by Judith Curry
A few interesting articles from this past week
Last week was a record low number of comments for the presidential politics thread! I assume it will pick up with the debate on Monday. Here are some new articles to kick off the discussion.
The Flight 93 election [link]
This one is meaty: Hillary’s policy team [link]
WaPo: How Trump would stimulate the US economy [link]
Trump’s economic plan is a mixed bag [link]
Hillary Takes the Nuclear-Energy Option [link]
Hillary Clinton’s anti-poverty plan [link]
“How Donald Trump can knock out Hillary Clinton in the first debate” [link]
Sanders and Trump represent two different sides of American populism—and the uprisings they sparked could topple the established political order. [link]
WSJ: Sizing up the next commander-in-chief [link]
And finally, in case you have been wondering what the failed Presidential candidates are up to
Political evolution.
Mrs.Clinton struggles to keep her base motivated.
Her opposition doesn’t follow the rules.
Whatever Trump is, and whatever emerges from the GOP in the aftermath, It will be a new animal that the political biologists will hardly be able to explain.
They are in shock.
It’s been fun watching them squirm.
For better or worse, a mongrel has arrived with new DNA.
The Brexit bug,
immune ter
oligarchy.
Yup. And the Brexit bug is spreading faster than Zika. For good reasons.
Borders management a security must.
Robust non-PC public debate.
Expenditure of guvuhmint – CUT.
X-it guvuhmint from education micro-managagement.
Intricate bureau-regulation of prolariats’ social behavior – OUT.
Tax and tariff creep ‘n Keynesian economics – NOT.
Grr- WordPress micro-management of line lengths
Consider that ‘OUT’ a little moved to the right.
Beth,
Many plusses :)
Hillary is sort of correct: to believe America has more to fear from radical Islam than from radical environmentalism requires a willing suspension of disbelief.
“We have never before seen a candidate like Donald Trump, and Donald Trump may well break patterns of history that have held since 1860.”
From https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/23/trump-is-headed-for-a-win-says-professor-whos-predicted-30-years-of-presidential-outcomes-correctly/.
Professor hates Trump but his system picks Trump to win, so Prof hopes his system is wrong. His quote is on the money though.
Read this. He hates his longstanding book prediction. What a funny intellectual pretzel. Bragging he has never been wrong, hoping he will be this time. BTW, if you score his 13 true /false diagnostics more objectively than he did, Trump is a shoe in. I counted 9, not maybe 5 or 6.
Trump will get 35% of the popular vote, +/- 1.5%
Thomas
Your error bars aren’t big enough for a climate blog. You must have meant Trump will get 35percent of the popular vote plus or minus 15 percent…
Tonyb
;)
re Flight 93 election politics and dorm-room Marxism, The Left — comprised of tribal believers in socialist Eurocommunism (that’s failed every time it’s been tried) — is more than willing to fight to the death of the last productive person in the country if it serves the greater purpose of helping the Left achieve its mythic liberal Utopia. Deep down, Leftist ideology has never been about reform but rather the Left’s view that a free man cannot be trusted.
I liked the line about how Hillary becoming President would be playing Russian Roulette with a semi auto.
And I wonder how many folks who self identify as Progressives understand it.
For those who haven’t found him, Scott Adams has a very interesting take on Trump. He decided based on the Kelly v. Trump exchange in the first primary debate.
After Hillary’s collapse/stumble/freeze, he has stated the election is over, and Trump is president.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/150264994381/the-race-for-president-is-probably-over
and recently
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/150772972746/how-to-know-an-election-is-over
From above:
Something Adams has been saying. His theory is Trump is a master persuader, and uses many persuasion techniques that will now become common place in politics. Adams uses the term “Linguistic Kill shot” Trump uses to describe terms such as “Low Energy” and “Stamina” to describe his opponents. The theory is they work on the subconscious level with confirmation bias (much the same as the incessant calling of Trump racist, and recently “Dark” and “Dangerous”, terms Clinton’s team popularized with the world-wide media, and which Adams attributes to a psychology professor he affectionately calls “Godzilla”). Over time, these become synonymous with the truth, regardless of the reality.
Adams said Trump brought a flame thrower to a stick fight. No one has a chance against him. Not 16 experienced opponents in the Republican primary and especially not Hillary Clinton who had to cheat to beat lone opponent Crazy Bernie the socialist senator from Vermont.
Adams has called it all correctly so far. He believes we’ll see Trump win in a landslide.
Merkel’s popularity ebbs away as the liberal, cosmpolitan Berlin takes a hard turn to “the right.”
When are liberals going to learn that screwing working people comes with a price?
I believe this researcher’s experiment is skewed, because it assumes that, as Kennedy put it, there is a “rising tide.”
And there may indeed have been a “rising tide” for the past couple of decades in places like China and Russia.
But what about places like the United States, Mexico, or Europe, where there is no “rising tide” because economic growth has been anemic, and the purchasing power of workers pay has actually shrunk?
The United States is no longer “the world’s breadbasket.”
Russia has now surpassed the U.S. in wheat production, as well as wheat exports, with major geopolitical implications, as well as throwing wheat prices into a tail spin.
Global warming is causing the corn belt to to move North like into North Dakota where they grow a lot of wheat. Wheat returns less per acre than corn.
Ragnaar said:
So it’s GW that’s caused North Dakota farmers to plant more corn and less wheat in North Dakota?
I would think, besides GW, the relative prices of corn and wheat might have something to do with what farmers decide to plant.
In addition, this study cites another cause — politics, anti-GMO agitation,t and government regulation — that has motivated farmers to plant more corn and less wheat in North Dakota:
And if we look at aggregate wheat production from the U.S, it has been almost flat for the last 20 years, while Russia’s has more than doubled.
U.S. corn production, however, has increased.
And most of this increased corn production has gone to the production of ethanol:
And once again, the main cause of this increased corn production was government intervention:
Besides regulation, there is another form of government intervention that has spurred corn produciton: government subisidies for corn production.
In Mexico, this is a very big deal, because the non-subsidized Mexican farmers can’t compete with the heavily subsidized American farmers:
You can Google “NAFTA Free Trade Myths Lead to Farm Failure in Mexico” by Laura Carlsen to read the entire study.
Ragnaar,
For more on the massive subsidies the U.S. government lavishes on U.S. corn producers, you can Google “mexican farmers can’t compete with heavily subsidized us farmers.”
Our crazy farm subsidies, explained
http://grist.org/food/our-crazy-farm-subsidies-explained/
Hopefully the link animates:

What to call it? The Minnesota express. Kicks Gulf moisture counter clockwise all the way to us clod kickers. I think usually the low moves more West to East. The Dakotas are west of Minnesota and get less of this precipitation. They are also blocked by the Rockies wringing the water out of the air. Eastern Montana is drier still. I’ve been known to watch radar weather to see if the rain will track onto the family farmland. It’s the amount of precipitation that used to make the difference between corn and wheat. Dry is wheat.
The peak oilers and neocons were wrong about Russian oil production. It did not crater under the weight of low prices, but continues to rise, reaching a temporary, all-time, post-Soviet high of 11.7 million BOPD recently.
This has major geopolitical implications, plus contributes to keeping oil markets over supplied and prices low.
The game that Obama and Clinton are playing with Russia — red baiting and demonizing it in order score political points against Trump — is an extremely dangerous and counter-productive one.
And when it comes to lies and dishonesty about Russia, there doesn’t seem to be any low that the Obama administration will not sink below in order to damage Trump:
Clinton is under attack from some sectors of both the left and the right for her unapologetic war mongering, unwavering support for permanent war, and constantly keeping the Islamic hornets’ nest stirred up. This one comes from the right:
UN fears third leg of the global financial crisis – with prospect of epic debt defaults
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/09/21/un-fears-third-leg-of-the-global-financial-crisis-with-epic-debt/
In April oil prices surpassed the $40/barrel mark that Permian Basin shale oil producers say is now needed to produce a barrel of shale oil.
The Permian Basin producers responded by quickly putting more rigs back to work after oil prices passed the $40/barrel mark.
Besides Russian and U.S. shale oil production being more resilient than many predicted, there’s an additional concern for those like me who have skin in this game, and depend on the sale of oil for their livlihood.
That is Nigeria and Libya.
Authorities in both countries claim they now have their internal insurections under control and can return their nations’ oil production to pre-insurgency levels. For Libya, this would add approximately 1.3 million BOPD to world oil supplies, and for Nigeria about 400,000 BOPD. This could push the balancing of global oil markets into 2017 or even 2018, assuming world oil demand continues to grow at 1.0 to 1.5 million BOPD.
This, however, is only what the leaders of Libya and Nigeria say they can do. It hasn’t happened yet.
True Grit: Surging Sand Demand Could Boost Jobs in Oil, Gas
http://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=146738
Turkish immigrant in custody, suspected of killing 5 in mall

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/25/us/washington-mall-shooting-arrest/index.html
The US media has had a virtual blackout on the murderer’s ethnicity and immigration status.
……meanwhile Obama and Hillary plot to import millions more.
Were calling him him Hispanic even though the grainy mall camera photos showed a guy who looked more Middle Eastern than Hispanic.
Definitely not a terrorist according to official statements.
Glenn Stehle
One of the downsides of naming race/ethnicity to a breaking news item, is being wrong. The involved community does get upset when characterized as someone of a particular race/ethnicity being “the shooter” etc.
In today’s Seattle Times:
Laura Martínez tweeted, “BREAKING: Cable networks realize ‘brown mall shooting suspect’ is not Hispanic after all.”
Cascade Mall Shooting
“Police mistakenly describe Cascade Mall shooting suspect as ‘Hispanic,’ protests erupt on Twitter
Images from security footage, press conferences, vigils around Burlington
Other mass shootings in Washington state
Others suggested that officials and the media were trying to cover up the possibility of terrorism inspired by or sympathetic to ISIS.”
The fact of the alleged shooter was Turkish of course has nothing at all to do with, in no way, how could you say such a thing with the possibility of being a terrorist attack. The FBI even said that this was not looking like a terrorist attack within the first hours of the investigation.
Does this mean that the FBI is in cahoots with the Justice Dept’s efforts to quell any anti-Islamic sentiment that may play a role in the up coming election? That the FBI gave a pass to Ms. Clinton on email controversy and gave immunity to one of Clinton’s closet aide regarding her role in the email controversy?
Really now, how could you say such a thing?
Read the Seattle Times this afternoon on the shooting. While the man is Turkish by ethnicity, has lived here since age of seven and so far no evidence presented of any religious motivation. Appears to be a young man with out direction and frequent run ins with the law.
Need to ban deadly hunting rifles which are meant only to kill.
Has Chicago now surpassed Ciudad Juárez, Mexico as the “murder capital” of the world?
The Charlotte Shooting And The Presidential Election
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/09/24/bill_oreilly_the_charlotte_shooting_and_the_presidential_election.html
Cruz endorses Trump.
Why does it take a TV station to reveal this? Obviously, governments don’t care in this case. And in a close election, this kind of thing matters – a lot. From the article:
…
Local officials in Colorado acknowledged “very serious” voter fraud after learning of votes cast in multiple elections under the named of recently-deceased residents.
