The Test of False Equivalence

The media's so focused on speculating on the meaning of FBI Director James Comey's letter, that the media has seemingly forgotten the laundry list (including money laundering!) of known violations Donald has committed over his life time.

• 1973 -- Settled Fair Housing Act violation of discrimination against African-Americans.
• 1988 -- $750,000 fine for violating federal antitrust laws meant to prevent quiet takeovers of competitors.
• 1988 -- $15,000 fine to FEC for excess illegal contributions.
• 1991 -- $65,000 fine to NJ gaming officials for not getting approval for financing (chipgate) from his daddy..
• 1991 -- $450,000 fine for circumventing NJ laws blocking gifts to patrons, particularly a rich bigot (see next entry).
• 1991 -- $200,000 fine for pulling black workers from a casino pit, catering to a bigot's hatred of African-Americans.
• 1998 -- $477,000 fine for violation of Treasury's (Fincen) anti-laundering rules.
• 2000 -- $250,000 fine for secretly funding ads against a rival casino.
• 2000 -- $250,000 fine for not reporting lobbying money spent.
• 2015 -- $10,000,000 record fine for violation of Treasury's (Fincen) anti-laundering rules, directed at Taj Mahal property for activities in the 2000s (when Donald maintained majority stake).
• 2016 -- $2500 fine for using his charity to make a political donation (Pam Bondi).

Note that there are multiple criminal complaints against Donald, including corruption involving that donation to Pam Bondi who promptly dropped her investigation into Trump University. There are the investigations into violations of IRS rules against self-enrichment, too. Also, he has at least two ongoing court trials set for later this year involving Trump University and accusations of rape involving an underaged girl. That's all completely separate from the dozen allegations of sexual assault.

I profess that I can't quite understand the false equivalence of Donald's known violations to the innuendo and unproven accusations Hillary faces. By any measure, Donald is demonstrably worse -- and I'm not talking about the lesser or worse of two evils.

But even ignoring the known violations and simply comparing the current list of allegations, how exactly does a pedophile serial sexual assault perp who has cheated on his taxes and cheated people out of their money get high marks against classified info and an improperly secured server?

That is the true test of false equivalence.

5 Thoughts for October 30, 2016

1. The FBI's CYA Moment: If you really want to know why the FBI sent a letter to Congress talking about the possibility (not the confirmation) of new emails related to Hillary's time at State, just realize that this is what people do to cover their asses. Rather than be exposed to blame for not informing Republicans (who'd then tell the entire world), ahead of the election, they FBI covered their ass. To cover their ass-covering, confidential sources within the FBI then leaked information that the emails did not originate from the Clinton server and that it was unlikely to be consequential. The CYAC effort has made things look worse for James Comey because it revealed the CYA-ness of the letter he sent, and why his public announcement at the conclusion of the FBI's investigation was also a CYA moment.
2. Idiocracy: A few weeks ago I read this Daily Beast article about Idiocracy and I knew I had to watch it. That scene in the House of Representin' was perfectly prescient, but there's no way Mike Judge would have known that "Hector Camacho" Trump would arrive by 2016 and America was already this stupid. "Shit! I know shit's bad right now. With all that starvin' bullshit." Idiocracy is pure sarcasm, and there are logical failures all over the place, but if you ignore them, it's a scary but funny movie about the reality we're facing in 2016.
3. In Sam Darnold We Trust: After watching Darnold play several games, it's probable that Ricky Town saw what we now know to be true, that Darnold is going to win USC a championship. His arm and wrist are so strong, his throwing motion 50 yards downfield is the same as a short pass, and both are fast motions -- he doesn't go into some extended wind-up on long passes. He's tall, strong, and makes quick decisions, such that the run-pass options (RPO) are effective against any defense. He's a dream quarterback who can overcome deficiencies elsewhere in the offense. That's not to say that Max Browne isn't a great quarterback, but that he isn't equipped to compensate for failures elsewhere in the offense like Darnold is, considering that the USC offense has shown an exceptional ability to completely suck at times.
4. Russell Wilson's Woes: In exactly the opposite situation of Sam Darnold and USC's offense, Russell Wilson's knee and ankle injuries prevent him from compensating for their offensive line's shortcomings. They can't do rollouts or run options, and with a mishmash offensive line, Wilson's taking a lot of sacks. The pundits constantly praise Tom Cable's abilities to raise the play of the offensive line, but if Seattle hadn't drafted Wilson, the offense would be much worse.
5. All-White Jury: That was the first thing that came to mind when I read that Ammon Bundy and the other Malheur occupiers were found not guilty. But wait, this isn't some racist thing, right? Oh, but it is. This year's political climate has pushed the idea that White Americans have been cheated out of the American Pie. The Bundy takeover of Malheur fed right into that narrative. Sure enough, it was an all-White jury that exonerated Bundy and the others, in what can only be understood as jury nullification. I've read what juror #4 has said, and I am in total disbelief that he basically got away with uttering a bunch of incoherent, illogical statements that are provably wrong. In one of the most damning instances, juror #4 stated that he was waiting for the prosecution to present an agreement to prove conspiracy, but the instructions itself noted that a formalized agreement was not necessary to prove conspiracy. The two most plausible explanations for this are, (1) they're all idiots or, (2) as an all-White jury they applied existing bias to find cause to nullify the proper outcome.

