The 2020 Election – What will happen?

Its two days before the election and time to look at what may happen and why.

In normal times, Trump would be a shoe-in. He’s an incumbent running for a second term, the economy recovering from the COVID shock, and 56% of Americans are saying they are better off than they were four years ago.

Without taking any other factors into consideration, this one resembles the 1972 election between Nixon and McGovern, when Nixon collected 520 electoral votes. That year McGovern ran as the Anti-Vietnam War candidate, who would cut defense spending. To be fair, Nixon was the incumbent and the economy was doing well, so that gave him an advantage. McGovern was an outsider, perhaps a populist at the wrong time, with a message centered on the war.

The McGovern defeat has cast a long shadow over the Democratic Party. This shadow takes the form of the party elders controlling how far Left the party goes to avoid alienating independent voters. It has been standard operating procedure in recent decades for the Democratic Party to be strongly Left during the primary season, and then move toward the center for the general election.

This year the party has stayed left and used a prop, Joe Biden, to make it look like it is operating from the center. The real story is that Kamala Harris is radically Left, put there to appease the Left wing of the party. In addition, the Democrat platform is essentially socialist: free schools, free healthcare, forgive student debt, and implementation the Green New Deal. The latter would force the phase out of the lowest cost energy resources.

The extreme Left focus of the Democrats would appear to help Trump, but there are three mitigating this scenario: the media’s assault on Trump, the media’s silence about the Democrat agenda, and Trump’s personality. In the time since 2016, the media as lost all credibility. Journalism is dead, or at least objective journalism is dead. The media are now the marketing arm of the Democratic Party.

Since the media are Left-leaning, every idea that is Right-leaning is discounted. Furthermore, any idea that is Left-leaning, no matter how radical, is supported or not criticized. For example, there is no one on the Left reporting on the cost of the Democrat socialist programs. It would be useful to determine whether the Federal budget could stand the strain of a welfare state. The Left, when pushed about this, asserts that the money will be raised by taxing rich people. Unfortunately, there aren’t enough rich people to pay for these programs, so the middle class will be covering the shortfall.

Whenever one of the Democrat candidates misspeaks and says something controversial, a handler comes forward with a reinterpretation of what was said. Look at the fracking issue. The Democratic candidates pretend they won’t ban fracking even though their party platform says so. Denial avoids the exposure of a controversial position. Here is a quote from the 2020 Democratic platform.

“We support banning new oil and gas permitting on public lands and waters, modifying royalties to account for climate costs, and establishing targeted programs to enhance reforestation and develop renewables on federal lands and waters.”

The Trump personality creates more uncertainty about the election. There are at least three positions on him: some hate Trump because of his personality, some overlook Trump’s personality and look at what he’s trying to accomplish, and some like his pushiness as a sign of strength and they respect him for it. Trump’s behavior is an issue he created, and it might cost him the election.

So, what about the election?

The poll numbers look like 2016. They are wrong this time too, but by how much? The Left likes to say that Biden’s lead is bigger than Hillary’s so he’s locked in. The pollsters also say they have corrected their models since 2016, but who knows whether that is true. There is no doubt that some people are providing false information to the pollsters. These are the “shy” conservatives. They hate what the media has become and will not play their game.

Exit polls in early Wisconsin voting showed that 6% of the voters refused to say how they voted. One suspects there are more conservatives in this group than liberals. Wouldn’t liberals be proud to announce who they voted for? Conservatives are so beaten down by the Left: called out, attacked, and ridiculed, it makes sense that they’d want to keep their views to themselves.

There are other factors at work also. The Left’s position is that suburban Moms are moving away from Trump because they don’t like is personality. Is Trump’s personality more important to them then law and order? I doubt it. The rule of law is fundamental to any stable society and there are a lot of Americans who value that principle. Ideas like defunding the police, and taking over parts of cities to rule lawlessly is not something most people like to imagine becoming reality.

There are a lot of Americans who believe in fairness. The idea that riots are acceptable in the time of COVID, and family gatherings are not, is fundamentally absurd.

Many of the riots have including the tearing down of statues – some having nothing to do with the issues being debated. The Left doesn’t understand that tradition is important and should not be discarded. Tradition provides a roadmap to move society forward. Without that roadmap any society would end up like France did during its revolution – in a state of anarchy.