A local media outlet uncovered the fraud by comparing voting history databases in the state with federal government death records. “Somebody was able to cast a vote that was not theirs to cast,” El Paso County Clerk and Recorder Chuck Broerman told CBS4 while discussing what he called a “very serious” pattern of people mailing in ballots on behalf of the dead.
It’s not clear how many fraudulent ballots have been submitted in recent years. CBS4 reported that it “found multiple cases” of dead people voting around the state, revelations that have provoked state criminal investigations.
“We do believe there were several instances of potential vote fraud that occurred,” said Colorado Secretary of State Wayne Williams. “It shows there is the potential for fraud.”
…
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2602775
The entire United States is beginning to resemble Texas, where in the 1948 senate election Lyndon Johnson “received the votes of the dead, the halt, the missing and those who were unaware that an election was going on” — just a handful of votes, but enough to put him over the top.
http://www.nytimes.com/1990/02/11/us/how-johnson-won-election-he-d-lost.html
Nothing has changed in Texas over the last seven decades:
Of course it is almost impossible to attribute any malicious intent to the bloated voter rolls.
And voter fraud, after it has occurred, as anyone who has actually participated in an election contest knows, is almost impossible to prove:
I was no fan of LBJ while in office but the volumes by Robert Caro on his life are a fantastic study in power and how to use it. They are chock full of anecdotes like noted above.
One of several reasons I do not like vote by mail. In Oregon and Washington it is the only way one can vote.
Voting is not simply a right. It is a duty and saying you are making it easier is not a good excuse.
Article clip @jim2 | September 25, 2016 at 8:55 am in moderation
From the article (idi0t word doctored to avoid mod trap):
…
Let’s just put it this way: If Donald Trump’s campaign was found guilty of this crime, the media would pre-emptively announce his resignation and carry him out of town, pitchforks and torches in hand. However, Hillary Clinton is apparently immune to any criticism in the media. Don’t know what I’m talking about? Let me fill you in.
The campaign Hillary4America, a group that advocates for the policies of Hillary Clinton, was searching for recruits to go to the polls and preach the word of Clinton. Two things are wrong with this:
First, it’s illegal to go to a polling/voter registration place and tell people who to vote for. It’s the reason why candidates can’t go to a polling/voter registration place and talk with voters, despite Bill Clinton doing it anyway and the media staying quiet about it. This seems like a clear cut case of voter manipulation and fraud.
Second, the idi0ts behind Hillary4America didn’t know that one of their prospective recruits, the very people they were instructing to violate voter laws, had a hidden camera on the whole time and exposed them for the crooks they really are.
…
http://usapoliticsnow.com/hillarys-campaign-knew-voter-fraud-didnt-know-cameras/
Another clip @jim2 | September 25, 2016 at 9:05 am in moderation
From the article, modified to avoid mod trap:
…
When will the Virginian Pilot stop l_y_ing about voter fra*d?
The Virginian Pilot says that voter fraud doesn’t happen. They l_i_e.
People know that people cheat if given the chance. That’s why they support voter ID laws. People care about their vote, and don’t want it cancelled out by fra*dsters.
Here is a story from Colorado about dead people voting.
The truth is that the Virginia Pilot approves of voter fr*ud, just as it approves of giving convicted fel*ns the right to vote.
The reason’s simple. They believe that people who commit voter fr*ud and convicted fel*ns are probably Democrats. And they want Democrats to win elections, preferably honestly, but by fr*ud if necessary. The writers, editors and management of the Virginian Pilot are Democrat operatives with a printing press.
…
http://tinyurl.com/hs9uojc
This seems like a really positive sign especially when you get a statement like this from the National Review about Hillary Clinton:
“The punchline here is obvious: It doesn’t matter whether you like Hillary Clinton or loathe her. Nor does it matter much whether you adhere to the orthodoxy on climate change. What matters is that finally — finally! — a leading Democrat has acknowledged that we need nuclear energy.”
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/440274/hillary-clinton-says-she-supports-nuclear-energy?utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A+Trending+Content&utm_content=57e3eb9d04d30155fd497904&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter
She is, of course, lying about her support of it. It’s a calculated lie based upon a supposition it will win more center votes than it will lose from the left.
Trump’s message of unleashing the energy sector to create jobs that actually raise GDP (as opposed to bureaucratic gov’t jobs which lower GDP) and make US industry more competitive resonates with centrists. Hillary has to lie her ass off (lord knows she has plenty in reserve, she’s ALL ass, and it comes naturally to her) adopting positions that Trump has held all along in order to compete for those votes.
Regardless, I still see it as a sea change as does the National Review.
Then you AND at least one author at the National Review are naive.
This is solely a defensive measure to counter Trump’s rapidly increasing poll numbers in fossil fuel states devastated by the one-two punch of heavy industries relocating offshore and the war on coal which was used to power those industries.
Trump in within easy striking distance in Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Michigan because of his support for coal mining and heavy industry. The linguistic kill shot he’s been using is “It used to be cars were made in Flint and you couldn’t drink the water in Mexico. Now the cars are made in Mexican and you can’t drink the water in Flint.” That’s pure gold. Weapons grade persuasion.
Impeach Barry said:
Imagine that, building an economy based on production and not reckless speculation, blowing serial debt bubbles, endless war and criminal activity.
@J0shua
Two black voters in the LAT/USC Daybreak poll changed their minds again. Trump went from 5% to 15% of the black vote overnight. There’s one other flip flopping black voter who might bring Trump back up to 20% very soon.
http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/
Are we having fun yet? I hope you’ve managed to wrap your head around a Trump presidency by now. It’s for your own good you know. A boy scout is always prepared.
A Mexican friend of mine emailed me this article as supporting evidence of his theory about the U.S. presidential election.
His theory is that the election is not about workers vs. capitalists. Instead, it is a conflict between two sects of elites — two sects of capitalists. On one side is productive capitalism, represented by Trump. On the other side is speculative capitalism, represented by Clinton.
Here are the passages from the article he highlighted:
Maybe they should build an underground wall. Add some airborne agents and a bunch of drones…
Sharyl Attkisson’s interview of Donald Trump today:
…
You see outside, you see the kind of crowds we have. And you just said something, you ought to show pictures of what’s outside, because it’s true, the press is an example. They never show the size of the crowd, ever. The only time they show it is, is a little bit of protest someplace within the crowd, then all of a sudden they show, and then people say, wow, what a big crowd that is.
…
http://fullmeasure.news/news/cover-story/donald-trump-interview-part-1
I’ve seen it in person forced to sit in the nosebleed seats in a 10,000 person stadium that the fire marshall had to close when it filled to capacity. There were thousands outside who didn’t get there in time. I arrived one hour early in a calculated effort to both avoid rush hour traffic and not be so late as to get turned away. I cut it close.
The Twitter article, “Incentive malus,” about bad science being hereditary reminds me of the tale of two suitors, one being younger and stronger, the other being older and sickly but perhaps a wee bit “smarter.” During the courtship as it turns out the younger may have been too honest– the sickly suitor took belladonna (a poison) that put a youthful-looking blush on his cheeks and temporarily mask his infirmities whereas the younger man was just being real. In the end, the bride married a man who died early, leaving her alone to raise a child. The child was not robust but instead, small and sickly but… very crafty.
“Last week was a record low number of comments for the presidential politics thread! ”
Because most folks are heartedly sick of the whole circus?
Because most folks are heartedly sick of the whole circus? Ain’t it the truth!
Ordvic
Just think how fed up those of us on the other side of the pond are!
A British election lasts six weeks. Which ever party head wins on the day Is our prime minister. They move into 10 downing street the same day.
I think that even after your election day it still takes several months before the President is inaugurated. Can’t you speed it up?
Tonyb
Some good points there, Tony. I’m wondering how your multiple-party system works over there.
Tony
As long as it is now after the election, (January 20), inauguration day used to be March 4. The change occurred under FDR. The end of the budget fiscal year used to be June 30 until it went to September 30 in 1977. Hoover had only 4 months to make any changes to the FY 1929 budget, almost impossible.
Cerescokid kid
Does the outgoing president still have the full legal authority to make binding decisions until the inauguration day of the new incumbent?
Tonyb
One of Britain’s two major parties just re-elected a leader (Corbyn) who seems unelectable as PM. Even though Britain doesn’t vote directly for PM, he harms their local hopes for seats too. Some parallels there.
Jimd
Many intellectuals, cultists, politicians and the media live in bubbles. A good example was with Brexit when the intellectual so called elite at Cambridge and other places went into meltdown at the result. There are a small number of extreme left wingers who really believe Corbyn will win a general election. Those outside their bubble look on in wonderment. It’s difficult to know if Jeremy or his brother, piers, are the most deluded.
I am not sure I see any connection with a serving president who has just seen their successor re elected but who still holds power for two more months whilst the other looks on, impotently.
Tonyb
Running a country is 99% not about what to do with immigrants. Yet, these campaigns spiral in on those side issues and become about them. It is very hard for the public to keep a proper perspective, whether it is a presidential election or a referendum. For so many, it becomes about their own hot-button, race-based, issues that are not about the day-to-day government of the country.
Tony
Absolutely, he has full legal authority for the entire term up to January 20. However, strictly on a political basis there may be some reluctance to move in some policy areas. The incumbent knows , for instance, any Executive Order could be reversed on January 21 so why bother. One of Obama’s decisions is already in the air to be influenced by the election. Let’s see what happens about his nomination for Supreme Court that the Senate Republicans have buried until the election. If Hillary wins the nomination may go through if Senate Republicans believe they can’t get anything better.
I’m so sorry that your delicate sensibilities are offended by this thread, Adam. How can we make it easier for you to not succumb to the dark desire to enter this sequestered space?
Tom fuller just forecast trump would get 35 percent of the popular vote plus or minus 1 .5 percent.
Anyone else care to make a prediction?
Tonyb
I can’t figure this one out. It is the most bizarre election I have followed closely beginning with the 1956 race between Ike and Stevenson. Unprecedented to have Congressional leaders not supporting their party’s candidate. Even more bizarre to have sound bites of those leaders used in the other party campaign commercials.
Trump will get over 45% if he loses. He is under polling because of a stigma some feel to be publicly for him. The intensity for him far exceeds that for Hillary which will translate into greater showing in the privacy of a voting booth than in pre-election polls. David touched on that and it is happening all across the country.
Very weird this year is the absence of yard signs and bumper stickers for both candidates. I have been actively looking for both names and never see them.
Cerescokid
In our Sunday papers this week a political commentator made exactly the same point that for the first time he could remember there were no yard or bumper stickers supporting their candidate.
I made the point earlier that there is probably a hidden few percent of support for trump, just as there was for Brexit.
Tonyb
Regardless of what each candidate’s position is concerning nuclear power, an expansion of nuclear can’t take place in the United States unless the long-term price of natural gas increases substantially over what it is today, thus restoring parity to the lifecycle costs of gas-fired versus nuclear generation.
The Democrats call for a 28% reduction in US carbon emissions by 2025, a 32% reduction by 2030, and an 80% by reduction 2050, goals which cannot be achieved unless the US Government puts a price on carbon and unless there is a substantial expansion of nuclear power. However, regardless of which party controls it, the US Congress will never legislate a carbon tax of any kind. All roads to achieving the substantial carbon emission reductions the Democrats say they want pass directly through the US Environmental Protection Agency.
