Categories
technology

Still trying to get connected

I’m wondering what the hangup is

Categories
meta

Trying again

Gotta see if this will finally show up in the fediverse. Maybe after another try.

Categories
Elevated meta politics technology thoughts

Contributing to the fediverse

This is both new and old for me. I wrote consistently on political policy topics for over 10 years but then life happened and I tapered off nearly 10 years ago. I was writing before social media was a thing – back when decentralized personal publishing was the norm rather than everybody using one or more monolithic mega-platforms to share their thoughts. (Also before short form content dominated all the conversations online.)

In the nearly 10 years since I stopped writing with consistency we have stopped being a nation where I felt that our constitutional order was secure and have become a nation where it is clear that significant populations of voters across the political spectrum (but especially among the flag-waving rightward fringe of the political spectrum) either do not understand our constitutional order or no longer believe it can or should be maintained. That is why I think it is critical for me to again share a perspective that is unabashedly pro free-market and fully committed to defending our constitutional order from all enemies, foreign or domestic.

I’m also intent on contributing in the decentralized social web to help foster that healthier ecosystem that harks back to earlier days before our discourse got toxic enough that rabidly anti-constitutional positions are now treated as fairly normal. (This isn’t unlike efforts to save the Great Salt Lake from spiking salinity levels due to dangerously low water levels – I hope it’s not too little, too late but there’s no way to know in advance.)

Categories
National politics

Pre-Super Tuesday Revisions

Who knew that after posting on Friday I would need to update all three of my recent posts before we arrived at Super Tuesday.

On my candidate ranking my top two candidates have dropped out. Additionally, while I had Michael Bloomberg ahead of Joe Biden I am considering that I might prefer Biden over Bloomberg because while I might come a little closer to Bloomberg’s political leanings, I worry about him having unexpected liabilities since he hasn’t been through the degree of vetting that the other candidates have already.

On my thoughts on who can win: the paths to victory for Buttigieg and Klobuchar are obviously closed. Warren doesn’t have a path after the results of South Carolina. Biden got exactly the kind of South Carolina win that he needed and the only way his path narrows is if he gets trounced tomorrow.

And thanks to the last 24 hours, our youngest presidential candidate is now 70 years old. I’m not thrilled about that.

Categories
National politics thoughts

An Age Problem

I’ve mentioned that I have a problem with the ages of most of the presidential candidates. Today a thought struck me that I think would put that problem in perspective. I realized that Elizabeth Warren – the third youngest legitimate candidate still in the race is only three years younger than Bill Clinton – who was our president 28 years ago. If I were to rank the candidates in age order relative to Bill Clinton it would look roughly like this:

  • Bernie Sanders (5 years older than Clinton)
  • Michael Bloomberg
  • Joe Biden
  • Donald Trump (3 years older than Clinton)
  • Bill Clinton (for reference)
  • Elizabeth Warren (3 years younger than Clinton)
  • Amy Klobuchar (14 years younger than Clinton)
  • Pete Buttigieg (35 years younger than Clinton)

Why is it that we are stuck choosing mainly between candidates who are older than a president we had almost 3 decades ago?

Categories
National politics

Who can win?

For the second time today I need to get something published before an approaching deadline. This time it is my take on the chances that the various Democratic candidates have of getting the nomination. I want to make sure that I publish this before we get more data from voters voting.

If I had written this earlier there would have been a couple more candidates considered – even with my restriction that I am only covering candidates who have any potential path to the nomination. Many but not all of those who have already dropped out never had any path. Even today there is Tom Steyer who has not dropped out but who, despite his wealth, has no path to the nomination.

For the sake of fairness I will cover the candidates in alphabetical order by last name. I will offer my take on what they would need to win the nomination and my opinion on what they should do based on what happens on Super Tuesday.

Categories
National politics

2020 Candidates Ranked

I’ve been meaning to share my take on the 2020 candidates for some time now. It would be a water not to do so before Super Tuesday so I’ve put it off as long as possible already.