A statue of Robert E. Lee should remind us that he lived in another time; a time when people believed slavery was acceptable. But that concept was ultimately rejected as immoral and American society moved forward toward a freer and fairer place for all our people. The true lesson is the rejection of immorality.

Is there an enthusiasm factor?

Polls show 48% of Biden’s supporters are enthusiastic about him; Trump’s support is at 77%. One can observe that by looking at the size of the Trump rallies. Why do the Democrats have so few at their rallies? It can’t be COVID because supporters could practice social distancing and still attend these events. Small crowds more likely demonstrate less enthusiasm for Biden.

What will the results be?

Trump has a similar path to victory this time. It starts with four battleground states he must win: Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, and Ohio. He must also win two of the following states: Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Arizona. That would give him enough electoral votes to win the election.

The early states will prove out the extent of polling error, and provide a guide for what will happen later.

Time for a Media Vacation?

Time for a Media Vacation?

I’ve been on a media vacation recently and it’s a pleasant experience. You should try it. Good for your mental health.

No matter what your political stripe, you have to be tired of the hourly drumbeat of depressing information. It’s not healthy!

Every day we hear about how bad Trump is. Whatever support he has is drowned out by the sheer volume of the attacks from the Left.

Every day we hear about COVID. One side is optimistic and the other side is pessimistic. Its hard to find the truth since both sides manipulate the data to their advantage. To my knowledge this is the first time in American history that a force bringing our people together was negated by a counter force; the tribalism we are experiencing now. We were tribal before Trump, but his personality has made the situation worse. Add the fact that this is an election year and everything gets exaggerated.

The end result of our failure to unite is the truth has gone by the wayside. Who knows what to believe? Governors are partisan, majors are partisan, and the federal government is split along partisan lines. Is Dr. Fauci a Democrat who exaggerates his warnings about reopening?

I guess we’re left watching the dashboards. Are cases per day going down? Are deaths per day going down? That only works if the counts are not being manipulated, which some have admitted is happening.

No media outlet provides a context to frame the data. That keeps their depressing message intact. Here is an example of perspective. Ohio has 11.7 million people and 3,618 deaths. That’s 3 hundredths of 1% of the state population who have died. The death to case ratio is 3.7%. Ninety seven percent of the deaths are people older than 50. Fifty seven percent of those who died were nursing home patients.

If you’re under 50, without underlying conditions that make COVID worse, you’re going to be fine.

Every day we hear about riots. Portland stays in the news because riots have been going on there for 70 days. The mayor is using those riots as a political prop. When rioters attempted to set fire to a police precinct yesterday, the mayor accused them of attempted murder but also said. "Don’t think for a moment that you are if you are participating in this activity, you are not being a prop for the reelection campaign of Donald Trump — because you absolutely are." The implication is that the rioters are breaking the law, and since Trump wants to uphold the law, they are giving him power. Why doesn’t Portland’s mayor want the law upheld?

Is the world turned upside down? We now have riots as appropriate behavior and police as evil actors. Its ok to riot without social distancing, but you can’t attend a funeral with more than 10 people.

No laws = no society. Only anarchy.

That’s why media vacations are good. Too much exposure to the media will make you think reality is what you see on the small screen. It isn’t. If the media will not accurately represent reality, you have to find it for yourself in your own life.

Review of Tribalism

ELECTRUM MAGAZINE

Why The Ancient World Matters Today

Top of Form

REVIEWS

Michael Anderson’s 2nd Excellent Book: Tribalism will Divide and Conquer Us

June 29, 2020 8:50 PMViews: 7

Lionel Royer, Vercingetorix Throws Down His Arms at the feet of Julius Caesar, 1899

P. F. Sommerfeldt –

Julius Caesar knew that to destroy the fractured Gauls, his overarching task was to accentuate their tribalism, not their national unity, in order to divide and conquer. History repeats this time and again as Michael Anderson cogently writes on tribalism, the bane of 21st century America. Anderson has done it again with a great sequel book to his Progressive Gene, which identifies deep emotional and even genetic tendencies and responses in behavioral psychology that drives and divides humans into compassionate (progressive) or loyal (conservative) camps, albeit along a broad spectrum. Tribalism is a long-held tenacity to cling to limited regional “us versus them” clannishness or limited nationalism over, for example, multiculturalism, global identity and seeing humanity at large. Racism, for example, is a political construct of the most superficial xenophobic tribalism.