50 Words or Less: FBI+Clinton+More Emails

FBI discovered related emails, apparently from Anthony Weiner's "devices" -- a double entendre. A review for possible classified info implies Huma Abedin may have shared State info with husband. As with Hillary, no jeopardy for Abedin: intent not established under 18 USC §793, §1924.

Hillary not involved.

Cue: *Outrage!*

Me: Eyeroll.

5 Thoughts for October 26, 2016

1. Aimless Google: Google has lost its way. Two years ago, it felt like the company was on the cusp of greatness, pushing the boundaries of everything with fearlessness and, most importantly, deep pockets. Today, it's still a growing company with deeper pockets but it has sold off its robotics, fiber has stalled, Nexus is dead, Glasses is gone, Project Ara is a fading memory, no one knows what Nest is doing anymore, their photo service has just gone through its nth iteration, and in my view they completely screwed up on their Google Wallet - Android Pay transition / redo. The only true bright spot is ChromeOS and its newly-gained Android app compatibility. There was no excitement from Google IO, and their recent device announcement left me confused about Google's goals -- was it to build an ecosystem or to move up the profit margin ladder into Apple territory?
2. Lexus UX: WTF? I think the folks at Toyota are confused. The C-HR that was meant to be a Scion, and its funky design thusly originated from its Scion-ness -- which is why it's so cool and awesome. Used as the underpinning of a compact crossover concept for the Lexus brand, it was bound to be their most daring concept, but WTF is the UX? Lexus is the luxury brand, not the ugly brand. UX is butt ugly; it's not even fugly, it's bugly. I was so horrified by it, I didn't bother passing it along to my friend who would have gone for an upscale version of the C-HR.
3. False Equivalence: You see it don't you? Everytime Hillary plows ahead in the polls and the race looks like a foregone conclusion, there are members in the press who push complete nonsense in order to create a false equivalence between Donald and Hillary. "Questions were raised" has become the bullshit meter of this election cycle.
4. Vox's Vote Compass: Vox has this adorable test that allows you to view how your opinion on a variety of topics places you on the matrix of progressive and conservative spectrum within economic and social issues. It's far too simplistic to be a proper judge of one's place in the matrix, but it's entertaining nonetheless. I placed in-between Jill Stein and Hillary, but slightly closer to Hillary.
5. The Death of The Walking Dead: The show is dead. I've already complained about season 6, and I haven't watched the season 7 opener (and I might never watch it) but the show's theory of mankind's turn towards sadism is preposterous. You might as well call it for what it is: The Walking Dead Gone Mad Max. Anyone who has watched the show long enough could tell you that the only true survivalists are Daryl, Glenn, and Michonne. Everyone else is too fucked up in the head, so much so that the show now centers on the question: Who's more fucked up in the head: the protagonists or the antagonists? So you think Negan's the most fucked up in the head? I guarantee you that Rick will challenge Negan for the title of most fucked up in the head.

50 Words or Less: Morocco + Clinton

In 2015, Morocco's king donated lots of money to the Clinton Foundation in exchange for an appearance at the Clinton Global Initiative with the king (which did not happen). She was not at State, therefore "pay to play" is a lie.

It was completely legal.

End of story.

#DrainTheTrump

VOTE!

Oregon Ballot -- How I Voted on Measures

This covers the range of measures I voted on, from state, county, city and metro. (Note to ballot measure people: When there are fifteen ballot measures in total, only a sadist reads through all of the material covering the arguments for and against -- I'm no sadist.)

State Measure 94, Repeal of state judge age limit: Yes
We don't have age limits at the Supreme Court -- reason enough to eliminate the limit. But as with most states, elected judge positions are not competitive races, meaning, there's just one name listed at any given position. 75 is an arbitrary age limit, anyway.

State Measure 95, Universities allowed to invest in equities: Yes
If you constrain what universities can invest in, you've essentially cut off its ability to offset risk. The more practical understanding of this is to watch how bonds go up as stocks go down and bonds decrease as stocks increase, then imagine how things would be if you were only allowed to put your money in bonds or hold your cash under the mattress.

State Measure 96, Dedicates 1.5% of state lottery funds to veterans: No
It's not that I have anything against veterans. I'm tired of these types of ballot measures meant to constrict how lottery funds can be spent. Limiting the flexibility of the state to allocate income always worsens a recession's effects.

State Measure 97, Increase of minimum corporate tax for companies earning $25M+: Yes
It won't have the impact many think it will -- go examine Donald's companies to understand how he avoids paying corporate taxes -- but at the same time it's undeniable that Oregon has the lowest corporate tax rate, in effect creating pressure for higher property taxes. The question is, do costs trickle down? They do when there's no competition, so maybe the real problem is a lack of competition.