The EPA has full legal and constitutional authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate all of America’s carbon emissions, not just those of the coal-fired power plants. But the EPA’s authority to regulate carbon emissions is not being utilized anywhere nearly to its full potential. If Hillary Clinton is elected president and doesn’t push the EPA towards comprehensive regulation of all of America’s greenhouse gas emission sources, then she is simply making empty promises concerning the issue of climate change.
What if Hillary Clinton is elected president but doesn’t make full use of the EPA in forcing steep reductions in America’s carbon emissions? What if Donald Trump is elected president — heaven forbid that such a crazy thing could ever happen — and simply tells climate activists to go stuff it?
If the environmental activist groups — the Sierra Club, the Friends of the Earth, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Children’s Litigation Trust, 350.org, etc., etc. — are truly committed to the fight against climate change, they must do what they aren’t doing now, and that is to force the EPA under threat of lawsuit to write a Clean Air Act Section 108 Endangerment Finding for carbon; to set a NAAQS for carbon; and then to create a comprehensive regulatory framework for carbon which forces the steep emission reductions they claim are needed.
Beta Blocker said:
Nah.
Price or cost mean almost nothing with a government as interventionist as ours.
Take the way the government destroyed the coal industry, for instance. It was regulation wot done it, though coal’s demise is often blamed on the low price of natural gas.
Since 1990 natural gas’s triumph over coal had almost no correlation whatsoever to the price of natural gas. Coal’s rout proceeded along a straight line, regardless of whether natural gas price was high or low.
When the government decides to regulate an industry out of existence, it just does it, economic costs be damned.
One of my main concerns about reliance on natural gas is that the prices are very spiky compared to coal. It that got reflected in electricity prices it would make budgeting much harder for both homes and businesses, which creates uncertainty and causes business to operate much more conservatively, slowing down economic growth.
GT – we have tons of nat gas and any significant increase in price will bring forth more from the ground. Demand would have to soar to spike prices now. Hard to see how we could export that much LNG.
Glenn Stehle, the widespread adoption of renewable energy mandates is the agent of change which is most responsible for putting considerable pressure on generators of baseload electricity, coal and nuclear alike, to move to a different model for managing supply and demand on the nation’s electric grids.
These renewable energy mandates are being imposed mostly at the state level, and most of these mandates have been written in ways that target all baseload generation for eventual elimination. Those who write these mandates are just as determined to eliminate baseload nuclear as they are to eliminate baseload coal.
The variable energy resources (VER’s) of wind and solar require conventional backup in the form of other variable energy resources which can quickly respond to changes in VER capacity supply and demand. From a total lifecycle cost perspective, gas-fired generation is currently the most economical means of supplying the conventional VER’s need to support the oncoming wind and solar VER’s; and market forces aren’t likely to strong enough over the long term to push the long-term price of natural gas high enough to keep nuclear competitive.
As things stand today, if the adoption of renewable energy mandates continues apace, the US will eventually lose most of its nuclear baseload capacity, unless special economic incentives are adopted to keep that legacy nuclear capacity on line. In any case, coal-fired baseload generation is on its way out, at least here in the United States. IMHO, the economic and political forces which are now driving coal-fired generation off the grid are unstoppable.
Whether the appearance of Small Modular Reactors (SMR’s) in a decade or so will eventually have a positive effect on the ability of nuclear to economically supply variable energy resources in support of government-mandated wind and solar is a question which is yet to be answered. Only time will tell.
Dear Dr. Curry
My comment is awaiting moderation. I hope this is due to WordPress being cantankerous today, although the weather here is magnificent Fall. I do seem to attract the downside of WordPress’s nature.
It appears the WordPress filter triggers on words that are frequiently used to describe some popular Dimowits. Words like m_u_r_d_e_r, variants of l_i_e, variants of c_r_o_o_k, etc.
Perhaps it is protecting Clinton.
From the article:
…
The issue of Clinton’s alleged mistresses and accusers was put back in the headlines Saturday when Donald Trump threatened on Twitter to bring Gennifer Flowers to the first presidential debate after Trump troll Mark Cuban said he’d sit in the front row. Flowers, who says she had a 12-plus year relationship with Clinton, responded promptly on social media, writing, “Hi Donald Trump… I’m in your corner. Of course I will see u at the debate!!”
After first denying any relationship with Flowers during a 1992 60 Minutes interview, Clinton later admitted to one sexual encounter with her in a 1998 deposition for the Paula Jones lawsuit.
On Sunday, both Broaddrick and Jones stated they would attend tomorrow’s presidential debate if they were invited.
Meanwhile, the issue of the number of alleged Clinton mistresses and victims has been in the media in recent months.
…
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/09/25/exclusive-kathleen-willey-clinton-sex-victims-fill-entire-audience-presidential-debate/
Newsflash: Hillary joins husband Bill in using a Cuban to screw someone. Monica Lewinsky declined to comment. The public wonders whether Mark will leave the debate with stains on his dress.
Hmmm … blondes in Germany should avoid trains at all costs, I’m thinking. From the article:
…
Parenting magazine Baby & Family has told readers to beware of families who are “inconspicuous” and “cheerful”, as these warning signs indicate they are right wing and thus “dangerous”.
Depicted with illustrations featuring solely blonde women and children, the report says ordinary parents must take action against right-wing families and make clear that their ideology has no place in the world.
Asserting that the term “right wing” “stirs up anxiety” and brings to mind “burning refugee homes”, skinheads, and the National Socialist Underground (NSU) group who carried out a string of violent attacks on foreign people, Baby & Family notes that people “rarely connect it with women, family and children”.
This, the high-circulation German magazine declares, “is precisely the great risk” as such people are just as dangerous if not more so as gangs of Nazi skinheads. The identifying features of right-wing families, it contends, are that they are “inconspicuous, blond, cute and engaged”.
“First of all, [right-wing families] are nice and dedicated” Michaela Köttig, sociologist and researcher of right-wing extremism at the Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences, alleges.
Researcher of right-wing politics, Eva Prausner, says a huge danger of right-wing families is that they seem normal.
…
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/09/25/blond-cheerful-families-dangerous-right/
It’s wrong because it is profiling.
Please name the best known researcher of left-wing politics.
Article clip @jim2 | September 25, 2016 at 2:40 pm in moderation. I missed the n_a_z_i word. Darn!
I hate when that happens.
The friendship of George W. Bush and Michelle Obama
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/24/politics/michelle-obama-george-w-bush-friendship/
Much as I dislike neocons at this moment for becoming party traitors… GW Bush has more class in his little finger than Barry has in his entire body. You didn’t see GW shamelessly spending half his time campaigning for John McCain in 2008. GW has kept a pretty low profile since leaving office. There’s just no substitute for good breeding. The aristrocrat and the mongrel.
There is a lot one might criticize about Bush’s presidency, but not much to criticize about Bush the man. And I am of the opinion that is true in many ways about Obama. Remove politics from the equation and see how he stacks up. Unlike Bush he is arrogant. But he is also a loving husband and father.
What leads you to believe he’s a loving husband and father? Unless his wife and kids are golf partners I think that’s false on the face of it.
False based on what Dave?
Note the contrast between Bill’s ubiquitous political presence post 2000 versus both Bushes and Reagan. Clinton just never shuts up. There is a certain class and dignity in silence. Given that all Obama has done for 8 years is to campaign 24 hours a day we can expect the same energizer bunny act from him for the next 20 to 30 years.
If I were Trump, I would invite to the front row; a Benghazi mom, a mom of a child slain by an illegal alien, an out-of-work coal miner, an out-of-work auto worker, an IT worker whose job was outsourced to India, a mom whose child was slain by a Islamic rabid religious fanatic, then Gennifer Flowers. I’m sure there are some others that would have a high impact on Billary’s composure.
Clinton doesn’t give schit about any of those you mentioned. Trump picked the single class of people that would rattle her; Bill’s Bimbos. There’s enough of them to fill the room too which is why I call them a class of people.
From the article:
…
That Barack Obama communicated in 2012—under a redacted pseudonym—with Hillary Clinton on the then secretary of State’s permeable home-brew email server and then claimed he did not know of that server’s existence until it was reported in the press in 2014 is far more than the usual politician’s prevarication.
Since the fish rots from the top—and in this case it stinks to high heaven—the surfacing of this particular presidential lie calls to question the entire FBI inquiry into the Clinton server, an investigation whose credibility was paper thin in the first place and has now completely vanished.
It’s time to ask that age-old question: “What did the president know and when did he know it?”
…
https://pjmedia.com/diaryofamadvoter/2016/09/24/obamas-colossal-email-lie/
From the article:
…
Do people around the world have a right to move to the United States? It’s a bedrock belief of most conservatives that there is no such right. The U.S. sets its own immigration policy, admits whom it chooses, and foreign nationals in foreign countries have no right — a claim that could be pursued in court — to enter the United States.
Now, Hillary Clinton says there is such a right, at least if a tweet from her campaign headquarters can be taken for a policy pronouncement.
…
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2602573/?platform=hootsuite#!
From the article:
…
Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions pushed back against Hillary Clinton campaign’s “radical” suggestion that foreign nationals living in foreign countries have a global right to immigrate to the United States.
As Byron York first reported, earlier this week, Clinton’s campaign indicated that she believes the world has a global right to immigrate to the United States—a position that essentially dissolves the United States’ status as a sovereign nation.
York explained that on Monday, Donald Trump delivered a speech in which he declared, “We want people to come into our country, but they have to come in legally, through a process. … No one has a right to immigrate to this country.”
…
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/09/24/jeff-sessions-pushes-back-clintons-radical-suggestion-global-right-immigrate/
Hillary has become unhinged. I think she popped a blood vessel. A big one. No political calculus in the world could possibly conclude it was a good move for her to announce a desire to raise the death tax. That will alienate virtually every successful professional politician in the country who just about without exception have estates that are above the death-tax exempt ceiling. Political suicide.
Of course it is a right. At least it is if you are a democratic politician and/or a one world globalist.
For the first they represent future voters having a high probability to vote democrat. For the latter, the more you can dilute and weaken the US, the higher your chances of seeing your vision of one world occurring.
Anti-oil-and-gas proposals fail to make Colorado ballot
http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/blog/earth_to_power/2016/08/colorado-secretary-of-state-says-anti-oil-and-gas.html
The Natural Gas War Burning Under Syria
http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/The-Natural-Gas-War-Burning-Under-Syria.html
Argue if you will. It’s your vote that is counted. At least in my country, when I go into that voting booth, the only one I have to answer to is the man in the mirror. That said, let me tell you all about that fun time at the NOAA campus, during the DC sniper thing, when the protesters showed up and the guy dressed like the admiral from Gilbert & Sullivan was telling all his hundreds of youthful protesters wearing sponge hats like dolphins to fall dead because the NAVY was bad. Now see, this happened and I could go on for more, it was a very long day and then some fool dropped a doe-nut with white powder and everybody screamed ‘anthrax’ and we had the ARMY show up. Did I mention I don’t like politics?
From my daily Texas Monthly email:
The article is behind a firewall, but can be viewed by Googling “Will water and oil mix in Balmorhea?”
A video and lots of great fotos.
