Eli,
Shame on me. I clinked on the link about the Colorado re-districting commission, read a bit, sighed and stopped. I never got to the punch line on how it was organized. I, like our President, refuse to accept blame. I blame the author. If someone doesn’t tell me exactly what they want in about 2 paragraphs I assume what they are going to say. Or I move on.
Interesting take on incumbency. I go back and forth on this. If you have a good congressperson why shouldn’t they stay a long time? I’d still be skeptical of this commission solving that. Would (woudn’t) Dems and Repubs do their darndest to draw the districts to keep them in office. That leaves the independents to keep everyone honest, so why not just use the indies. Now we’re back to the experts.
Sigh.
Bill
Tuesday, July 24, 2018
Why Did The Russians Interfere In the 2016 Election?
Bill,
I don't know of course, since Vladimir Putin hasn't been talking to me lately. Even though the net effect of their activity may have been to provide a small advantage to Trump, I am dubious that their primary intent was to actually help him win, since no one thought he would. Not you or me, not Hillary, and certainly not Donald Trump. And I don't think they were particularly invested in damaging American democracy whatever that means. American democracy is way too resilient for their shenanigans to have much of a lasting or powerful effect.
My guess is that they saw their efforts as an instrument to limit the effects of American power. Russia is a 3rd rate nation, with a miserable economy that functions slightly above third world levels, a pathetic standard of living, limited life expectancy and host of social ills. No one after all. is clamoring to emigrate to Novosibirsk. It is in John McCain's memorable phrase, a gas station masquerading as a country. Russia is not, and never will be, on the same playing field as the United States in economic productivity, education, innovation, quality of life, culture, and host of other arenas that I can't think of at the moment.
What Russia does have is a robust state-of-the-art community of intelligence services and great cyber espionage capabilities. That's hardly a surprise, since it's run by a spy. So if it can't compete in an equal and transparent way with American influence, the answer is to bring America down to its level. And the easiest way to do weaken Americans' faith in their government and in each other, to sow discord within the body politic, limit unity of purpose, promote paralysis, and weaken resolve. With regards to those goals, one would have to acknowledge, they've been pretty effective at what they set out to do.
Bill
I don't know of course, since Vladimir Putin hasn't been talking to me lately. Even though the net effect of their activity may have been to provide a small advantage to Trump, I am dubious that their primary intent was to actually help him win, since no one thought he would. Not you or me, not Hillary, and certainly not Donald Trump. And I don't think they were particularly invested in damaging American democracy whatever that means. American democracy is way too resilient for their shenanigans to have much of a lasting or powerful effect.
My guess is that they saw their efforts as an instrument to limit the effects of American power. Russia is a 3rd rate nation, with a miserable economy that functions slightly above third world levels, a pathetic standard of living, limited life expectancy and host of social ills. No one after all. is clamoring to emigrate to Novosibirsk. It is in John McCain's memorable phrase, a gas station masquerading as a country. Russia is not, and never will be, on the same playing field as the United States in economic productivity, education, innovation, quality of life, culture, and host of other arenas that I can't think of at the moment.
What Russia does have is a robust state-of-the-art community of intelligence services and great cyber espionage capabilities. That's hardly a surprise, since it's run by a spy. So if it can't compete in an equal and transparent way with American influence, the answer is to bring America down to its level. And the easiest way to do weaken Americans' faith in their government and in each other, to sow discord within the body politic, limit unity of purpose, promote paralysis, and weaken resolve. With regards to those goals, one would have to acknowledge, they've been pretty effective at what they set out to do.
Bill
Abolish Gerrrymandering
Bill
I am in fact strongly in favor of abolishing gerrymandering entirely, and have been for as long as I can remember understanding what it is. The problem for me is not that gerrymandering benefits Democrats or Republican since both sides, as you point out, do it. The problem is that it benefits incumbents. It turns democracy on its head, allowing legislators to pick their own votes, and diminishes the power of voters to remove them from office. Most damaging in my opinion, it increases polarization (on both sides). and limits the potential for compromise.
The Colorado reform law and similar laws in Arizona, Utah and elsewhere, doesn't rely on a panel of experts to draw districts. It relies on a mixture or Democrats, Republicans and Independents (to insure that Dems and Repubs don't collude together). The law emerged after an endless series of bitter fights resolved only after the courts intervened. One analysis suggests that the Colorado law will likely erode the Democratic advantage in the legislature. As far as minority-majority districts created under the Voting Rights act, it can be argued that under many circumstances they dilute the power of minority voters by packing them into gerrymandered districts.
Eli
I am in fact strongly in favor of abolishing gerrymandering entirely, and have been for as long as I can remember understanding what it is. The problem for me is not that gerrymandering benefits Democrats or Republican since both sides, as you point out, do it. The problem is that it benefits incumbents. It turns democracy on its head, allowing legislators to pick their own votes, and diminishes the power of voters to remove them from office. Most damaging in my opinion, it increases polarization (on both sides). and limits the potential for compromise.