State Measure 98, Requiring funding for dropout prevention: No
Much like appropriating state lottery funds, this measure effectively requires the state to allocate general funds to specific programs. I support the funding of these types of programs, but the Legislature should have the responsibility and flexibility of funding programs, and political parties and members ought to have to defend their actions rather than use these types of laws to alleviate their duties.

State Measure 99, Outdoor school education fund created with state lottery money: No
I think you can see where I'm going, this year: If the Legislature can't or won't fund it, voters should insist that they do so by writing to their senators and representatives. These programs shouldn't be hard-wired into the state's funds.

State Measure 100, Blocks the sale of exotic wildlife products: Yes
If the feds get to fine people who buy and sell elephant ivory, the state should also have the ability to fine people, too. By piling on, it creates greater jeopardy for people who traffic in such goods. Cutting off rhino horns and leaving them to die is pure evil.

Multnomah County Measure 26-181, Extend maximum term limits of county officials: Yes
In general, I'm against term limits. For one, they're arbitrary, but secondly, they're generally unnecessary as people have the ability to vote someone out through a recall. These term limits are especially meaningless when the offices they cover are nonpartisan.

Multnomah County Measure 26-182, Allow commissioners to run for chair w/o resigning: Yes
This one is mostly about whose convenience matters most, the people or the individual. Normally I'd side with the people, but convenience is not a valid reason to kick someone out.

Multnomah County Measure 26-183, Sheriff's position change from elected to appointed: No.
I like elections. Giving the county chair the power to appoint and fire the sheriff at his/her pleasure seems counter-intuitive to good government.

Multnomah County Measure 26-184, Limits contributions and requires disclosures of higher value donations: Yes
Call it the backlash of the Citizens United ruling. People should have the broader right to transparency, particularly in election money. The broader effect is to limit the politics behind these nonpartisan races.

Multnomah County Measure 26-185, Changes appointment process for the Office of Citizen Involvement: No
Talk about busy work. It creates new rules and changes dates to the appointment process while eliminating rules that fill out vacancies. Someone thought this made for a better process, but all I see is a waste of time.

City of Portland Measure 26-179, Bonds to affordable housing: Yes
This is my preferred method of tackling a lack of affordable housing. Why? Because it directly increases the housing stock as soon as it can be built, and years down the line when they're not needed, they can be converted to market-rate units or condos.

City of Portland Measure 26-180, Local tax on recreational marijuana: Yes
Call it a sin tax or just getting your hands in the -- ahem -- pot, it's all good. There is no valid reason why you wouldn't want to tax marijuana, anyway.

Metro Measure 26-178, Renew tax to provide Metro money to protect environment: No
Shocking right? Not really. Metro is a waste of money. The cities of Portland, Gresham, etc., could do just as good of a job as Metro, but without the added administrative costs. But the most annoying part of Metro is that it has hundreds of acres of mowed lawn that it considers too sensitive for dogs. Meticulously kept lawns, zero dogs, under the guise of sensitive areas. One of the things I'd do if I won the lottery, would be to personally drive an effort to shut down Metro, stop charging people to pay for access to those green lawns and allow dogs to accompany their families on picnics on those green lawns. Who's with me?

Oregon Ballot -- How I Voted on Candidates

This doesn't include every race, just the prominent and interesting ones.

US President: Hillary Clinton / Tim Kaine
It's self-explanatory. Even if Donald were a change agent, we have no way of knowing what changes he'd bring. As an autocratic demagogue whose own words are contradictory and whose ill-tempered, egocentric personality gets in the way, he's the worst choice out there. You could pick Gary, Jill, or write in Evan, and you'd still be picking a better human. I'm picking the person whose values come closest to my own. I believe capitalism works, but markets require oversight. Gary and Evan would remove oversight, Jill would constrain markets, and Donald would do something but no one is sure what he'd do. Hillary's porridge is just right, by pushing trade agreements but with oversight.

US Senator: Ron Wyden
Without a doubt, he's one of the best senators in the Senate. He's a major champion of privacy rights and works with Greg Walden to support Oregonians. He's much more bipartisan than you might expect for a senator from a strongly blue state. I think most people take him for granted, and I wish they didn't.

Oregon Governor: Kate Brown
She's not a front and center leader who grabs the spotlight. She's done some good work, but also had some missteps. The alternative is Bud Pierce, a run of the mill Republican pushing the same sort of policies (cutting taxes) that has created chaos in Kansas. Plus, he's creepy when he talks. She's the best choice by far.

Secretary of State: Brad Avakian
This was a close one. Brad's had some problems in the past, and I was ready to pick Dennis Richardson. But Dennis Richardson is too cowardly to denounce Donald's actions and not a single Republican has brought up the multi-million dollar fines Donald has had to pay because of all the laws he's broken. In essence, Republicans are saying it's okay if a Republican does what a Democrat does. If that's the case, the difference between the two candidates is simply political, and I find his politics disagreeable.

Portland Commissioner #4: Steve Novick
This was another difficult choice. I really disliked his early actions in office, and there's still some squirrely stuff surrounding Uber that hasn't been fully resolved. Nonetheless, Chloe Eudaly's position on affordable housing -- support for rent control -- freaks me out. I strongly support paying more taxes to support affordable housing, but rent control will essentially cap housing prices, and in turn affect new housing starts in the city. Also, I think Novick will likely act differently when certain individuals are no longer on the council.