Trump’s economic plan is a mixed bag [link]
If Trump can actually shut down the globalization rip off and bring manufacturing jobs back that will help.
But I have no delusions that he will do anything to stop the financial industries ripoff of America and the coming middle class tax hikes/austerity that will be required to pay for this asset stripping of America.
And Hillary will continue along the destructive path in both cases, so a vote for Trump is still the only way….
Of course its all moot, as we are headed straight to thermonuclear with Russia in Syria. Where we have absolutely no interest. Except at the behest of the Israel lobby.
Climate/Energy Policy Shakeup?!
Trump picks top skeptic to lead EPA transition
President Obama’s Clean Power Plan finally goes on trial — what’s at stake
No Fortune 100 CEOs Back Republican Donald Trump.
Democrat Hillary Clinton has 11 contributors and 2012 GOP nominee Mitt Romney had far more
http://www.wsj.com/articles/no-fortune-100-ceos-back-republican-donald-trump-1474671842
Killary Klinton and her war mongering minions in the Pentagon and Department of Defense strike again?
Sorry Glen but this is garbage. The Pentagon does not generate orders contrary to those of the President. This is conspiracy belief. A far more plausible scenario is that we dropped bombs either on the wrong location or that it was the correct location but the tactical picture was fluid and changed between the time the mission was given and the aircraft arrived over the target. You try identifying nationality of troops on the ground from 10,000 feet. There is a reason for the term fog of war.
Tripoli. 1986. French Embassy.
Brandon,
That’s definitely a foggy reference. Can you explain or do I try looking it up.
Presidential Debates Will Be a Major Influence for a Third of Voters, Poll Says
http://www.wsj.com/articles/presidential-debates-will-be-a-major-influence-for-a-third-of-voters-poll-says-1474808400
Climate Change Is Here: Inside the Summer of Hell and High Water.
With a catastrophic season of wildfires, megafloods and major hurricanes, the climate-change siege is fully upon us
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/summer-of-hell-and-high-water-shows-climate-change-is-here-w441345
This is the sort of garbage journalism that convinced me much of what we are told about the issue is BS meant to advance an agenda that has little to do with science or the climate.
The Seattle Times had a similar piece this Sunday from Seth Borenstein. These people are counting on the public having an attention span measured in days.
Are The Promoters Of Global Warming ‘Catastrophe’ The True Deniers?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/johntamny/2016/09/25/are-the-promoters-of-global-warming-catastrophe-the-actual-ones-in-denial/#186f312bff44
So much for Lester Holt’s neutrality.
He scolded the audience the first time they clapped for Trump asking them to be quiet then failed to do it a single time when they clapped for Clinton.
What’s up with that, Lester?
Lester the Molester. We already knew he donated to Clinton’s campaign.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/09/26/lester-holt-candy-crowley-moment-first-debate/
As did Trump!
That’s right, and he’s said it multiple times in front of thousands of screaming fans!
This was probably the biggest mistake made in the history of our country. If the Senate were elected by State Legislators like the angry, old, white men, who wrote the Constitution, specified, the Federal government more than likely wouldn’t be the evil behemoth it has grown into.
From the article:
…
The Seventeenth Amendment (Amendment XVII) to the United States Constitution established the popular election of United States Senators by the people of the states. The amendment supersedes Article I, §3, Clauses 1 and 2 of the Constitution, under which senators were elected by state legislatures.
…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventeenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Not a single policy “gotcha” on Trump in the debate.
No Allepo moment.
Had him on defensive a long time on issues few people don’t care about – birtherism and his personal income tax return.
Even president Obama pleaded to the public “please move on we have more important things to discuss than my birth certificate”. Harping on it doesn’t solve a single problem facing the nation.
Public polling indicates very few people are concerned about what’s on Trump’s taxes. He met all the legal requirements for financial disclosure. Presidents aren’t even required to give up running any companies they own while in office.
What Hillary failed to do were the very things she needed to do. Trip up Trump on policy issues people care about like national security, terrorism, economy growing at less than 2%, and getting over- extended in borrowing. Didn’t happen. The other thing that didn’t happen is she didn’t get him to take the bait and lose control.
So we had a super-practiced one-on-one debater, the most qualified presidential candidate evah, couldn’t trip up Trump on policy and couldn’t get him to launch any personal attacks despite launching many of her own.
As Tucker Carlson remarked tonight “There are no undecided voters. There are just voters wanting to know that Trump isn’t crazy before they vote for him. They want and they want it bad. Trump is change and so long as he isn’t a lunatic, which he isn’t and proved tonight, he’s got the right stuff to break up the status quo.
I wonder how many people who are so concerned over Trump’s tax return have bothered to look at his 104 page financial disclosure?
They couldn’t find anything untoward on that? Trump said he’d give the names of any institutions who give him credit lines or other loans. He’s got some $4B in hard business assets and a total of $700M in credit carried by several banks. He says his “Trump” brand is worth $6B in future discounted tax flow. That’s probably exaggerated but maybe not a lot. That’s not an excessive amount of working capital. He earned $680 million last year. That’s a pretty good return on capital. Plus he personally creates tens of thousands of good paying jobs and many billions in cash flow. That’s the kind of financial performance we need from our federal government. Spend less build more.
Ahem. Not that it means much but Time and CNBC online polls for who won are 60% Trump, 40% Hillary within 1% of each other at 1AM Central Time Tuesday morning.
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/26/vote-who-won-the-first-presidential-debate.html
http://time.com/4506217/presidential-debate-clinton-trump-survey/
Hillary failed in her mission to force an “Allepo” moment or to get Trump to lose his cool. Either one would have given her the win and she failed both.
Fortune magazine poll: 55% Trump, 45% Clinton on four topical questions then a whopping 87% said it didn’t change their minds.
http://fortune.com/2016/09/26/presidential-debate-donald-trump-hillary-clinton-poll/
Again a win for Trump presuming a 55/45 split for the 13% who changed their minds.
Fortune poll 7% undecided, 13% changed their minds, and 80% were unmoved. Just to be clear.
Betting odds, Trump down 4.4% to 29.6%, Clinton up 6.5% to 69.2%.
And we know how insightful bookies are.
Those who are more insightful can make a motza.
Nate Silver’s odds are a bit different.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo#now
All three prediction models have Trump with better than 45% odds.
Pre-debate odds.
I went to your link and as I looked the odds changed to 47.9% for Trump. Guess it is thought he at least didn’t disgrace himself in the debate. Our own commentators said he held his own but thought he looked more tired and fractious than Hillary at the end
tonyb
“as I looked the odds changed”
No, the first figure that shows is the odds for the election (in Nov), and the second is “odds if the election were held today”. But they are based on polls – pre-debate. The actual betting odds for Trump dropped considerably post-debate.
Nick, the betting markets are currently giving Trump a one in three chance of winning.
Let’s say you’re playing Russian Roulette and you are handed a revolver with 4 bullets and 2 empty chambers. How confident are you that you won’t blow your head off on the first try?
“How confident are you that you won’t blow your head off on the first try?”
Sounds like a good way of looking at it.
US murders surged in 2015 to highest rate in two decades
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2016/09/26/murders-surged-highest-rate-two-decades/F26q2t09aPhzjhChd00rgI/story.html
Murders in United States jumped nearly 11% in 2015, FBI data shows
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/murders-jumped-11-2015-fbi-data-shows-article-1.2807429
The question of murders in NY City came up last night, with Clinton and Lester Holt both insisting that they have not increased.
Both Clinton and Holt were wrong.
According to the “Crime in the United States” reports that the FBI publishes, the number of murders in NY City did increase in 2015.
Oh my God. Murders increased from 335 (2013) to 352 (2015), a whopping 5% increase over 2 years.
Curious George,
The question of whether murders have increased or decreased in NY City is of an empirical nature, and I’m not sure everyone is into Newspeak and doublethink — the form of thinking where up is down, black is white, and ignorance is strength.
Following are excerpts from the transcript of what was said during the debate last night.
Notice how Clinton and Holt want to make it all about identity politics — racial bias and discriminaiton by the police — and Trump wants to make it about what has been demonstrated to have worked in the past to bring crime rates down.
The issue of the efficacy of stop-and-frisk also came up last night, with both Clinton and Holt arguing it had not been effective in NY City.
But again, the crime stats indicate they may be wrong.
Here’s the history of stop-and-frisk in NY City from wikipedia:
Only problem is that Giuliani became Mayor in 1994. Dinkins was Mayor in 1990.
Nick Stokes,
That’s right, Bratton preceded Giuliani.
But that’s no problem, at least if we’re talking about the efficacy of stop-and-frisk, since Bratton implemented his policing tactics beginning in 1990.
“since Bratton implemented his policing tactics beginning in 1990”
Bratton was in Boston when Giuliani appointed him Police Commissioner in 1994. He had previously been with transit police in NY.
Nick Stokes,
So what’s your point?
Are you arguing that the NY police, when Bratton became head of Transit Police in 1990, didn’t begin implementing stop-and-frisk?
I’ve cited a source that says that’s when the implementation of stop-and-frisk began. Are you claiming that is not the case? If so, where is your source?
“I’ve cited a source that says that’s when the implementation of stop-and-frisk began.”
No you haven’t. Your source says he implemented a zero tolerance policy, which is not at all the same. And it is unlikely that the head of transit police could be mainly responsible for a drop in the city’s murder rate, or indeed would have authority to implement stop-and-frisk on his own. In any case, he went to Boston in 1992.
Nick Stokes said:
Nah.
Sources, Nick, sources. Your unsubstantiated and unsourced assertions count for little.
Stop-and-frisk may not be “the same” as a zero tolerance policy, but there certainly is no zero tolerance policy without it. No one, on either side of the debate, attempts to make these razor thin, nit-picking, and highly irrelevant distinctions in nomenclature that you do.
“Sources, Nick, sources.”
OK, where is your source that says that David Dinkins introduced stop-and-frisk in NYC in 1990?
Nick Stokes said:
Say what? What does Dinkins have to do with it?
The claim is that “broken windows” policing, zero tolerance policing, stop-and-frisk — call it whatever you want — was the brain child of Bratton. He began rolling it out when he became head of the New York City Transit Police in 1990, and more fully in 1994 when he became Police Commissioner.
Clinton and Holt’s claim that stop-and-frisk has been “ruled unconstitutional” is also extremely iffy, and Trump’s description of the legal status of stop-and-frisk was not that far off the mark. Citing Wikipedia again:
From this history, one can see why there is so much enmity between de Blasio and the NY City police.
Scott Adams: I Score the First Debate
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/151007796236/i-score-the-first-debate
“But voters don’t care about facts and debating style. They care about how they feel.”
“Consumer Confidence in U.S. Hits Nine-Year High”
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-27/consumer-confidence-in-u-s-rises-to-highest-since-august-2007
What does this mean?
What it means is the same as the doctor telling you that your chances of survival have increased from 14% to 15%. You’re still in a horrible situation and probably going to die if there isn’t vast improvement that happens soon.
The fact of the matter is there’s a financial bubble been created by the US borrowing and spending $7 trillion dollars over the past 8 years, as much as was borrowed in the 200 years before that. And what we have to show for all that borrowing is an economy growing at a catastrophic long term rate of less than 2%. It needs to grow at double that rate for many years to climb out of the hole that’s been dug.