Anderson’s new book is Tribalism: The Curse of 21st Century America and it couldn’t be timelier as 2020 rages on. “Left versus Right” has become increasingly polarized, especially when the current Trump divisiveness becomes ever more entrenched against “libtard” Democrats like myself, such that honest Conservatives despair along with honest liberals – each side with patriots who know national unity is becoming ever more elusive across the abyss. Who could have imagined that Republicans and Democrats could represent such horrible polarized “enemies” as Americans have somehow seemed to become? Weren’t we told only a generation ago that Soviet Communism was the enemy, not our own country’s political parties? Is the dichotomy between Republicans and Democrats as “enemies” true or merely propaganda? I believe the latter. Of course, the fault is on both sides, as Anderson documents.

Nativism and anti-immigration prejudices – nationalist xenophobias – are other aspects of the worst kind of tribalism that can be exploited by internal and external forces. Media preferences can all too easily reinforce tribalism, where charges of “fake news” add fuel to the already irrational flames. Too few know that the meme of “fake news” (part of dezinformatsiya) was a favorite device of Stalin’s NKVD (becoming the KGB) to discredit and destroy opposition and neutralize international media by sowing distrust, undermining what would be perceived as “true’ in postmodernist relativist understanding; in this country “fake news” didn’t really enter the common vocabulary until the political campaign of 2015. The more lies anyone can tell and get away with, the more bewildering the search for knowable truth becomes in the insidious aim to deceive public opinion. To international intelligence analysts, it is clear that certainly within the last decade or so Putin’s authoritarian apparatus exploits the possibilities for disinformation to the max, using the wiliest propaganda experts in pursuing much of this deliberate policy, knowing how to use tribalism in the worst possible ways to divide and destroy other sovereign nations. We should examine exactly how the media has become in Trump’s words, “the enemy of the people” because this rhetoric sounds exactly like what you would have heard and still hear coming out of Russia state-owned organs.

On the simplest level, most people who follow sports have favorite teams – usually their local ones – and this is a deeply-ingrained tribalism where individuals vicariously identify with a sports team that likely doesn’t even know that individual’s existence. I knew rabid fans who became so angry “their” team lost that they literally threw out the television from an upper apartment window in blind rage. Absurd, for sure, but an example of simple tribalism run awry.

Some of my favorite text sections in the book have to do with extended analyses of how we got to this current impasse through Enlightenment rationalism, to post-Enlightenment, Collectivism, Socialism and Liberalism to Postmodernism. Anderson also says (p. 206) about Trump: “He’s not even a Conservative. He’s a Populist and Populists are politicians who don’t embrace a particular ideology but build a platform around what they think the people want.” Great graphs like on p. 207 show how educated people have gradually moved toward the Left – partly because of academic bias – and many credible political surveys right now confirm educated people moving toward Independent and Democrat affiliations and away from the Republican party as it has polarized so far away from the center and embraced authoritarianism in executive branch power. Elsewhere Anderson’s keen observations and possible solutions include building bridges between divided ways of thought that are exacerbated by inculcated academic and media philosophies to break down animosities to find common ground (p. 282): “If Americans could see their government functioning the way they believe it should, working for the benefit of all of us, the tension level would abate within the tribes. Unfortunately, this will not happen before the end of the Trump presidency. Successful or not, Trump is too divisive to get the Left talking to the Right.” Anderson doesn’t say it, but in my opinion, Trump is the ultimate Tribalist.

