
âThe American dream seemed most remote to young adults and women in the survey…..46% of men but only 28% of women said the ideal of advancement for hard work still holds true, as did 48% of voters aged 65 or older but only about 28% of those under age 50 agreed.â
And people think the dream is growing more remote. When last yearâs WSJ poll asked whether people who work hard were likely to get ahead, 68% said yesânearly twice as many as in this yearâs poll (36%). More from the NYT:
âEconomic difficulties are greater for those without a college degree, who are the majority of Americans. They earn less, receive fewer benefits from employers and have more physically demanding jobs.â
Voters without a college degree are Trumpâs strongest cohort.
Adding to the cloudy forecast, the Economist/YouGov weekly tracking poll of registered voters says most people are happy with their jobs:
But the same Economist/YouGov poll gives a different impression when you ask about the American economy more broadly:
Whatâs going on here? These data suggest something tragic – either the American people have no idea what is happening in the country, or what they do know is deeply wrong.
A final nail in this conundrum. Ed Kilgore in NY Magazine says that the youth vote is swinging against Biden:
âUntil recently, Democratsâ biggest concern about the 2024 youth vote was that millennial and Gen-Z voters …might not turn out in great enough numbers to reelect Joe Biden. Young voters were…the largest and most rapidly growing segment of the Democratic base in the last election. But now public-opinion surveys are beginning to unveil a far more terrifying possibility: Trump could carry the youth vote next year.â
The latest national NBC News poll finds President Joe Biden trailing Trump among young voters ages 18 to 34 â with Trump getting support from 46% of these young voters and Biden getting 42%, while:
âCNNâs recent national poll had Trump ahead of Biden by 1 point among voters ages 18 to 34.
Quinnipiac University had Biden ahead by 9 points in that subgroup.
The national Fox News poll had Biden up 7 points among that age group.â
Hard to know what to believe from those surveys. More from Kilgore:
âAccording to Pewâs validated voters analysis (which is a lot more precise than exit polls), Biden won under-30 voters by a 59% to 35% margin in 2020. Biden actually won the next age cohort, voters 30 to 49 years old, by a 55% to 43% margin.â
So, whatâs wrong? Itâs important to note that yesterdayâs younger voters arenât todayâs. From Nate Silver:
âFully a third of voters in the age 18-29 bracket in the 2020 election (everyone aged 26 or older) will have aged out of it by 2024, as will two-thirds of the age 18-to-29 voters from the 2016 election and all of them from 2012.â
Silver says, So if youâre thinking âdid all those young voters who backed Obama in 2012 really just turn on Biden?â Those voters have aged into the 30-to-41 age bracket.
We need to remember that todayâs young voters share the national unhappiness with the performance of the economy, and many are particularly affected by high cost of living and higher interest rates that make buying a home or a car difficult. Some are angry at Biden for his inability (thanks to the Supreme Court) to cancel student-loan debts. And most notoriously, young voters donât share Bidenâs strong identification with Israel in its ongoing war with Hamas (a new NBC poll shows 70% of 18-to-34-year-old voters disapprove of Bidenâs handling of the war).
And thereâs this tidbit from the NYT:
“Younger people…had concerns specific to their phase of life. In the poll, 93% of them rated the economy unfavorably, more than any other age group.”
What exactly are kids in their 20âs supposed to be feeling at this stage of life? Unless you come from money, your 20âs are a financial struggle. Wrongoâs certainly were, and thatâs decades ago when the economy was great. This isnât to dismiss todayâs very real economic uncertainties. Wrongoâs own grandchildren run the gamut of (relative) struggle financially.
The single most persuasive way to convince young people that Trump isnât the right answer is to show them what heâll do in his own words. Many of them are too young to know much about Trump. Some of todayâs college freshmen were just 14 or 15 when he was in office.
It’s Monday, and it’s time to wake up America! People need to pay attention. Once again, it will come down to effective messaging for the Dems. They must help voters understand who will serve their interests and who will literally crush their interests.
To help you wake up watch and listen to William Devaughnâs âBe Thankful For What Youâve Gotâ. It sold nearly two million copies in 1974. It takes us back to a time when there was more optimism in America. If you lived or worked in NYC in the1970s, the video will also take you back to a difficult period in the cityâs history. In its own way, itâs a great Thanksgiving song:
The Daily Escape:
Eastern Bluebird, Cape Cod, MA – November 2023 photo by Ken Grille Photography
âAlways go to other people’s funerals, otherwise they won’t come to yours.” – Yogi Berra
Biden celebrated his 81st birthday on Monday. Although this isnât breaking news, as if on cue there were plenty of: âIs Biden Too Old?â faux concern expressed by journalists and pundits across the media landscape. As Wrongo has said before, Biden is visibly old. He looks like many older men who have remained physically fit: They seem thinner with voices that become more gravely with time.