Consumers were more optimistic about the outlook for the labor market, as 15.1 percent said more jobs will be available in six months, the most since June 2015
Share of Americans who see their incomes increasing in the next six months fell to 17.1 percent from 18.5 percent
A 16.5 percent share of respondents said they saw an improvement in business conditions in the next six months, down from 17.6 percent
Buying plans wavered, however, with purchase expectations falling for autos, homes and appliances
2016 Global Manufacturing Competitiveness Index
[…]
[…]
[…]
[…]
[…]
One of the advantages of higher boundaries between polities (e.g. “nation states”) is the increased incentive for governments to work together with industry, finance, labor, and the consumer/customer base in competition with other polities.
Barriers to unrestrained immigration and offshoring of manufacturing and other productive labor allow various polities to experiment with different methods of “recycling” the money spent buying consumer products to consumers so they can buy more. That buying is what drives the competitive production and marketing that, in turn, drives technological improvement.
During the heyday of “Fordism”, skilled and semi-skilled labor were both the main instrument of manufacturing (and its main expense) and the main consumers. As offshoring of manufacture to foreign workers (including “guest”/remittance workers) diverted the money paid for labor to non-consumers, even as it brought down the prices of the products, the “class” of consumers to buy these lower-priced products shrank, as their jobs disappeared.
Most of the replacement jobs were low-paid unskilled labor with little support for discretionary spending, which latter was the mainstay of consumer spending.
As the manufacturing comes home, however, the jobs won’t follow, they’ll disappear. Replaced by automation and a sprinkling of highly skilled jobs that will leave most of the class of displaced workers stuck with low-paid unskilled jobs.
This will have to be solved, somehow, with a system of recycling (don’t call it “redistribution”) money from the upper side of the manufacturing chain back to consumers so they can buy more. Such a system, however, has no chance at all of working without those national barriers.
Without them, all the efforts to recycle value to consumers will drain away as remittances, or support of endless immigrant relatives who are all used to a much more “frugal” lifestyle.
AK says:
Brazil is the poster child for how not to “recycle” money.
It did the whole “recycling” thing, including a universal basic income:
However, just as with Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, much of the stimulus leaked off due to, as you say, insufficent impediments to trade and capital flows. Much of the stimulus spending was used to buy more imported goods, and not bolster domestic production.
The biggest benificiary to Obama’s Recovery Act, it turns out, may have been China:
Report: Feds Give Billions To Foreign Green Energy Companies
http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/17/report-feds-give-billions-to-foreign-green-energy-companies/#ixzz4LUdi0B2j
@Glenn Stehle…
Thus, we (and voters) can blame “free trade” for the fact that the “stimulus” did so little good.
After all, if all the given-away money had included restrictions on buying from manufacturers operating in the US, paying US workers, we could have been sued in the WTO.
AK,
I would argue that the entire neoliberal structure that Hillary Clinton is so desperately attempting to sustain — including the WTO — has run its cycle and is now obsolete.
@Glenn Stehle…
It won’t go without a fight. The financial world has a very great deal of money invested based on globalist expectations. I suspect that’s the main reason so many Republican CEO’s are opposed to Trump.
@Glenn Stehle…
Recently I’ve been digging into John A. Mathews’ ideas combining the “long waves and technoeconomic paradigm shifts” of Kondratiev with “neo-Schumpeterian theorizing on technological ‘surges’ of creative destruction,” in the idea of “renewable energy” as an “emergent 6th paradigm […] driven by the technology surge associated with renewable energies, particularly in China where the investment is most intense and the falling costs are driving market expansion.”
I’m highly skeptical that “renewable” energy alone could drive such a sixth wave, but the rapidly falling prices and emerging notions of “externalities” of fossil carbon might play a major part in that wave.
The timing of these waves is interesting in comparison with Quigley’s stages of “economic organization” (pp 37-38/52-53), especially the expansion of “Financial capitalism” along with the 2nd Kondratiev wave (railroads and big steel).
The question is what sort of financial reorganization might accompany the 6th wave? Given the uncertainties, it makes sense that most of the major concentrations of capital/investment would be chary of it. Or any change accompanying it.
Like most generals, they seem to be fighting the last war.
What good is accomplished by shoe-horning human development into “waves”? Does it predict anything of note or usefulness? Just askin’.
I’d say it gives us a framework in which to make predictions. Or at least, educated guesses.
It’s something of a pattern. Does it tell you how high or long the next wave will be? Does it tell you what will cause it or what the knock-on effects will be? It tells me about as much as the ice core CO2 record, which isn’t one heck of a lot.
No. But it does sort of suggest that we should expect a heavy round of investment, evolving into a bubble, in some new technology.
Which, if correct, might offer some guidance for the next couple decades.
My questions are sincere. We see so much garbage from “science” and other academic fields that one must always ask if its just a case of mental masturbation or actually possesses some utility.
Well, it seems intuitively obvious to me that there are important connections between technological development and economic activity. This, at least, tries to develop some theory of how they interact.
AFAIK, most economists simply dismiss technology as random, or a predictable result of investment in R&D.
The problem with “green” technology is that they require massive infusions of tax payer monies. Past technological revolutions were mostly self propelled because they provided something people were willing to pay for in a free market. They weren’t propelled by subsidies and government mandates.
For these reason, I don’t believe “green” tech will fuel the next wave.
Except for Wright’s “Law”.
This is a somewhat useful concept, sort of like the tech wave thing you threw out earlier. But, again, the concept is too general to use as a tool to inform us of the economic sustainability of “green” tech.
We’ve covered ad nauseam all the other expensive pieces that have to be in place to effectively utilize intermittent energy sources. Smart grid, batteries that don’t exist (and might never exist), backup power. Focusing on the unit cost of a solar panel or windmill blade is missing the forest for the trees.
And, again, this is government-driven, not market driven and that means it’s not something that people naturally are drawn to.
People saw readily the utility of kerosene and were clamoring to get it. Not so with solar panels.
Not really. It offers a presumptive relationship between deployment and cost reductions. This relationship suggests that large-scale deployment will be accompanied by substantial cost reductions regardless of where the money came from to pay for it.
In WWII governments built airplanes to deploy and get shot down. Manufacturing costs came down.
In the “Space Age” the government(s) built rocket-based launch systems to deploy satellites. Manufacturing costs came down.
The government(s) bought large amounts of cutting edge electronics, including the integrated circuits ancestral to modern IT tech. Manufacturing costs came down.
The government(s) first bought solar cells/panels, then established subsidies for others to buy them. Manufacturing costs came down.
It’s true, the process with solar PV has gone much farther than it had to with other technology, but solar PV has almost reached parity for 10-15% penetration alongside CCGT, and it’s unlikely (IMO) that those subsidies will go away before it crosses the tipping point.
But naysayers like you keep ignoring anything that doesn’t fit your preconceptions.
Not really necessary, but, given “Moore’s Law”, probably the cheapest way to accomplish its function.
Perhaps, but there are options using pumped hydro that don’t require dams. And the main part, the turbines and motor/generators, are pretty much mature technology.
Nope.
That’s the wrong perspective. You’re trying to apply logic that only works for base-load and dispatchable power to intermittents. For CCGT, with its very small up-front capitalization costs, redundant solar/wind and CCGT is very different than considering it “backup power.”
Well, actually by the ’70’s there were people who saw the utility:
(I find it very interesting that Wiki’s timeline of solar PV includes no mention of either Exxon or Berman (as of today.)
At that time, of course, PV and batteries had similar prices, so the combination was suitable for all sorts of isolated applications.
Mild mannered arch-skeptic Myron Ebell is apparently heading Trump’s EPA transition team.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trump-picks-top-climate-skeptic-to-lead-epa-transition/.
What a great choice. Myron normally works the Hill, which will help if he gets to work over EPA. Especially interesting that Trump picked a climate person, not an EPA air & water person. However, his team does a lot on EPA, especially Marlo Lewis, who has been hammering the Clean Power Plan (which is in Court today). Trump gets the whole Cooler Heads Coalition.
David, I think the EPA’s Clean Power Plan has a fair chance of being struck down in the courts because it unfairly targets one sector of America’s economy for steep emission reductions while encouraging greater reliance on other GHG emitting sources from other competing sectors.
If the true goal is to actually achieve the very significant GHG emission reductions the Democrats say they want — as opposed to playing politics with the issue of climate change as a means of gaining the support of environmental activists — the Clean Power Plan isn’t a particularly smart way of going about it.
If, after the upcoming election, the US Government remains intent on regulating America’s carbon emissions in support of President Obama’s steep reduction targets, it must regulate all carbon emissions across the board, spreading the burdens of compliance as equally and as fairly as possible among all emission sources and among all economic sectors.
BB, read Larry Tribe’s brief on same. Harvard Law’s foremost constitutional scholar. He says it is unconstitutional. He is a flaming liberal, whose only greater loyalty is to the Constitution. Available online via Google. Key words ‘Tribe CPP Constitution’ in any order.
Beta, I do not think that is among the objections raised by the plaintiffs.
Ristvan (Rud Istvan): “BB, read Larry Tribe’s brief on same. Harvard Law’s foremost constitutional scholar. He says it is unconstitutional. He is a flaming liberal, whose only greater loyalty is to the Constitution. Available online via Google. Key words ‘Tribe CPP Constitution’ in any order.”
David Wojick: “Beta, I do not think that is among the objections raised by the plaintiffs.”
Lawrence Tribe’s brief doesn’t state so directly, but if one is familiar with past EPA practice, one can only conclude that if the US Government is determined to regulate carbon emissions to the extent that is necessary to achieve President Obama’s long-term GHG reduction goals, the only way it can be done legally and practicably is to regulate carbon as a completely separate pollutant class from all other classes of pollutants — which of course, the Clean Power Plan (CPP) does not do.
The CPP plays games with Clean Air Act Section 111 in an attempt to bundle carbon with other recognized pollutants. As written, the CPP is in basic conflict with constitutional law and it is a significant departure from past EPA regulatory practice. IMHO, the professional EPA staff who drafted the Clean Power Plan had to have known that the CPP is fatally flawed from these two perspectives. So why was the plan written that way?
One should never mistake motion for action, and as a realistic means of achieving some good portion of the Democratic Party’s highly ambitious GHG reduction goals, pushing the CPP is motion, not truly action. The Clean Power Plan is a regulatory strategy written mostly for political purposes to assist the Obama Administration in managing its relationships with the environmental activist groups and to keep that constituency inside their camp.
The lawyers who work for the environmental activist groups also have to know that as written, the Clean Power Plan is in basic conflict with constitutional law and is a significant departure from past EPA regulatory practice. How can they call themselves specialists in environmental law and pollution regulation if they don’t know this?
If these lawyers and these environmental activist groups are truly committed to achieving President Obama’s highly ambitious GHG reduction targets, why are they not pushing for separate regulation of carbon as its own unique class of pollutant? Why are they not demanding that a CAA Section 108 Endangerment Finding be written for carbon? Why are they not demanding that a NAAQS be set for carbon using a Section 108 Endangerment Finding as the starting point? Why are they not demanding that a truly comprehensive carbon regulation strategy be adopted which is written well enough to be legally sound, to be highly resistant to lawsuits, and to be practicably implemented nationwide at the state and local governmental levels in a reasonably fair and consistent manner?