This book offers insightful commentary and documentation, and is very clearly written with historic depth. Anderson shows that he can reach me, a Jewish liberal, right between the eyes and in the heart, not with deadly aim so to speak, but with genuine passion and warnings for the immediate future. Anderson may be a prophet in this regard. His glossary at the end is superb, and while he doesn’t mince words, it’s almost impossible to see him taking sides in partisanship. I simply cannot recommend this book enough for readers of modern political thought. Anderson’s warnings are on the mark. The alternatives are frightening, and civil war and dissolution of the U.S. could too easily ensue if we don’t quickly fix the problems of tribalism. When I last stood in the old Athenian Agora in 2016 and saw the ruins of the Bouleuterion, the Greek political voting chambers where democracy began, tears came to my eyes as I pondered how fragile democracy remains. This was even before Trump…

Anarchy in America

The protests over the death of George Floyd are continuing for a third week and by now most of the looters and rioters have moved on to their next shiny object. Only protesters and anarchists remain. The protesters are doing what Americans know how to do; express frustration with government by peacefully demonstrating. They want police violence against black people brought under control. The anarchists are also acting out their role, tearing down statues of famous people.

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to recognize the irrational nature of anarchist behavior. It started with the removal of Confederate statues, as a statement against the continuing repression of black people. It then moved on to statues of individuals who were not members of the Confederacy. Any one who had a link to slavery was now included; even George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were pulled down. Actually, the anarchist’s efforts are only partially irrational because there is also a strategy at work; the purposeful intent to destroy our political system.

Anarchism is a branch of the collectivist model of government, which was introduced by Rousseau in the late 1700s. Collectivists believe that political systems should be built around society as a whole and not individuals, which makes them strongly opposed to democracy. Anarchists believe that human society can exist without government. In their model, everyone would participate on a voluntary basis, without rules. Since this model can’t work in practice, anarchists spend their time engaged in revolutionary activities that accomplish nothing.

There are two problems with the anarchist activities happening now. First, they go beyond the intentions of the protestors, who want the government to address a serious issue and are expressing their feelings about that issue. The work of the anarchists is peripheral to those protests, being no more than the expression of mob behavior designed to remove symbols of democracy.

To improve the lives of black people, the country has to come together and take action as a whole. It takes, intellectuals, politicians, and citizens to unite for the common cause of equal and fair treatment by police. This issue extends to white people as well, demonstrating that the problems with police go beyond race. So far, in 2020, there have been 88 black men killed by police and 172 white men killed by police.

People must pressure the government to enact laws that will address the problem because a solution can’t be achieved through anarchy.

The second problem with anarchist efforts is the refocus of media attention onto themselves and the government’s response to them, away from the problems that caused the protests in the first place. Conservatives and others who believe in the rule of law, build their own anger narrative against the anarchy, wasting energy that should have been directed at fixing the original problem.

Do we really want to end this period of legitimate protest with torn down statues and nothing else to show for it?

There is also another issue: the lessons of history. A solid argument can be made for the value of understanding history, both bad and good. Immoral behaviors in history remind us of where we don’t want to be; they recall the behaviors we rejected in the past to make the world a better place. The list is long: slavery, exploitation of women and children, discrimination based on sexual preference, and more. Recognizing that those conditions existed, and were corrected, is the accomplishment, not the immoral behaviors themselves. Discard history and we discard knowledge of our sins.

The “cancel culture” thought process uses false logic; believing that behaviors that are now abhorrent must be used as clubs against those who participated in those behaviors in the past. George Washington had slaves so let’s cancel George Washington. This logic can be negated by examining its end point, which is an absurdity. As an example, we go back 150,000 years to the early human tribes in Africa. There are two tribes living in close proximity. One tribe kills the other in order to steal their food. By the cancel culture logic, we must cancel the killer tribe because they didn’t adhere to the current morality of the United States. Every society between then and now must be cancelled because, at some point, every society has exhibited immoral behaviors as judged by 21^st Century morality.

Morality and laws change as society decides they must, in order to respect the lives of human beings. Without the knowledge of what was bad, we can’t turn that knowledge into something good.

Bias Reporting on COVID and the Vaccine Paradox

One of many discussion topics about COVID is the apparent rise in new cases across several states. The data is accurate, but the reporting is biased. Another case of fake news.

Since the media represents the liberal establishment, they would like to make the situation look worse than it is, so they can criticize early red state openings. If they can make that narrative stick, it could hurt the Republicans in the fall elections.