Donald's September Fundraising Was a Disaster

If you recall, Donald's campaign told us that they raised $18M in pledges in the two days after the first debate in late September. Well, those pledges didn't result in cash contributions.

According to his campaign's e-filing, they only received $17.4M in contributions, excluding $2M Donald gave to his own campaign and $33.6M transferred from other sources (joint committee / RNC).

Pay attention, because this is really important. Donald's campaign ended September with just $34.8M cash on hand.

  $34.8M cash
- $33.6M transferred
= $1.2M cash if RNC / victory committee hadn't transferred money into campaign.

Donald's campaign is practically broke, people.

That's not just bad, that's a total disaster. You-know-what has hit the fan, folks. Donald is going to have to self-fund the rest of the way because people have given up on donating money to his campaign.

3rd Debate: Danger Ahead

Wednesday night ended up being the return of the primary theme of this year's election: Hillary cares, Donald scares. We saw this dichotomy during the respective conventions, and we saw it play out in this final debate.

But last night, there was a major twist in the debate, and then today he doubled down on it: He'll only accept the results of the election if he wins.

Last night, when asked whether he would accept the results of the election, he stated, "What I'm saying is that I will tell you at the time. I'll keep you in suspense. OK?"

Today, he clarified, "I will totally accept the results of this great and historic presidential election -- if I win."

Forget everything else that happened last night, Donald preemptively declared himself the next President, no matter what. That's dangerous rhetoric, and he's the most dangerous candidate in the history of the US.

His candidacy was always humorous in itself, but now he's fully walked past the red line and become a very dangerous man. He just openly posed an existential threat to the Democratic Republic, and we need to take this threat seriously.

Another Bad Friday for Donald.

I think this is going to blow up the news cycle this weekend.

Last Friday we had the 2005 video / audio of Donald making disgusting boasts about sexual assaults. That was horrible enough, but Donald said it was, "just words". Since then, there have been numerous women coming forward, but today was probably the one that will shake the news world.

Today we had Summer Zervos, a 2005 The Apprentice contestant, giving a tearful recount of Donald's unwanted advances in 2007. Watching her tearing up and having to stop is difficult, but also makes you angry. If it matters, Ms. Zervos said that she's a Republican.

Another screw in his coffin.

October 14, 2016 - Donald's Countdown

3 days without a lawsuit filed, since threatening the NYT with one.
6 days before the FEC releases his monthly fundraising report (since Donald refuses to release it ahead of time).
80 days since last press conference.
25 days until Donald is defeated (the Final Countdown)

10 Thoughts on Donald for October 13, 2016

Truly, Donald has opened the floodgates to Hell, that not a single day goes by without at least a handful of events blowing up in his face.

1. NYT Lawsuit: Donald threatened the NYT with a libel lawsuit. That's all it is, a threat. He can't go there because going there would give the NYT the room to get testimony from people involved with The Apprentice and use it to serve as the underpinning for a subpoena for their videos. Those videos establish a pattern of Donald's state of mind through the years, through his own words and actions. If he files that lawsuit, his brand is dead. The NYT is taunting him. His fans are clueless about what will happen if he sues the NYT. 
2. Falwell Backlash: Jerry Falwell Jr.'s getting some heavy backlash from students at his Liberty University, and for good reason. Among the many things he's done is to elevate himself to the position of God Almighty, telling everyone that he knows who is and isn't redeemable. That's blasphemy and dangerous theology. But also, he's casually accepted Donald's faults as a sexual predator, leaving many people incredulous.
3. Utah Mormons: Utah, overwhelmingly Mormon, is an extremely conservative state. On the surface, it seems surprising that Hillary is locked in a tight race here, but it's not because she's popular. Utah is splitting its overwhelming majority of conservative votes three ways between Donald, Evan McMullin, and Gary Johnson. McMullin, a Mormon himself, could pull more votes than Donald, and doing so would deliver Utah to Hillary. Every revelation of Donald's improprieties brings this possibility to reality.
4. Creepy Donald: Despite the recent video and outpouring of women alleging sexual assault, the two stories that carry the most weight right now are the rape allegations of a 13-year old girl, and the audio of Donald talking to a little girl about how he'll end up dating her in 10 years. Overlay the words contained in Jane Doe's lawsuit with this audio and you have something that will creep out everyone far more than anything else, because no one will vote for a pedophile.
5. Unshackled: It wasn't a question of "if" but "when" Donald would unshackle his inner demons. The only people who want Donald shackled are Establishment Republicans. Everyone else wants to see the unhinged Donald. His supporters need the red meat he offers; Democrats use his own words against him.
6. Wikileaks: Julian Assange and Wikileaks are now actively interfering in US elections, helping elect Donald. As the heat on Donald has been turned up, Wikileaks has responded with additional dumps. Last Tuesday they promised weekly dumps; instead, we've gotten dumps every other day, all because of the sudden turn of events last Friday. The press has caught on, choosing to either ignore them or carefully examine and confirm the contents before reporting on them...well, except Breitbart of course. You can only cry wolf so many times before people stop ignoring you, right?
7. YOTW: Yes people, it is, truly, finally, the  Year of the Woman. The only proof you need is to see the audience of Hillary's rallies and the voices we're hearing. Therefore, you could not possibly imagine a greater contrast to powerful women than Donald the Groper. Donald is the perfect literary foil -- the antagonist -- for the YOTW, where a strong woman conquers the weak, little man.
8. Zero Endorsements: Not a single daily newspaper in the entire nation has endorsed Donald for President -- I'm not making this up. There is one weekly -- the Las Vegas Tribune -- who offered up an endorsement, but the paper is a moribund publication run out of a house that was converted to an office space, whose FB page hasn't been updated in a year. By contrast, in 2012 Romney had dozens of endorsements from daily newspapers.
9. Zero RNC TV Ad Spending: How much has the RNC spent on TV ads for Donald? Zero. You read that right, zilch. Perhaps, even the RNC realizes that Donald is an outlier? The folly here is that Donald seemingly refuses to spend copious amounts of money on his own campaign, despite previously claiming that he would self-fund it.
10. Bill is Donald's Krypton: Attacking Bill increases sympathy for Hillary -- so says years of evidence from Republican strategists -- which is why Democrats aren't trying to stop Donald from engaging his delusions. You know who is trying to stop Donald? Republicans. Humorously, Donald believes there is hypocrisy in how people treat him compared to Bill, apparently having forgotten what Bill went through in the late-90s including that impeachment trial.