Entertaining (and perceptive) summary of the debate
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/09/27/idiot-winds-at-hofstra/
I am turned off by slick and slimy politicians such as Gore, Obama and our own Tony Blair.
So I would automatically have gone for the less polished performer. Whether I would vote for him is another matter though.
tonyb
I didn’t fact check the article you link but I did note one thing that indicated it needs fact checking.
The author claims that taking Iraq’s oil is a de facto war crime.
In point of fact it is not a crime. It’s called war reparations and it’s not only legal it’s common practice. Taking land is a war crime. Seizing assets to cover the winner’s cost of the war is not. It’s like winning in court. The winner can and usually does ask for and receive court costs and attorney’s fees.
Anyone who can’t bother to look up the legality of war reparations before giving their opinion on it is incompetent at best and likely wrong about a lot of other things.
Separating the wheat from the chaff outside your narrow field of expertise has never been one of your strong suits, Professor Curry.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_reparations
Fun read
Agree.
Capt’nDallas
It seems a bit odd that during the primaries, debates seem to have a great deal of influence on who was the selected nominee. During the Presidential debates, all sorts of gaffs are overlooked. Maybe, during a Presidency, all the gifted oratory of the primaries, the bickering and failure to resolve anything of the Presidential debates, and the jawboning needed during the Presidency represent skill sets have nothing to do with one another.
I guess the only good way to choose a President is after they have had their stint in office, judge their ability to get things done, adapt and manage. Maybe in a marginal way, the public should look at a future Presidential nominee who has been a president of something, and see how they did. I guess that is why I like Governors as Presidential candidates, and then of course there is Jimmy Carter.
For the people who seem to be able to, although famously many have not, get things done as President, a view to Congress, someone who has been there for a while, House or Senate, would make a better choice.
C’est la vie.
I combed the transcript for what the candidates had to say about CAGW and “clean” energy:
That exchange is a clear trump win.
Of course I am influenced by the nausea inducing rote comments by Hillary on how she has a “plan” to do all these things. With our money of course.
Here’s an outline of a typical Billary meeting:
http://dilbert.com/strip/2008-10-28#comments
I haven’t followed the debate. they are both dreadful candidates. Trump is an enormous risk. Clinton is guaranteed to be another weak president and do enormous damage to world security and economy because of her weakness.
However, reading these quotes revealing she would further distort markets to support more solar panels and is CAGW advocate says it all. She’s just another gullible member of the loony left.
Trump isn’t the great bug-bear presented by the entrenched elites and politicians. His approach is to bring together all the stake holders in a given situation and negotiate, trying to find a win-win.
If elected President, there will be a seat at the table for the outsourcing billionaires. It’s just that they won’t be able to buy anything they want. They will have to give a little.
There are things I don’t like about Trump, also, but I think he would be way better for the US and the Western world than Billary.
Robots, Automation, and a Universal Basic Income
http://prospect.org/article/robots-automation-and-universal-basic-income
Who Won the Debate? My View and Some Surprising Polls
https://mishtalk.com/2016/09/27/who-won-the-debate-my-view-and-some-surprising-polls/
What the global hey was Hillary talking about? “Alarmism has encouraged the pursuit of a one-sided climate policy of trying to cut carbon emissions by subsidizing wind farms and solar panels. Yet today, according to the International Energy Agency, only about 0.4% of global energy comes from photovoltaics and windmills. And even with exceptionally optimistic assumptions about future deployment of wind and solar, the IEA expects that these energy forms will provide a minuscule 2.2% of the world’s energy by 2040.” (Bjorn Lomoborg, The Alarming Thing About Climate Alarmism)
The IEA is wrong. Solar PV alone will top 10% well before 2030. By penetration (MWHr), not capacity. Capacity will be a large fraction of the total by then.
There’s not enough money in other peoples’ pockets to make Western Leftists’ Utopian dreams about solar energy and windmills come true.
Looks like the BBC holds women in deepest regard. From the article:
…
The BBC has appointed a “well known and respected” journalist, who once suggested someone should “sh*t” in Sarah Palin’s mouth on American television, as their new religious affairs correspondent.
…
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/09/27/shock-bbcs-new-religious-correspondent-said-someone-sht-sarah-palins-mouth/
jim2,
Hidden away behind all the racism, classism and gross misogeny of the establishment’s identity politics are very concrete economic issues.
It is these economic issues that the establishment wants to keep safely tucked away and to distract the public’s attention away from. The establishment achieves this by making the debate 100% about identity politics.
In the case of Martin Bashir, just look what triggered such a vicious attack on Palin. From the article you linked:
The funny thing is, Palin was far better qualified for the job than Obama based on actual experience and accomplishment. And she was the VP candidate, not the Presidential one. For me that showed liberal media bias and bankruptcy of Progressives far more clearly than the anti Trump campaign.
She was outspoken. I think that was the main thing that made her a target. Of course, she is also Christian – a pariah to the lefties. But even the Redimowits were tossing spit balls her way. I’m very disappointed in the Bushes. It’s as if the nominee isn’t a Bush or at least Bush-approved, they will put that before the welfare of their country.
Trump hit the nail on the head when he said Billary does have a lot of experience – bad experience.
Concerning the Twitter link, “What’s the point of tenure…,” we have learned to our chagrin and societal ruin that it is what entices many to do whatever it takes to avoid providing value in a free enterprise economy– the government-education complex is in serious need of downsizing, for the sake of individual liberty and for the preservation of our liberal Judeo-Christian heritage. The hoax and scare tactics of global warming is a wake-up call that we are witness to the fall of Western civilization.
Slick Willie and Cr_0_0_ked Hill would disagree.
Slick Willie with a taste for Gore
Nailed Crooked Hillary to the door.
Hillary said in a voice quite quaint
Please Slick Willie you’ll mar the paint.
Please, jim2.
I won’t ask twice.
Busted Donald rigging ring.
Hmmm … that reminiscent of the sort of things I was hearing and reading during the Redimowit primary race. We know how that turned out, don’t we?
I’ve got one word for you, Jim.
Just one word.
Are you listening?
Reddit.
Willard,
The Los Angeles Times tracking poll isn’t showing any break in Trump’s momentum the day after the debate.
Do you believe it to be “rigged” too?
http://cesrusc.org/election/

Willard’s perception overwhelms reality.
> Do you believe …
Our man in Mexico strikes again time with a very serious squirrel.
The same word I got for him as before, even if he’s never listening:
Reddit.
Should DNA scientists be required to hire a historian? Let’s take a poll.
If Scott Adams is right, then Clinton and her legions of sycophantic “journalists,” “experts,” and other assorted pundits and talking ditto heads may be playing right into Trump’s hands.
Adams claims that Trump’s main objective in the debates was to come off “less scary.” And by making Clinton’s debate triumph look like Sherman’s march through Georgia, Clinton Inc. may have done just that.
For instance, get a load of Clinton in this video from CNN, where she’s talking to her supporters at a rally in North Carolina Tuesday, the day after the debate:
Or here in the CBS Evening News coverage last night:
The Boston Globe joined the orgy of Clinton triumphalism this morning too:
Adams comments are ringing true for me. Just caught up on 3 days worth of the Seattle Times. The Trump Hillary articles are 90% in her favor. She isn’t outperforming him by that margin. Which begs the question, why is the press acting like she is?
Clinton Inc. is certainly playing one identity card — the gender card — in a big way this morning.
With the establishment it’s 100% identity politics, 100% of the time. After all, we certainly wouldn’t want to make the election about the economy, national security, crime or permanent war.
And:
There’s another issue that the Alicia Machado imbrolio interjects into the debate, one that Milo Yiannopoulos addressed at his speech at LSU last week. And that is sizeism:
Identity politicians want to create solidarity between fat people, and especially fat women, so that they can add them to their pantheon of victim groups. Thus sizeism takes its place alongside other isms and phobias of identity politics — racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, etc.
The project to unite fat people, and especially fat women, is not new. It’s been around for at least 20 years. Witness, for instance, Women En Large: Images of Fat Nudes published in 1994, well before Triggleypuff entered the scene:
Clinton Ad Features ‘Miss Universe’ Winner That Donald Trump Insulted
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/09/27/clinton_ad_features_miss_universe_winner_that_donald_trump_insulted.html
Megyn Kelly revealed in a live interview with her yesterday that Machado lied about her eating disorders. Machado had a broken english meltdown when Kelly put the hammer down and displayed the damning 1997 confession.
Machado admitted in a Washington Post interview in 1997 that she was bulimic and anorexic in the entire year leading up to the pageant. That was long before she met The Donald who only came into the picture after she actually won and had to be managed for the next year on tour as an employee of the pageant.
Machado has no witnesses to being called “Miss Piggy” and “The Housekeeper” by Trump. None. And now she’s been busted in a big fat (pun intended) lie.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1997/05/16/miss-universe-sizing-up-her-reign/4b76f45c-aaa9-4b44-8acf-39f2d4af7598/
The shameful part is that Machado would be an absolute zero if it weren’t for Donald Trump and now she is biting the hand that fed her. Or rather biting the hand that stopped her from feeding herself. You know what I mean.
The only Machado I care about is Manny Machado.
Whatever Happened to Peak Oil?
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/09/28/whatever_happened_to_peak_oil_131909.html
VIDEO: Newt Gingrich — Trump won the debate. Don’t believe the “Intellectual Yet Idiot” class
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/09/27/newt-gingrich-trump-won-debate-dont-believe-intellectual-yet-idiot-class.html
Another “IYI”?
Interesting –
–snip–
Donald Trump’s supporters are LESS likely to be affected by trade and immigration, not more.
–snip–
http://www.vox.com/2016/8/12/12454250/donald-trump-gallup-trade-immigration-study
A similar pattern played out with the vote on Brexit…where “leave” voters were not more likely to have been negatively impacted by immigration than “stay” voters, and answers to questions about something like views on the death penalty were highly correlated with views on leaving the EU. .
–snip–
What Rothwell found was revelatory, to say the least. He finds that individuals who are struggling economically are not more likely to support Trump, nor are people living in areas that have suffered a loss of manufacturing jobs, an influx of immigration, or competition from China. By contrast, people in areas where whites are struggling health-wise, and in terms of intergenerational mobility (and in areas that are very racially segregated), do seem more likely to back Trump.
–snip–
I should say [re Brexit]… “not more likely to have been negatively impacted economically…”
“A similar pattern played out with the vote on Brexit…where “leave” voters were not more likely to have been negatively impacted by immigration than “stay” voters”
Making stuff up again, little Joshie? You couldn’t be more wrong about that if you tried, the ‘Leave’ voters were exactly those most likely to be impacted by immigration.
You really haven’t the first clue what you’re wittering about, have you?
Bracing yourself for eight years of the Donald, are you?
You should be, that’s what you’re going to get.
GO TRUMP 2016!
Cat.
Try looking at the polling data, not just the popular beliefs.
Cat –
Regarding the data:
http://www.perc.org.uk/project_posts/thoughts-on-the-sociology-of-brexit/
https://flipchartfairytales.wordpress.com/2016/06/28/looking-behind-the-brexit-anger/
Cat –
And…
http://www.resolutionfoundation.org/media/blog/the-referendum-living-standards-and-inequality/
http://www.fabians.org.uk/brexit-voters-not-the-left-behind/
You remind me a bit, of Crazy Joe Davola.