The Colorado reform law and similar laws in Arizona, Utah and elsewhere, doesn't rely on a panel of experts to draw districts. It relies on a mixture or Democrats, Republicans and Independents (to insure that Dems and Repubs don't collude together). The law emerged after an endless series of bitter fights resolved only after the courts intervened. One analysis suggests that the Colorado law will likely erode the Democratic advantage in the legislature. As far as minority-majority districts created under the Voting Rights act, it can be argued that under many circumstances they dilute the power of minority voters by packing them into gerrymandered districts.
Eli
Experts are Humans Too
Eli,
I’m amused by what sets people off, including what I thought was a benign comment that I have less faith than you in the expertise of experts. To me it’s a rather mundane belief that experts don’t set aside their human failings while being experts. I know I don’t. My job requires me to evaluate businesses, plans, valuation, competition and personnel. The hardest part is keeping emotion out of it because so often I don’t want something to succeed because of some offense I’ve taken. Pure emotion overrides my analytical expertise. Happens often. I don’t think I’m that different than the average person, or expert, in that respect. There are parts that are mechanical, less subject to emotion, and that aspect, sure, experts are marvelous.
This exchange arose because I questioned a Colorado proposal to give the power to draw representative districts to an expert commission. Giving polticial power to a group is dangerous, why would I just hop on board becasue they are “experts?” Plus, it seems the Dems (you) only really cared about gerrymandering when the GOP won. Maybe not, maybe you think all gerrymandering should be eliminated. Are you willing to argue the majority-minority districts should be part of that elimination? After all, they are court ordered gerrymandering. Will the experts be allowed to exclude those when they un-gerrymander? And if so, how will they treat the changing aspects of the special districts. And I’m willing to be convinced, but not convinced currently, that gerrymandering is worse now than it was at any other time in our history or results in an unrepresentative House. The last time I checked if a party wins about 50% of the vote they get about 55% of the reps, and that’s kind of where we are now.
So not only do I still have less faith in the expertise of experts, but I’m not convinced gerrymandering is such a vital issue that only exerts can solve.
Bill
I’m amused by what sets people off, including what I thought was a benign comment that I have less faith than you in the expertise of experts. To me it’s a rather mundane belief that experts don’t set aside their human failings while being experts. I know I don’t. My job requires me to evaluate businesses, plans, valuation, competition and personnel. The hardest part is keeping emotion out of it because so often I don’t want something to succeed because of some offense I’ve taken. Pure emotion overrides my analytical expertise. Happens often. I don’t think I’m that different than the average person, or expert, in that respect. There are parts that are mechanical, less subject to emotion, and that aspect, sure, experts are marvelous.
This exchange arose because I questioned a Colorado proposal to give the power to draw representative districts to an expert commission. Giving polticial power to a group is dangerous, why would I just hop on board becasue they are “experts?” Plus, it seems the Dems (you) only really cared about gerrymandering when the GOP won. Maybe not, maybe you think all gerrymandering should be eliminated. Are you willing to argue the majority-minority districts should be part of that elimination? After all, they are court ordered gerrymandering. Will the experts be allowed to exclude those when they un-gerrymander? And if so, how will they treat the changing aspects of the special districts. And I’m willing to be convinced, but not convinced currently, that gerrymandering is worse now than it was at any other time in our history or results in an unrepresentative House. The last time I checked if a party wins about 50% of the vote they get about 55% of the reps, and that’s kind of where we are now.
So not only do I still have less faith in the expertise of experts, but I’m not convinced gerrymandering is such a vital issue that only exerts can solve.
Bill
What's Wrong With Expertise?
Bill,
Experts are frequently wrong to be sure. Just consider the previous example. What appears to be true can and does change. In the world I know best, the long running debate over coffee is a salient example. But accumulated knowledge counts for something. And most experts, like you and me, are trying to do the best they can, day after day, with the tools that they have accumulated , and to change their opinions as the facts around them change. Usually that something boils down to health, safety and emotional well being. Ignoring or denigrating expertise has consequences. Just ask the Somali residents of Minneapolis or the citizens of Miami Beach.
Eli
The current cultural tide against expertise continues to rise. I freely confess that I don't understand it. I'm an expert at what I do. So are you. Expertise informs almost every aspect of our daily lives. Expertise ensure that our buildings don't collapse, that our food is safe to eat and our water safe to drink (oops, on second thought not so much). We no longer explain natural phenomena as the work of the gods, or use haruspices to predict the future (at least most of us don't).
Experts are frequently wrong to be sure. Just consider the previous example. What appears to be true can and does change. In the world I know best, the long running debate over coffee is a salient example. But accumulated knowledge counts for something. And most experts, like you and me, are trying to do the best they can, day after day, with the tools that they have accumulated , and to change their opinions as the facts around them change. Usually that something boils down to health, safety and emotional well being. Ignoring or denigrating expertise has consequences. Just ask the Somali residents of Minneapolis or the citizens of Miami Beach.