5 Thoughts for October 10, 2016

1. Billy Bush: In defense of Billy Bush, there are very few people who could stand up to a bully. In grade school, who stood up to the bully -- did you? I did, and believe me, it's not easy. All those other kids who appeared to be standing behind the bully, it turned out, were just scared of him. They told me so, afterward. It's a lot easier to laugh and join a bully in his put downs, than it is to stand up to one. Billy Bush was a coward, but then, so are the vast majority of people. It was inevitable that he would be suspended, and it's easy to criticize him, yet he's not alone. Look around you and you'll see that most people simply don't have it within themselves to stand up to a bully. You say you can, but have you ever?
2. Alphas and Stalking: I am mystified that some folks have conflated predation with pack hierarchy when talking about the second presidential debate. Donald's actions weren't that of an alpha. Go over the video and count the number of times Donald entered Hillary's sphere of territory -- a circle around her chair -- and compare that to the number of times Hillary expressly violated Donald's. Leaning on a chair from behind is not what an alpha does, ever. Donald was not the alpha in the second debate; he may have been stalking from the shadows, but he was not the alpha.
3. USC Trojans Football: I had higher hope after USC's win against ASU than after this past weekend's game against Colorado. Yes, the offense and defense keep getting better, but the four turnovers are a glaring and ominous sign of poor mental focus. Colorado is better than last year, but they're not anywhere close to the level of talent at USC. That USC could drive the ball at will in the first half was a sign of the talent gap, and ultimately the difference between a 4-turnover team that pulled out a win and one that probably wouldn't be able to. That USC stalled in the second half points to a couple of serious issues with the team, and one that will eventually catch up to them if they fail to correct these problems. On the bright side, Sam Darnold's been impressive with the short throwing motion and quick decisions; he looks like a Cam Newton but without the nasty ego.
4. Donald's Chemistry + FOSS Lesson: In last night's debate Donald was gracious enough to provide us with both a lesson in chemistry and free, open-source software (FOSS). When ostensibly talking about Bleachbit, he never called it by name, but instead, twice referred to it as 'acid-wash'. He then explained that others may call it 'bleaching'. Therefore, we were informed that chlorine bleach (sodium hypochlorite), with a pH of 11, was an acid. While talking about Bleachbit, he also informed us that it was expensive, even though Bleachbit is a free, open-source software. And you wonder why Americans are stupid?
5. Concussion Hits: The NFL really isn't stepping up its enforcement of concussions. Take for instance NY Jets' Brian Winters' late hit on Seattle's Michael Bennett. Winters launched his head into Bennett, long after the whistle had blown. He got fined the NFL's minimum, $24,309. The irony, of course, is that he ended up with a concussion rather than delivering one, making Winters look like a fool. Or look at Cam Newton. There were multiple hits to his head, but there was just one fine attributed to one hit to his head, and again, the fine was the minimum, $24,309. They didn't penalize Carolina for failing to put Newton into the concussion protocol. The NFL isn't serious about concussions. There are NFL teams concerned about concussions -- Seattle specifically switched to tackling rugby style to avoid concussions -- but the NFL's protocols are nothing but a distraction.

Hillary Won the Second Debate

Donald won with his base but Hillary won with everyone else including undecided voters.  If you've paid any attention to my past blog posts, you know what this means: He connected with just ~34% of Americans.

What you didn't see on your TV was the end of the debate. Within 5 minutes of the end of the debate, Donald's team had left while Hillary's team spoke to members of Gallup's undecided voters, took photos and shook hands. Within 20 minutes, his entourage had left the facilities while hers remained for another 20 past his.