Do you hear me now?…
Where’s the enthusiasm?
In yet another ‘first’ for this election: “Since The Arizona Republic began publication in 1890, we have never endorsed a Democrat over a Republican for president. Never. This reflects a deep philosophical appreciation for conservative ideals and Republican principles.
This year is different.”
http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/editorial/2016/09/27/hillary-clinton-endorsement/91198668/‘
Probably a problem with the reporting.
Here’s the “enthusiasm”!!!!
Clinton’s supporters have such enormous “enthusiasm” that there’s not any left over for the deplorables.
Methinks you misunderstood. Nice ad hoc deflections to crowd pics though.
“The 2016 Republican candidate is not conservative and he is not qualified.
That’s why, for the first time in our history, The Arizona Republic will support a Democrat for president.”
There’s more in the link, but presume you won’t read it and if you do your eyes may hurt.
Arizona is a safe Trump state. The Arizona Republic newspaper was bought out in the year 2000. It’s 126 year history of not endorsing a democrat for president is actually a 16 year history with the current owner.
Pffffffffffft.
“The Dallas Morning News has also suffered a loss of subscribers, news editor Mike Wilson told Poynter. “Certainly we’ve paid a price for our presidential recommendation, but then, we write our editorials based on principle and sometimes principle comes at a cost,” he said.”
Principles and actual costs. How about that?
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/09/28/arizona-republic-clinton-endorsement-blowback/91246226/?utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzRss&utm_campaign=usatoday-newstopstories
Oops. Sorry, but I forgot we were discussing the Arizona newspaper.
Hmm. Wonder if Michigan is a ‘safe state’?
“Since its founding in 1873, The Detroit News has backed a Republican every time it has made a presidential endorsement (three times we have sat on the sidelines — twice during the Franklin Roosevelt elections and in the 2004 Bush/Kerry contest).
We abandon that long and estimable tradition this year for one reason: Donald J. Trump.”http://www.detroitnews.com/story/opinion/editorials/2016/09/28/endorse-johnson-president/91254412/
Danny Thomas: “Hmm. Wonder if Michigan is a ‘safe state’?”
These days Danny boy, I think you’ll find that the concept of ‘safe states’ is a thing of the past, especially for the Left/Liberals/Democrats or whatever you lot call yourselves.
Danny Thomas,
What is it about realignment that you don’t understand?
And as Yves Smith noted, “All those Republican endorsements she worked so hard for should really be a help” with this:
Glenn,
“What is it about realignment that you don’t understand?”
Most of it! Trump is excellent about pointing out issues yet awful about detailed solutions.
So why don’t you ‘splain’ it to me. To what, are we ‘realigning’?
Hillary Clinton Touts Endorsements From Republicans
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/09/29/hillary_clinton_touts_endorsements_from_republicans.html
Now it’s even USA Today against Trump.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/09/29/dont-vote-for-donald-trump-editorial-board-editorials-debates/91295020/
Danny Thomas,
There are literally dozens of articles similar to this one out there, but I believe this one does about as good of a job of “splaining’ it as any I’ve seen.
It goes without saying, however, that this sort of class analysis is krytonite for Clinton Inc., which dismisses it as being part of the grand conspiracy being perpetrated against America by the Russian menace.
In other words Glenn, Clinton (and at this side of the Pond, the Europhiles such as Cameron) are increasingly recognised as representing the ‘banksters’ and their enablers, acolytes and support structures in Government and the media.
Now Joe Public has had a bellyful of them and is doing all he can to ensure they damn well know it, with – it appears – considerable success, much to the mortification of the usual suspects.
catweazle
Brexit was about our right to rule ourselves and secure our own borders but there were a lot of related things rolled up into it such as an intense dislike of the political, cultural and financial elite.
Just the last few days we have had examples of utter arrogance from the English Football Manager, Sir Philip Green, Corbyn and his obnoxious sidekick John, and too many others to mention . The sooner they are kicked out of public life the better.
Trump equates to the yearning of a substantial portion of the American electorate to ‘brexitise’ their own elite. Trouble is, whilst he may have the right message it seems doubtful he is the right person unless he can display considerably more nous than he has done to date. It would help if he would stop shouting at everyone and interrupting them. He also seems to rise to the Clinton bait too readily.
Clinton represents the sort of politician I detest but Trump needs to do a lot better than he has to date if he is to prevent her enthronement.
tonyb
climatereason: “Trump needs to do a lot better than he has to date if he is to prevent her enthronement.”
Which is exactly what was said about the Brexiteers right up to the time that the result for Sunderland came in. All the pundits, the bookies and the pollsters were absolutely convinced of the outcome of the Referendum
I suspect a similar set of events will occur on November 8, 2016.
Plus, I think you’ll find Trump is actually doing very well indeed, he is a much wilier old fox than most of his opponents understand – or, in fact, are capable of understanding. As the day of the vote approaches, just watch his tactics subtly alter…
Here’s the enthusiasm…
Nostril enthusiasm:
Huma Abedin’s father says:
…
In a separate discussion on the state’s role in a person’s life, Abedin said it is necessary to police the application of Sharia law.
“The state has to take over” as Muslim countries evolve, he argued. “The state is stepping in in many countries … where the state is now overseeing that human relationships are carried on on the basis of Islam. The state also under Islam has a right to interfere in some of these rights given to the individual by the Sharia.”
…
http://freebeacon.com/issues/weiner-father-law-exposed/
This is perhaps Trump’s most important policy initiative, his push to rein in the unelected technocrats at the Fed, who are accountable to no one except the TBTF (Too Big To Fai)l Bankers:
WTO cuts 2016 world trade growth forecast to 1.7 percent, cites wake-up call
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-trade-wto-idUSKCN11X0HB
There’s a new report out by the NY Fed that shows how life-cycle real wages of white males born in the 1950s have gotten hammered. This demographic cohort first weathered 15 years of stagnant real wages, which was then followed by 10 years of decling real wages.
And the researchers predict it’s only going to get worse.
And the report only takes into account those lucky enough to have a job.
And the report only takes into account white men. Census figures show Blacks and Hispanics have fared even worse than Whites since 2007.
A speck in your eye is looking more & more like a telephone poll…
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/specialreports/solyndra-scandal/
I got a million or two of them…
With that record he should be running as a Democrat.
Add to this that Redirecting Donald directed $2.3 million owed to him to his tax-exempt foundation instead and he may also run for libertarians.
Any election with teh Donald should be about which party gets to have teh Donald go ad lib on anything.
What is his affiliation history? Maybe those all occurred when that was his registered preference but he’s gotten over it.
Not gonna argue that one with you Willard.
Thank you Willard:
Trump directed $2.3 million owed to him to his tax-exempt foundation instead
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-directed-23-million-owed-to-him-to-his-charity-instead/2016/09/26/7a9e9fac-8352-11e6-ac72-a29979381495_story.html
The charitable deductions that individuals and corporations usually offset income. So if Trump or one of his businesses first show the income and then take an equal deduction, all is about the same. About being the key word as there a number of problems with the tax code. He’d raise his personal AGI doing it the safer way. Sometimes that causes problems even with an equal charitable deduction. I’d say doing it the safer way wouldn’t cost him more than 5% of the total.
But here’s what he did wrong. Rules for charities in order:
Keep the IRS and state Attorney General happy
Do not self deal with a charity you are on the board of
Protect the reputation of the charity
Accomplish the mission
Here’s the charity’s CPA:
Where did that money come from?
Trump explains in detail.
The CPA says, Stop doing that this instant. Send the check back, and have them pay you.
Don’t ever do that again, the loss of my license isn’t worth it.
I will say, $2.3 million is small time.
The money to settle lawsuits is completely insane. But then again, using a charity to defend consensus scientists from the media is about as insane. (Mann perhaps?)
The paintings of Trump. Epic fail. Fire the Treasurer. Paintings of Trump should have set off a CPAs alarm bells.
Ragnaar… trying to narrow down what you are saying. Trump does work for Mr. X; Mr. X owes him 2.3 million. He doesn’t pay, but it appears he will pay it next year.
Credit income 2.3 million and debit accounts receivable for 2.3 million. Pay income tax.
So maybe:
Next year comes, appears no money will ever come. Credit accounts receivable 2.3; debit bad debt expense 2.3 million. Save on income taxes.
Mr. X calls and says, “I have your 2.3 million.”
Should be:
Credit bad debt expense 2.3 million; debit cash for 2.3 million?
or
Credit sales for 2.3 million; debit cash for 2.3 million.
Pay income tax.
Instead… he tells Mr. to donate the 2.3 million to his charity, and later gives it away? Is that what he did?
JCH:
“Credit bad debt expense 2.3 million; debit cash for 2.3 million?
or
Credit sales for 2.3 million; debit cash for 2.3 million.”
I’d go with the second option but I am not at a 100% with that. More like 67%. Another option is recovery of bad debts as an income credit. The bias is to over disclose.
“Instead… he tells Mr. to donate the 2.3 million to his charity, and later gives it away? Is that what he did?”
The story is so unclear but there is meat there I think. If he did what you asked, it’s wrong. But an attorney may counter what I think. It was would be wrong unless he paid income taxes on it. Assignment of income usually comes back NO. It is where form can hide substance.
One of the earliest lessons is Substance beats form almost all the time. But that does mean the tax code is 100% in agreement with that. The charity may have shown the form of Trump doing all the things a board member should do. Like no private inurement.
“The inurement prohibition forbids the use of the income or assets of a tax-exempt organization to directly or indirectly unduly benefit an individual or other person that has a close relationship with the organization or is able to exercise significant control over the organization.”
The shark accountants the AG may hire, will be trying to determine substance. I do a few 990s and make sure the treasury and president aware of the above quote. 990s do appear online. I use GuideStar when I want to see what Greenpeace is doing, as much as can be derived from that.
It must be really rough losing billions of dollars but still having billions of dollars left. I’m glad my business skillz aren’t that bad.
Oh wait… he’s still a self-made billionaire. I meant to say I wish I had business skillz that bad.
His financial disclosure form lists him as an executive for 515 businesses. He must have had a lot more than 5 failures. A 99% success rate would seem way too high,
He is a comedian making a living on TV… Trump is going to win big, your holding action is failing and just like in the Winter of ’44-45, you know in you heart it is over. His supporters need to realize it is now an uncertain world for them, for a change. However, they seem to continue having a big problem not being able to see patterns.
Your patterns are puke?
Your constant comments always seem to have the same tone… does that count in your world?
How Fracking is Re-Calibrating Global Geo-Politics.
The advent of fracking has precipitated a silent American revolution, allowing the US to leverage its power in the international arena.
http://thewire.in/67882/how-fracking-is-re-calibrating-global-geo-politics/
Barack Obama’s pivot to Asia in tatters
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2016/09/barack-obama-pivot-asia-tatters-160922122523631.html
Leaving aside the source of the article and only looking at Duarte and the Philippines, all I can say is so what? Duarte is a bit of a loose cannon. (ok, he’s perhaps a 24 pounder rolling around in a typhoon). But loose cannons are nothing new. And good skippers and experienced sailors know how to deal with them. Duarte strikes me as the sort who wants to be stroked and respected. Obama’s refusal to meet did the opposite. But unless he’s an idi0t, he is unlikely to swing towards China unless he perceives them as the ascending power. He may toy with the idea, but that’s more likely a ploy to gain leverage with the US.