Here are the current charts for Florida and Georgia. Florida cases are rising; Georgia cases are level to decreasing slowly. Deaths are dramatically lower in both states.

The obvious bias lies in what is not reported rather than what is reported. From the very beginning, the CDC has warned us that as testing becomes universally available, the number of cases will go up. That fact is obvious because if you test more people, you’ll find more cases of the disease. Asymptomatic cases won’t be identified unless widescale testing is done.

The second bias is not describing the new case characteristics. What is the age of these new patients? Old or young? Who cares if the new cases are asymptomatic people? Yes, those people now have to be careful they don’t infect others, but they certainly don’t represent a scary new trend. Our medical profession has done a good job of identifying the high-risk population. As long as those people are protected, the disease will come under our control.

As the data stands right now, if you are under 65, the risk of dying from COVID is about equal to that of being killed in a car accident on the way to work. Not a big deal.

______________

The COVID vaccine discussion is also interesting. As we all know, there has been a universal desire across our country to get a vaccine for COVID as quickly as possible. Some governors have made public statements that their states will not be open until the vaccine is readily available.

Lo and behold a new poll comes out, which shows that Americans are indifferent to receiving a new vaccine. Only 49% said they planned to get the shot. A large majority of older people plan to get the vaccine; younger people less so. Looking inside the numbers shows that 62% of Democrats will get the shot, but only 43% of Republicans will. A profile of those interested in a vaccination is a pretty close match to the same polls about the Flu. In others words, people have decided COVID is no worse than the Flu.

This public indifference throws a wrench into the control narrative of the Left about how the disease needs to play out. Ultimately, we have to have herd spread to control the disease, so getting there faster may not be a bad thing.

Twin Cities – Twin Problems

Problem 1

The death of George Floyd on May 25^th brought to the surface, once again, the problem of police brutality in America. It was a case of murder on TV -- so egregious no one could ignore it.

The reaction in Minneapolis and across the nation was swift and widespread. Protests were organized in all the major cities and launched the same day. “Why does this keep happening, asked the American people? Why can’t it be stopped?”

It’s obvious at this point that police training has failed and penalties for misconduct are inconsequential. It’s time to fix these problems because there is no excuse for not doing so. Criminal behavior appears to infect only a small minority of the police force, perhaps 5-10%, so the problem is easier to fix than if it were more widespread.

There are three parts to the fix: better psychological evaluation of recruits, better training, and more severe penalties for misbehavior. Police recruits already take a psychological profile test. It would be interesting to know how the test results are evaluated, but no one has access to that information. It would also be interesting to know how officers accused of misbehavior performed on the test. Were the indications of a future problem? That would help determine whether the tests have any value. Second, police training should include a strongly presented demonstration of prohibited behavior, such as choking and overuse of force on a victim. Recruits should sign a document that they will not engage in prohibited tactics. Penalties of misbehavior should include suspension and expulsion based on repeated offences.

The House of Representatives will be introducing a bill this week to address some of these issues. One part of the bill changes the standard for misbehavior from “willfully” violating a person’s rights to “knowingly or with reckless disregard” violating a person’s rights. The current provision places the burden of proof on the prosecution to show intent, which is a tough standard.

There is also talk of defunding police forces in different cities including Minneapolis. As crazy as this seems, I support the concept being on the table as a tool to force action. It is my firm belief that all human institutions become corrupt over time and cannot be reformed without radical change. Other examples of this corruption include universities and public-school systems. Usually, there are powerful lobbies that prevent reform. Those lobbies have to be overcome through public pressure.

Problem 2

The riots. An unfortunate result of the Floyd protests was the subsequent riots and looting that devastated parts of Minneapolis, including Black businesses. The perpetrators of this criminal activity robbed legitimate protestors of the spotlight, blunting the strength of their message. The rioters pursued their own ends without regard for whom they were impacting. The destruction of Black businesses pushes the affected neighborhoods deeper into a economic hole and postpones their opportunity to make progress.

Who were these perpetrators? Most likely multiple actors, including anarchists, criminals, and opportunists. The anarchists are bent on tearing down the institutions of America, hoping to cause a revolution against the American government and way of life. Anarchists have been with us, as organized groups, since at least the early 1800s. They reject all forms of hierarchy and wish the destroy the state, thinking the result will be freedom for the people. President William McKinley was assassinated by an anarchist.