From Paul Campos:
âWhen Biden was born in 1942, the…life expectancy for American males at birth was 62.6 years. 81 years later, itâs possible to estimate within an extremely high degree of accuracy how long American men born in 1942 will end up living, on average. The answer is 71.1 years, i.e., 14% longer than their…life expectancy at birth.â
Wow! Biden is old! Campos describes the two alternative definitions of life expectancy. First, period life expectancy, which is âlife expectancy at birth,â a statistical construct. Period life expectancy isnât a prediction: itâs a statement of a statistical fact. That fact is, if age adjusted mortality rates were to remain constant over the course of a cohortâs lifetime, it would indicate the average age at which people in that cohort died.
The second is called cohort life expectancy. This is a look back at how long people actually lived. When Biden was born in 1942, the period life expectancy for American males at birth was 62.6 years. This alternative definition of life expectancy how long people actually live, is called cohort life expectancy. That is 71.4 years in Biden’s case.
The gap between period life expectancy and cohort life expectancy was at one point nearly 20%. It turns out that people born in the US in 1900 lived to be on average 56 rather than the expected 47 years. With the massive improvements in medicine and public health over the last 120 years, the difference between period and cohort life expectancy are diminishing.
Period life expectancy isnât a prediction, and itâs very inaccurate. Nevertheless it is almost always interpreted by the media as a prediction.
If Wrongo had one request for Bidenâs handlers it would be to teach him to add more color, more inflection, to his voice. Everyone knows that he will occasionally trip over a word or two when speaking. That problem is as old as the man himself. From the NYT: (brackets by Wrongo)
âWhile Mr. Biden shuffles when he walks, talks in a low tone that can be hard to hear and sometimes confuses names and details in public…[his staff]…note that he maintains a crushing schedule that would tire a younger president.â
And while it is easy to see that Biden remains in command of situations that would cause younger men to freeze, better projection of his words and ideas would go a long way to blunting the finger-wagging ageists who jump on his every appearance on the world stage.
That said, Wrongo thinks that Americans can hold two competing thoughts at the same time: Biden is older than Trump but is competent and accomplished. While Trump is younger and a menace to America. To Wrongo, it seems that the press is more concerned about Biden having a birthday than about Trump becoming Hitler.
The media who are pushing Bidenâs age choose to ignore Trump’s age. Heâs 77 and will be 78 if elected, and 82 at the end of his term. Heâs not aging well. In his recent campaign appearances, heâs mistaken Biden for Obama 7 times, claimed that Biden will start World War II and said that Jeb Bush started the Iraq War.
These are just the highlights, and there are many more alarming gaffes. Think about what a second Trump term would bring: a dictator-adjacent felon who wants to weaponize the DOJ to take revenge on his former political appointments.
Despite Bidenâs many achievements, during one of the toughest periods in our recent history, the media has planted and nurtured the idea that Biden is unfit to be president. Why? Well, because of nothing beyond how Biden seems in videos. After thousands of articles saying Bidenâs too old, many in America are willing to dump the president that ended Trump’s reign of error.
Letâs get real: Biden has rung up a fine record as president. CLEARLY, his age and experience have given him the ability to make decisions that less experienced politicians probably would not make. Biden has ably handled foreign crises and had the most productive first three years of any president since LBJ.
All the while, his opponent is rapidly decompensating. This from a man who has proven his inability to put the country first in his thinking. The contrast is stunning, and more obvious than the media seems capable of being honest about.
The sad truth is that neither Party is willing to take the risk of nominating a younger candidate who might underperform what Biden and Trump did in the 2020 presidential election.
In the meantime, happy birthday Joe Biden, who statisticians predict will be approximately one year older than he is today on election day 2024!
It probably wonât be long before we see a headline saying, âIf Biden really cared about the environment he wouldnât put so many candles on his birthday cake.â
Since we couldnât have a Saturday Soother, Wrongo wants to complain a bit today. But first, it was a bad week for cartoons. Here are the best:
Itâs clear that many Americans canât hold two thoughts simultaneously:
Biden sees through the turkey:
Complaint #1: Weâre faced with a choice between our aging president and his aging contender for the job. Biden did quite well in his meeting with Chinaâs president Xi. He seemingly met all of the American objectives for the meeting. In the press conference afterwards, he looked in command, walking across a minefield of questions, even with the gotcha question about whether Xi was a dictator, without any missteps.