At this point in the cycle there are only 6 Democrats and one Republican with even a remote possibility of getting their party’s nomination – those 7 are the only candidates being ranked here. My rankings are not a reflection of who has the best chances of winning the presidency (or even their party nomination) but rather, who I think would prove most beneficial to our nation long term if they were elected.

By way of context, I have been a lifelong Republican but I have always considered that party affiliation is much less important than genuine ability or basic decency so I was dismayed in 2016 when Donald Trump got the nomination for the GOP. Long before either field had narrowed I argued that he was the worst candidate running out of either party. I have to admit that since that time he has grown on me and I have concluded that he wasn’t the worst candidate running that cycle. With that background, on to my candidate ranking.

Categories
Uncategorized

After #MeToo


Image from BBC News

I read an article arguing that we should have a zero-tolerance attitude toward sexual predators and felt compelled to write an argument for a more realistic approach. I realize now that part of my feeling was a visceral reaction to the zero-tolerance concept which has frequently resulted in outrageously unreasonable consequences over things less serious than sexual predators in places such as elementary schools.

Like all pushes for zero-tolerance – regardless of the subject – the basic idea was rooted in good intentions and certainly deserves thoughtful consideration (as opposed to a visceral reaction). I loved the open callout against partisanship – demanding that Democrats go no softer on Sen. Franken or Rep. Conyers than they do on Roy Moore just as Republicans should go not one ounce softer on Roy Moore than they do on Sen. Franken or Rep. Conyers. (Hint, hint, Mr. President) That part I wholeheartedly agree on.

Categories
Uncategorized

Nobody wants more health insurance

Image by Pictures of Money

Inevitably when lawmakers start talking about health care reform they end up dealing with health insurance reform. The funny thing is that if we think about it we realize that health insurance reform isn’t (or shouldn’t be) the real goal.
Go talk to people and see if you can find anyone who wants health insurance that will challenge their every medical decision and deny a significant chunk of their claims plus almost inevitably delay payment on the claims they don’t deny.
People are interested in some assurance that health care won’t bankrupt them. Insurance is the most common vehicle for that today, but that’s not because they inherently want insurance – just see those young and healthy people who would rather not get insurance because their brain assures them they don’t need it.

Categories
culture National politics thoughts

The pundits who cry wolf

We should all know what it means to “cry wolf” and while pundits across the political spectrum are prone to dong so, those on the liberal end of the spectrum should be kicking themselves right about now that because of the way they demonized a very decent Mitt Romney in 2012 (as well many other decent conservatives over many years) they have exhausted the limits of the English language to the point that they can’t effectively expose Donald Trump as being uniquely dangerous in his unfitness for the office that he is dangerously close to holding. (He was dangerously close as soon as the Iowa caucuses were over.)

Having inured the electorate with their constant invective against anyone or anything conservative, they have squandered any moral or intellectual capital they might have had and made it so that wide swaths of voters think that choosing between Clinton and Trump is a matter of choosing their favorite (or least un-favorite) shade of gray rather than a choice between dirt and radioactive waste. (You don’t want to set either one on your dinner table but while one might gross you out the other will eventually prove fatal even if you don’t actually ingest it.)

Pundits on the right are equally powerless because of their history of exaggerated rhetoric to effectively show qualitative differences between political disagreement and a 5 alarm dumpster fire of a candidate. If the Democrats were to nominate someone as toxic as Trump – which they undoubtedly have a few of within their ranks (lets hope they never stoop as low as the GOP did this year) – these talking heads would be left hoping that the electorate could recognize when it was being offered a dirty bomb rather than a conventional weapon.

I wrote the above on November 2nd. On November 6th I came across this video where Bill Maher makes the same “we cried wolf” statement: http://www.mrctv.org/videos/maher-panics-over-fascist-prez-trump-confesses-cried-wolf-bush