Need more proof? Go rewatch the debate.

When a member of the crowd asked a question, she got up and walked to that person, crossing in front of Donald, and spoke directly to that person. It was so effective, they couldn't do a split screen because she was blocking him. In the main screen, he was hidden in the background. While she engaged voters, he voluntarily walked behind his chair towards the rear of the stage and paced around, sometimes with his head faced down.

When it came time for Donald to answer a question, he stood near his chair, as if he were worried about violating a line on the ground. This was a town hall and he never bothered to engage the audience.

The signal was that she was the alpha leader and he was the omega.

And when you listened to how each candidate answered, he was on the defensive, spending nearly the entire debate with a scowl on his face, while she was confident and smiled when she needed to. He further fed this idea of being the defensive omega while she was the confident alpha.

Sure, he got all of his talking points in there, but he did that to hold onto his base and nothing more. She, on the other hand, projected leadership and deliberately avoided stooping to his level. And while there are people who think that she should have gone for the kill, that wasn't her goal; her goal was to keep Donald in the race so that she could beat him handily and flip the Senate and House.

What Do Republicans Do Now?

Let's face it, Donald is in deep trouble. The Republican Party is in deep trouble. What Donald said about women was so disgusting that the trajectory of the race has fundamentally changed.

So what do Republicans and Donald do now?

Kicking Donald Off the Ballot

There is widespread rumbling that Donald should quit. It's not so easy as simply calling it quits. The GOP have rules allowing for a replacement in cases of death or declination, but to go there they'd need Donald to either die or willingly quit, then meet to pick a replacement, then go to court in all 50 states to press their case to stop early voting and change the names on ballots.

They'd still lose the race but at least they would have saved face. Nonetheless, that's too much work in too little time. Did I mention that he'd have to voluntarily quit? Oh, and this would only exacerbate the GOP civil war as Ted Cruz, John Kasich and Marco Rubio would all press the GOP elite to put their name on the ballot. Least likely option.

Apologize Uncategorically and Unconditionally

So far, we've had two apologies and, unsurprisingly, both were categorical and conditional, served up with a heaping of informal fallacies.

The right way to apologize is to strictly admit, roughly, "I have a character flaw and as a result, I have hurt a lot of people. I am sorry. Now that I have no choice but to face my flaw, I must fix it. It is strictly my fault and mine, alone, but I need help in fixing my flaw." If he had an authentic life-changing moment, there wouldn't be a single Evangelical / born-again Christian who couldn't relate. Even some Catholics could accept and forgive an honest reflection of conscience and admission of guilty.

The only problem is, he needs to break through his ego in order to make this proper apology, and that ain't happening anytime soon. I look at Mitt Romney and I see a man who understood what it meant to be a moral person. I look at John McCain and see the same thing. I look at Donald and there's no way. The second problem is, this only preserves his current support at best, as opposed to building enough support to win. It also has negative consequences down ballot as each candidate will be Willie Horton'd and Donald will become persona non grata with the rest of the GOP. Second most likely option.

Doubling Down / Taking Their Lumps

I call this the Wikileaks plan. Within an hour of the video's release, Wikileaks rushed out their own release of John Podesta's stolen emails, then going on a tweetstorm for the next 7 hours attempting to paint Hillary in a bad light. Similarly, Breitbart has chosen to focus on Hillary's and Bill's role (there is none) in Donald's actions.

This stuff works well for his most committed supporters, but that base of support always had a floor of roughly 34% of the entire population. Doubling down means that he'll not just lose the election, but lose it in spectacular fashion. 

The GOP will take their lumps by cutting ties with Donald, and though there will be increased GOP infighting with lots of political theater, the alternative is a massive wave election resulting in super majorities in both chambers. I think this, or some sort of version of this, is the most likely scenario as it involves the fewest variables. Most likely option.

The Provisionary Candidate

This past week, the press has heaped praise if not pity on Mike Pence for the job he did at the VP debate. In contrast to Donald, Pence's beliefs are strictly in-line with Republican conservatism. The GOP could force Donald into a written contract guaranteeing that Donald would quit within an hour of being inaugurated into office, were he to win.

That would achieve two things: Placing a true conservative, Pence, in the White House and sending Donald off with the only thing he ever cared about, which is seeing his name in US history books as the 45th POTUS.

On the surface, there is nothing illegal about this tactic even if it flies in the face of the US Constitution's intent. Yet, it is complicated and requires careful consideration and execution. In other words, the GOP probably couldn't pull it off, they know it, and will discard the idea immediately. Third most likely option.

Why Bother?

Did I mention that I love politics?

If I was able to strategize it, people from both sides of the aisle were able to come up with the same ideas. It's just a thought exercise that allows me to have fun and compare the outcome over the next few days with what I've written. Right now, both sides are pulling all-nighters coming up with their options, as they must have a plan in place ahead of Sunday night's town hall debate.

NSFW: Donald.

Wow.

This is so bad and so widely covered, I don't even need to provide a link to the story and video -- everyone has already heard about it. Donald is simply and plainly, Not Safe For Work.