Eli
Tuesday, July 17, 2018
We He Goes Dumb, We Go Dumber
Eli,
I've always found Michelle Obama's "When they go low, we go high," amusing. I guess accusing Mitt Romney of murder and Paul Ryan of pushing old people off the cliff were grandfathered in.
The slogan of the Trump opponents is, "When he goes dumb, we go dumber." Given all the dumb things Trump says there is a constant race to the dumbest. The latest dumb Trump statements about Russia and hacking Clinton, the DNC and DCCC were mind-numbing idiocy and infuriating as well.
Not to be outdone: Former CIA head John Brennan:
A Democratic representative from Tennessee I've never heard of (the congressman, not the state) said this:
I didn't vote in the 2016 election because I found both candidates foul and loathsome. And I thought maybe the Dems would try to put up a reasonable alternatives for the midterms and for 2020, but it doesn't look that way. Instead it looks like Gresham's Law being applied to the political markets.
Very depressing.
Bill
I've always found Michelle Obama's "When they go low, we go high," amusing. I guess accusing Mitt Romney of murder and Paul Ryan of pushing old people off the cliff were grandfathered in.
The slogan of the Trump opponents is, "When he goes dumb, we go dumber." Given all the dumb things Trump says there is a constant race to the dumbest. The latest dumb Trump statements about Russia and hacking Clinton, the DNC and DCCC were mind-numbing idiocy and infuriating as well.
Not to be outdone: Former CIA head John Brennan:
Donald Trump’s press conference performance in Helsinki rises to & exceeds the threshold of “high crimes & misdemeanors.” It was nothing short of treasonous. Not only were Trump’s comments imbecilic, he is wholly in the pocket of Putin. Republican Patriots: Where are you???
A Democratic representative from Tennessee I've never heard of (the congressman, not the state) said this:
Where are our military folks ? The Commander in Chief is in the hands of our enemy!He then claimed he wasn't calling for a military coup. OK sport.
I didn't vote in the 2016 election because I found both candidates foul and loathsome. And I thought maybe the Dems would try to put up a reasonable alternatives for the midterms and for 2020, but it doesn't look that way. Instead it looks like Gresham's Law being applied to the political markets.
Very depressing.
Bill
Monday, July 9, 2018
Idiot In Chief
Bill,
I've been a missing partner in our ongoing conversation for a long time and I offer my apologies. Like many Americans of my political sensibility, I've witnessed the last year and a half with increasing dismay, and have had to work hard to overcome that dismay and continue to oppose the policies I disagree with. Much of what has occurred (deregulation, tax reduction, half hearted and unsuccessful attempts to reduce the size of the welfare state, repeated attempts to inject Christian religious preference into public policy etc) would be expected of any contemporary Republican administration, so I may not like it, but can I can hardly be surprised it or view it as something novel. And I can continue to take the long view that the much of the nativism and bigotry on display is also nothing new; from the Chinese Exclusion Act (in force for 60 years) to the Immigration Law of 1924 (not repealed until 1965) to the general disdain and prejudice exhibited against your ancestors and mine, resistance to the arrival of new Americans is bred into the country's DNA.
What I can't absorb(along with every major economist and the Chamber of Commerce) is the raw stupidity of so much of what passes for policy coming from the White House. So much of what is touted as economic wisdom seems to violate every principle of how to grow an economy. A trade war looms. Trumps coal obsession is the ultimate picking winners and losers.
Meanwhile, while the longest expansion in modern US economic history continues, storm clouds are gathering. I don't think this ends well. And when the consequence of Administration policy finally unfold, the Idiot-in-Chief will blame everyone else but himself.
Eli
I've been a missing partner in our ongoing conversation for a long time and I offer my apologies. Like many Americans of my political sensibility, I've witnessed the last year and a half with increasing dismay, and have had to work hard to overcome that dismay and continue to oppose the policies I disagree with. Much of what has occurred (deregulation, tax reduction, half hearted and unsuccessful attempts to reduce the size of the welfare state, repeated attempts to inject Christian religious preference into public policy etc) would be expected of any contemporary Republican administration, so I may not like it, but can I can hardly be surprised it or view it as something novel. And I can continue to take the long view that the much of the nativism and bigotry on display is also nothing new; from the Chinese Exclusion Act (in force for 60 years) to the Immigration Law of 1924 (not repealed until 1965) to the general disdain and prejudice exhibited against your ancestors and mine, resistance to the arrival of new Americans is bred into the country's DNA.
What I can't absorb(along with every major economist and the Chamber of Commerce) is the raw stupidity of so much of what passes for policy coming from the White House. So much of what is touted as economic wisdom seems to violate every principle of how to grow an economy. A trade war looms. Trumps coal obsession is the ultimate picking winners and losers.
Meanwhile, while the longest expansion in modern US economic history continues, storm clouds are gathering. I don't think this ends well. And when the consequence of Administration policy finally unfold, the Idiot-in-Chief will blame everyone else but himself.
Eli
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)