But the press still talks about how old Biden looks. From Kevin Drum: (brackets by Wrongo)
â…having now listened to a number of Biden’s recent speaking gigs, there’s really no question that this [his age] is solely about his physical appearance. Cognitively, Biden is perfectly normal. The worst he ever does is the occasional verbal flub, a longtime Biden habit. Agree with him or not, he says what he means to say….He thinks Xi Jinping is a dictator and has repeated this [even] through the grimaces of his Secretary of State.â
Contrast that with Trump who doesn’t appear to be as old, but can barely remember who the president is, or how many world wars we’ve had. America will either elect a charade of an active former president with a deteriorating mind, or we can keep an active president with a strong mind but obvious physical limitations.
Which would you rather have?
Complaint #2: Speaker of the House Mike Johnson. Speaking on CNBCâs Squawk Box, he told Americans on Tuesday that our time-honored concept of separation of church and state, a founding principle of the country is a âmisunderstandingâ, that what the founders really wanted was to stop government interfering with religion, not the other way around:
âThe separation of church and state is a misnomer….People misunderstand it. Of course, it comes from a phrase that was in a letter that Jefferson wrote. Itâs not in the Constitution.â
Johnson was referring to Jeffersonâs 1802 letters to the Danbury Baptists Association of Connecticut. In the letters, Jefferson makes clear that the founding fathers subscribed to a powerful separation of church and state, which they enshrined in the establishment clause of the First Amendment (even Johnson knows while the Amendments are technically ânotâ part of the Constitution, they really are).
Itâs no surprise that the same people that believe the Constitution should be strictly interpreted are also trying to force an interpretation of it that allows them to make the bible integral to it. Integration of religion into politics has historically been something that fascists and authoritarians have used to get what they wanted.
Rolling Stone says that Johnson has:
â…a flag hanging outside his office that leads into a universe of right-wing religious extremism…â
More:
âThe flag is white with a simple evergreen tree in the center and the phrase âAn Appeal to Heavenâ at the top….this flag was a Revolutionary War banner, commissioned by George Washington as a naval flag for the colony turned state of Massachusetts.â
The quote âAn Appeal to Heavenâ was taken from John Locke. In the past decade, this flag has come to symbolize a die-hard vision of a hegemonically Christian America. Still more:
â…if you look closely at the…videos and pictures of the Capitol insurrection, Appeal to Heaven flags are everywhere. There are dozens, perhaps hundreds, of them…[in]…the crowd…â
An example from Jan. 6:
Rolling Stone has spent months researching this corner of Christianity known as the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR). They use the same flag hanging outside Johnsonâs office, and itâs a key part of their symbology.
The NAR was formed in the 1990s around an evangelical seminary professor named C. Peter Wagner. This is a nondenominational network that believes they are the vanguard of a Christian revolution. In the mid-2000s, these NAR networks embraced a theological paradigm called the âSeven Mountain Mandate,â a prophecy that divides society into seven arenas â religion, family, government, education, arts and entertainment, media, and business.
The âMandate,â as they understand it, is for Christians to âtake dominionâ and âconquerâ all seven of these sectors and have Christian influence flow down into the rest of society.
Follow along for another minute: One of Wagnerâs key disciples is Dutch Sheets. In 2013, Sheets was given an Appeal to Heaven flag. A friend told him that, because it predated the Stars and Stripes, it was the flag that âhad flown over our nation at its birthing.â Sheets saw the flag as a symbol of the spiritual warfare-driven Christian nationalist revolution he hoped to bring about in American politics.
Sheets endorsed Trumpâs candidacy and over the course of the 2016 campaign, the Appeal to Heaven flag and the NARâs vision of a Christianity-dominated America became entwined with Trump.
Why does Johnson fly this symbol of Christian warfare at the House Speakerâs office when it is clear that the spiritual-warfare appropriation of it connotes an aggressive form of Christian nationalism. The Rolling Stone closes by saying:
âIt is simply untenable to think that Johnson is unaware of what the Appeal to Heaven flag signals today. It represents an aggressive, spiritual-warfare style of Christian nationalism, and Johnson is a legal insurrectionist who has deeply tied himself into networks of Christian extremists whose rhetoric, leadership, and warfare theology fueled a literal insurrection.â
We The People cannot let the Mike Johnsons of the world take over our country.
When theocrats and fascists tell us who they are, believe them.