So rather than post the video or a link to his vulgar and disgusting comments, I offer some uplifting videos of Hillary as a reminder that the campaigns and their supporters could not be any further opposite of each other.

And the classic video from the Democratic Convention.

Understanding the USC - LAT Poll Tracker

I laugh every time I see or hear someone (Donald included) point to the USC - LAT poll tracker, as proof of Donald's competitiveness. There are only two pollsters whose tracking polls appear to show high volatility, despite the fact that there is very low volatility in this year's election -- that should be a clue that the problem lies in house bias.

The two important components of the USC - LAT poll tracker are the voter preference and the voter expectation numbers. When you look at them, one -- the voter preference -- appears to be volatile while the other -- voter expectation -- appears to be fairly stable.

USC - LAT voter preference tracking

USC - LAT voter expectation tracking

Looks can be deceiving. The reason why the voter preference looks volatile is because it appears that the two are changing leads. So what happens when you vertically adjust (align) voter preference and voter expectation for each candidate?

Realignment of USC - LAT trackers for Hillary

Realignment of USC - LAT trackers for Donald

In the two charts above, the left side is tied to voter preference while the right side is tied to voter expectation. In essence, the right side shows how much I moved the line up or down; that's the house bias effect.

The voter preference line generally matches the voter expectation, right? When the expectation line tracks lower than the voter preference it roughly means that there is lower enthusiasm, whereas when it is tracking higher it conversely means that there is higher enthusiasm.

Rather than spend even more time attempting to recalculate the numbers based on their separate enthusiasm (intention to vote) tracking number, this simple graphical alignment highlights that the USC - LAT tracking poll has a house bias of 10 points total (5 points upward for Hillary and 5 points downward for Donald). To get to this crude extrapolation, you subtract the difference between the right side and the left side for each chart.

So, when you add 5 points to Hillary's number (43.6 + 5 = 48.6%) and subtract 5 from Donald's (46.2 - 5 = 41.2%), for a total delta of 10 points, you come up with something that actually matches the aggregate of national polls in Pollster's 2-person race, Hillary = 48.1% / Donald = 41.7%.

It's an extremely crude method of removing the house bias, but this is what it looks like when you superimpose Pollster's tracker over the adjusted chart.

Superimposed USC - LAT adjusted poll tracker over Pollster aggregate

Feel free to ignore it if you want, but the USC - LAT tracking poll, once adjusted (crudely) for house bias, looks like it's just a reflection of the poll aggregation.

Without running the numbers to check for correlation, you can visually see that the uniformly adjusted values of the USC - LAT tracking polls match extremely well to poll aggregation.

And that's why I laugh when someone talks smack about how Donald is winning in some of the polls.

You Have a Vested Interest in the Election

Via Macroeconomic Advisers:

"Relative to the Sept. 30 market close, the results suggests that if, Clinton wins (that is, the probability of a Trump win falls from 36 percent to 0 percent), all else equal the equity risk premium will decline from 3.55 percent to 3.45 percent and the market will rally by about 4 percent. If, on the other hand, Trump wins (that is, the probability of Trump winning rises from 36 percent to 100 percent), the equity risk premium will rise from 3.55 percent to 3.73 percent as the market sells off about 7 percent."

Pared down, it says that were Hillary to win, stocks would rally 4%, but were Donald to win, markets would sink 7%. If you have a 401K or some sort of stock-fund pension, you've got a vested interest in the outcome of the presidential election.

Choose wisely, America.

---

ADD: I posted too soon. WaPo has an editorial commenting that Donald could single-handedly sink the global economy while Greg Ip at WSJ asked Macroeconomic Advisers to do some modeling based on Donald's proposed tax cuts and the results are a $1T increase in the annual trade deficit by 2026, currently at around $400B.

It's hard to say what happens in the future when there are dozens of variables, but most importantly we're still at the zero lower bound of the Fed rate. There is scant evidence that a tax cut, particularly at the upper marginal rate, would have any discernible effect on the economy. Even at the lower tiers, a tax cut is not very effective at stimulating growth. Which is to say, at the ZLB supply-side economics is spectacularly ineffectual macroeconomic policy.

In other words, long before Donald could increase the trade deficit, he'd probably cause the US economy to stall, and with his terrible economic dogma, he'd likely sink the US economy into a deep recession.

So I reiterate, choose wisely, America.

Mike Pence's Debate

There wasn't a single answer he couldn't deflect during the debate. Politicians frequently deflect, but Pence made deflection the cornerstone of his debate. It was so bad, I had to catalog the debate to show how the two candidates diverged in answering questions.