The criminals were seeking profit, taking property for resale. Public anger provided the spark for them to come out of the woodwork and commit their crimes. The third group, the opportunists, are always present. They do not usually lead the way in riotous situations, but show up to join in on the spoils.

The riots and destruction hurt the protestor’s cause in a second way. They create anger among those who strongly believe in law and order, so it becomes easy to blame the protestors for the destruction even if they weren’t involved. In situations like this, the messaging coming out of law and order types should be carefully focused on the perpetrators rather than the protestors. Having said that, many municipalities have done a poor job of responding to the riots and looting. Public safety has to start with law and order or there is anarchy. Polls taken since the Floyd’s death show that a high percentage of Americas want cities to do a better job of keeping law and order.

It’s a strange twist that it’s the police department that has that job.

Deconstructing Face Mask Politics

The face mask has now become the “shiny object” of the Coronavirus pandemic – both a symbol and political statement.

Many on the Left believe all of us should wear masks all the time. This may be due to the fact that twice as many people on the Left are worried about getting the disease as those on the Right. I can’t explain that one. The Right thinks masks are appropriate, but fewer support them in polls, compared to the Left. Of course, there are many on the Right who wear masks all the time.

Before deconstructing mask usage, let’s go back and review how this issue evolved over the past few months.

Initially, the CDC stated, correctly, that wearing a mask does not protect you from catching the disease. Masks do not seal well and most don’t filter enough airborne material to offer adequate protection. Some politicians were concerned about the impact of a mask requirement on those who couldn’t tolerate wearing one, so there were mixed policies put into place Government leaders have to think about the psychological impact of having one’s breathing restricted and feeling closed in. Universal wearing of masks was not a part of the CDC recommendations.

Sometime later, mask use was refocused. Rather than worrying about protecting the person wearing the mask, it became more important to protect people coming in contact with that person. This logic was based on the fact that some people with symptoms could infect others, so mask use should be mandatory. Other people could be asymptomatic and infect others without knowing it, if they didn’t wear a mask. Makes sense.

Quickly, the mask debate got more heated and is now completely political. The Left criticizes those photographed without masks. Perhaps the assumption is these maskless villains are Republicans. But notice the CNN reporters at the White House who only wear masks when the camera is on. Or the CNN reporter commenting on lack of masks on the beaches Memorial Day. He had a mask. His cameraman didn’t. Trump is photographed golfing without a mask. How terrible of him, even though he’s outside and away from other people. Golf courses are open around the country and none require golfers to wear masks.

The public is riled up too. A grocery shopper in New Jersey was verbally attacked and driven out of a store recently because she wasn't wearing a mask. Whether you're social distancing or not, you better not leave that mask home. In this case, the customer was actually violating the governor’s order to have her face covered.

There are fifteen states that require masks while shopping, most of them in the Northeast. New York is a hair more lenient saying “wear a mask if social distancing is not possible.”

Let’s take the mask debate to its logical conclusion. If a person has COVID and knows it, or has symptoms, they should stay home. If they have to go out, they should wear a mask to protect others. Asymptomatic carriers are different story. Since we can’t know who is asymptomatic unless we test everyone for COVID or antibodies, how do we identify these people?

We might never reach a point where everyone is tested, which means all of us will have to keep wearing masks forever or stay home. Huh?

We should be using practical, rather than Draconian, rules. If you have COVID or have symptoms, you should wear a mask. Masks for the rest of us should be optional, unless social distancing is not possible.

The management of the pandemic depends on the commitment of the America people, so reality has to be applied to balance risk and behavior. Seventy three percent of COVID deaths in New York City involved people over the age of 65. Of the total deaths across all age groups in that same study, only .7% had no underlying conditions. If you’re older or have underlying conditions be careful and limit interactions with the public. Always wear a mask. Younger people with no underlying conditions have little to worry about.

Everyone should use social distancing as the primary method of keeping themselves safe. Masks are a backup.

It’s also important to follow the data. As summer heats up, the country becomes more open, and the graphs trend further downward, feel more confident about having your face uncovered.