Here's an exhaustive list of every question in the debate and how Pence answered:

• On why Americans think Donald is erratic (asked 3x): Hillary created an unstable Middle East and is untrustworthy.
• Whether there is concern that both candidates' plans add to the federal debt: I balanced budgets as governor and we're going to cut taxes to spur growth.
• Regarding the apparent fairness of Donald avoiding having to pay taxes (asked 2x): This economy is struggling and Donald created tens of thousands of jobs.
• What happens when Social Security is no longer being able to pay out 100%: We're going to meet our obligations to our seniors by cutting taxes.
• On how to reduce the burden of cops: We're going to make sure that the police have the resources to maintain law and order, and we need to stop bad-mouthing police.
• On African-American Tim Scott (Republican Senator) getting stopped 7x by police because of bias: We need criminal sentencing reforms and support our police.
• What to do with illegal immigrants who haven't committed crimes: We need to secure our borders and remove criminal aliens.
• How millions of illegal immigrants will leave: We will build a wall below the ground and in the air and have strong enforcement in the country.
• Whether the world is safer or more dangerous today: The world is less safe; I was in DC on 9/11.
• How to stop domestic terrorism by US citizens (asked 2x): It begins with immigration reform, starting with extreme vetting and suspending refugee programs.
• On a cyber security surge: Hillary had a private server.
• On whether the US has a responsibility to protect innocent Syrians: US must show strong leadership with a built-up military, would set up safe zones and bomb Syrian military.
• Where Syrian safe zones would be set up and how to keep these Syrians safe: We need to strengthen US military after waking up the Russian bear.
• What would you do to counter Russian annexation of Crimea: We need to stop what's going on in Syria and stop working with Iran.
• Why Putin will respect Trump: Strength. We're bigger.
• How to stop NK's nuclear program: Rebuild and modernize the military to create "peace through strength".
• Toughest conflict between your religion and public practice: Pro-life policies are difficult to enact when people are pro-choice.
• Upon winning, what would you do to unify the country: We'll change DC and make America great again.

As you can tell, most of them were non sequiturs. At one point, Mike Pence actually slipped when talking about Donald, saying:

"I'm happy to defend him, Senator, don't put words in my mouth and I'm not defending him."

Keeping score? Mike Pence deflected his own deflection on Donald. 

6 Thoughts for October 1, 2016

1. Lead: Is it just me, or are we stupid for continuing to allow the sale of lead sinker weights for fishing? I remember growing up using lead sinkers, and I also remember losing a lot of lines and those lead sinkers. After a cursory search, it appears that only in recent years some states have begun to -- ahem -- tackle this issue. Just think about how long those lead sinkers will be sitting in our waterways, polluting the fish we eat, for a century or more.
2. Bill's Indiscretions: If Donald attacks Hillary on the notion that she was an enabler of Bill's indiscretions, or to fault Hillary for attacking Bill's public accusers, he will lose the issue. Marital infidelity involves two people using their free will; you cannot lay the blame of the choices Bill and his female partners made, at the feet of Hillary. As for her actions in defense of Bill, marriage is hardly the institution it once was (Donald's three marriages, anyone?), but if you go back a few decades, Tammy Wynette once popularly sang, "But if you love him you'll forgive him, even though he's hard to understand ... Stand by your man, and show the world you love him." Today, it is no longer a virtue to endure infidelity.
3. Market Response to Debate: No, I'm not talking about the response of equity markets around the world, shooting up after a Hillary blowout win in the first debate. It's something of a comical insult that free-market Capitalism is fearful of Donald the Republican, but that's not the market response I'm talking about. Instead, I'm highlighting Predict-It's prices in the presidential race. Since July, a Hillary win has reached a low of $0.61 and a high of $0.79, and yesterday reached $0.73. The market is thus saying that its confidence of a Hillary win has been as low as 61% and as high as 79%. Contrary to what some statisticians say through their analysis of public polls, people playing the markets on this specific race have never considered the race to be a toss-up, nor has it been as volatile as the media portrays it.
4. US Supreme Court Vacancy: It is bad enough that the court has had a vacant seat for half a year, but the new term begins Monday and the first case comes up on Tuesday. The following Tuesday will be a blockbuster case, Samsung v. Apple, on whether or not damages from a violation of a design patent should be limited to the attributable value of that particular component covered by the design patent. By the time the US Senate has approved an appointment, SCOTUS will have gone through a full year spanning two terms without 9 justices.
5. USC Football: The real reason why people are upset at the head coach is that at 1 - 3 with two conference losses, fans are forced to lower expectations for the season. Losing one or two games early is one thing, but to lose three is a stab in the heart. The team has vastly improved from that first game, but not to the point where it could compete for a full game against Alabama. The head coach labeled Utah a must-win but they lost nonetheless, so where does that leave us? It leaves us with 8 remaining games, all of which are must-win games. But if you think the anger at a 1 - 3 team is bad, see what happens if the team reaches 7 losses.
6. Deplorable: I've listened to numerous podcasts and read many articles criticizing Hillary's reference to Donald's "basket of deplorables" and it completely annoys me that so many White Liberals Don't Understand. In a White person's world, racism is a negotiable opinion, but to a Black, Asian or Native American (etc.), it's a stab in the heart -- a direct offense against one's existence. YES, BEING A RACIST MAKES YOU A BAD PERSON. If you're White and you're talking to your White colleagues, it is easy to ignore the racism of your White brethren because their racism does not affect you directly; you may take offense at racism but it does not directly impede your way of life. That the Republican Party has moved to normalize racism as a negotiable opinion IS WITHOUT QUESTION, BAD.