For Willard. Enjoy.
Silence from the auditor peanut gallery. Perfectly understandable.
Total medical expenses are deductible on schedule A to the extent they exceed a certain percentage of the your Adjusted Gross Income (AGI). Generally, Congress has raised that percentage over time.
1954 3% of AGI
1982 5% of AGI
1986 7.5% of AGI
2013 10% of AGI but for Seniors 7.5% of AGI
The money grubbing establishment politicians did this. Backdoor tax increases for sick people. What is a way to handle the above? Cadillac health coverage that has low deductibles. That costs more. It is the opposite of high deductible health plans (HDHP) that are becoming common. People taking care of their own bills more than with traditional plans. So first Congress contributes to the problem moving us to fuller coverage, then it changes its mind towards disaster coverage with HDHP rules and incentives. Seniors cannot contributes to Health Savings Accounts (HSA) and are still saddled with the 7.5% above. Congress still has a material take of Seniors money with that rule. Seniors unless self employed cannot get a direct write off of their health premiums.
This is your establishment. Most of Congress.
1997 – Congress allows the Self Employed to directly deduct 100% their health insurance premiums. This 100% is phased in over a number of years. 1997? Really? For most large employers, either the employers pick up the full cost of the premiums and it’s tax free to the employee. Some pay part, and it’s still tax free and the employees contribution is in effect deducted up front by the employee. Or the Employee pays it all through their employer and gets a deduction for it. Some companies will do it differently so there are cases where it’s not tax free. But the majority of large employers that offer health insurance have smart people running the plans that make things tax free.
So what did the establishment do for me and all other self employed people before 1997? They milked us for tax money as compared to many employees. While each person has their own level of acceptable risk and health situation, HDHPs and HSAs should be given consideration. HSAs are tax efficient and do those insurance companies need all that money anyways? They get less money when you self insure more. It is true, they were brought to you by the establishment. And it’s about time. But that 7.5% and 10% threshold number is carved in stone. That’s never going to get reduced. Congress needs the money.
We could say HDHPs were invented for the self employed. To a lessor extent HSAs were too. The two fit together for the self employed. They are being adopted by larger and larger companies. Governments in general are resisting them for their employees. But that comes as no surprise. W-2s recently started showing the cost of employer paid for health insurance. My all time record holder works for guess who? Hennepin County. Over $20,000 a year and he doesn’t have children. No wonder my property taxes are so high. That’s another government establishment and that will change any day now.
Warmist skeptic evaluates Invelox:
https://cleantechnica.com/2014/07/08/invelox-ducted-turbine-latest-long-line-failures/
They get a number of puff piece new stories. And they seem to do marketing well.
For Puppy Dave, Beyond Imagination Donald:
You just described Hillary except she has experience. She f’cked up everything she touched. That’s her experience. A monumental world class phuck-up.
Clean Power Plan — Two Harvard Lawyers very much disagree with what Rud has extensively written here at CE: http://www.eenews.net/tv/2016/09/28
They do believe case will eventually go to Supreme Court in 2018. Big question is will current stay be lifted?
Different legal views on the Clean Power Plan:
http://www.realclearenergy.org/2016/09/28/cpp_did_the_epa_exceed_its_authority_278970.html
RASMUSSEN POLL: Voters Show More Support for Stop and Frisk Laws
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/september_2016/voters_show_more_support_for_stop_and_frisk_laws
RASMUSSEN POLL: Post-Charlotte, Voters Say Obama, Clinton on Side of Protestors, Trump With Police
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/september_2016/post_charlotte_voters_say_obama_clinton_on_side_of_protestors_trump_with_police
RASMUSSEN POLL: Police killings are escalating in America: most still blame politicians who are critical of the police for making their jobs more dangerous
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/july_2016/blacks_whites_disagree_over_whether_there_s_a_war_on_police
RASMUSSEN POLL: Most Voters Favor ‘Blue Lives Matter’ Law in Their State
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/may_2016/most_voters_favor_blue_lives_matter_law_in_their_state
RASMUSSEN POLL: 58% Think There’s A War on Police in America Today
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/general_lifestyle/august_2015/58_think_there_s_a_war_on_police_in_america_today
RASMUSSEN POLL: Voters See Debate Moderators Giving Clinton A Helping Hand
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/voters_see_debate_moderators_giving_clinton_a_helping_hand
Relief arrives for U.S. shale firms as OPEC folds in price battle
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-opec-meeting-usa-shale-idUSKCN11Z0BT
As Rigzone reported yesterday, no one saw this coming:
After pouring untold amounts of taxpayers’ money into saving the European banking system, maybe the Eurocrats haven’t saved it after all. As Michael Hudson is fond of saying, “Debt that can’t be repaid, won’t be repaid.”
If Deutsche Bank goes belly up, will the technocrats be able to control the contagion?
Trump is one of the very few politicans who is willing to admit the precarioius position the world’s financial system now finds itself in. From the debate:
Alicia Machado. The perfect mouthpiece for Hillary Clinton.
Machado caught in lie. She admits to eating disorders to WaPo a year before she became Miss Universe or met Donald Trump. Link below.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1997/05/16/miss-universe-sizing-up-her-reign/4b76f45c-aaa9-4b44-8acf-39f2d4af7598/
She stars in Live Sex reality show on Spanish TV channel.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1875985/miss-universe-winner-who-sparked-donald-trump-miss-piggy-row-had-live-sex-on-a-reality-show-called-the-farm/
Accused of being getaway driver when boyfriend murders someone. Then she threatens to kill the judge hearing the case. Link above.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1875985/miss-universe-winner-who-sparked-donald-trump-miss-piggy-row-had-live-sex-on-a-reality-show-called-the-farm/
Classy. Great role model for American girls. Top notch immigrant to America. We need so many more new citizens just like her, right?
Machado poses nude for Playboy magazine. Only Miss Universe to ever do that.
Her only child fathered by drug lord.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3812212/I-m-not-saint-girl-Sex-reality-TV-Playboy-photo-shoot-threat-kill-judge-claims-drug-lord-fathered-baby-haunt-Alicia-Machado-Clinton-campaigner-fat-shamed-Trump.html
Hillary Clinton sure knows how to pick her surrogates, huh?
Way to go Hillary!!! Show us more women you admire and who admire you!!!
> Machado poses nude for Playboy magazine. Only Miss Universe to ever do that.
Yet Dreamgirl Donald does not seem to consider posing nude as depravated:
Okay. So we see how you appraised Alicia Machado. Question now is how would you go about an appraisal of ‘her boss’? http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/29/politics/donald-trump-golf-club-lawsuit-female-employees/
It’s okay. Take your time. We can wait.
What I find amazing is that tv media will cover stories like these at all. They are infamous for discriminating against female reporters based on appearance. Print media probably is treading on safe ground.
2600 offers 10K for Withhold Donald’s tax returns.
I’ll give you 10K if you’ll read his 104 page financial disclosure and report back to us. LOL
http://www.rasmussenreports.co…
Lester Holt helped rig the presidential debate against Trump. Voters noticed according to Rasmussen poll.
Yep.
The economic anxiety argument does not seem to explain Demography Donald:
Reading Judy’s may have sufficed.
That’s right, Willard.
We already know that half of those who support Trump do so because of irrational prejudices, and not bcause of rational self-interest. They are “a basket of deplorables” and are “irredeemable.”
And if you don’t believe it, just as Hillary Clinton:
Did you actually read Willard’s screed? You have more time to waste than me if you did.
“Willard’s screed” is just more of the “basket of deplorables” meme, but with a scientific gloss.
How did that “basket full of deplorables” remark work out for Clinton?
Oh well, with friends like Willard, who needs enemies?
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/09/28/gowdy_to_comey_you_have_five_immunity_agreements_and_no_prosecution_thats_not_the_fbi_that_i_used_to_work_for.html
Comey: “I never said Hillary Clinton was truthful about emails”
Comedy of Errors. Clinton IT guy tries to cover-up the cover-up.
Discordant Donald Is Often More Hawkish Than Washington Elites
With Trump, I would agree that there’s some doubt as to what we’re getting.
Clinton, however, is a known commodity, so we know exactly what we’re getting.
And the Taliban certainly seems to prefer Clinton:
Here’s what you remind me of, little Willy.
Where’d you go, Cat?
https://judithcurry.com/2016/09/24/week-in-review-politics-edition-11/#comment-814144
I was looking forward to your response.
Hillary caught with teleprompter in her custom made podium.
Whoa! Is there no end to how unfairly Teh Donald has been treated? Not only did she have a teleprompter, but she also had an earpiece!!
–snip–
NYPD sources involved with the NBC forum’s security detail confirm Clinton was wearing an ‘inductive earpiece,” the same technology employed by almost all lead Broadway actors to receive forgotten lines and stealth off-stage cues from directors.
–snip–
http://www.infowars.com/was-hillary-wearing-an-earpiece-during-last-nights-presidential-forum/
No Interdict Donald’s Co Violated the United States Embargo Against Cuba
Documents show that the [No Interdict Donald] company spent a minimum of $68,000 for its 1998 foray into Cuba at a time when the corporate expenditure of even a penny in the Caribbean country was prohibited without U.S. government approval. But the company did not spend the money directly. Instead, with [No Interdict Donald]’s knowledge, executives funneled the cash for the Cuba trip through an American consulting firm called Seven Arrows Investment and Development Corp. Once the business consultants traveled to the island and incurred the expenses for the venture, Seven Arrows instructed senior officers with [No Interdict Donald]’s company—then called [No Interdict Donald] Hotels & Casino Resorts—how to make it appear legal by linking it after the fact to a charitable effort.
Duterte Calls for End to US-Philippine Military Exercises, Part of Tilt Toward China
http://thediplomat.com/2016/09/duterte-calls-for-end-to-us-philippine-military-exercises-part-of-tilt-toward-china/
Duterte talks big, but the Philippines won’t break ties with the US any time soon
https://theconversation.com/duterte-talks-big-but-the-philippines-wont-break-ties-with-the-us-any-time-soon-65949
Humiliate Hillary 2016… you irredeemable basket of deplorables.
Data Breach Donald
I would think that Oracle who bought MICROs PoS system would be the one to make any announcements. Could hurt their business to make an announcement before finding a fix though.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2016/08/11/oracle-micros-hackers-breach-five-point-of-sale-providers/#669d1c8e5eb8
Of course the real blame belongs to Al Gore for creating the internet :)
So what’s going on?
Was it the fog of war, an honest mistake?
Or did Obama give the orders to attack Syria, blowing up the ceasefire?
Or did the Pentagon disobey Obama?
Is the left making this stuff up — about the Pentagon defying Obama — in order to give Obama plausible deniability for what he did, using the Department of Defense as a convenient scapegoat, so that Obama can polish his dovish Nobel Peace Prize credentials?
Our Man in Mexico may confirm the Mexican enthusiasm:
¡No manches, güey!
¿Francis Fukuyama, de la fama del “El fin de a historia”?
Talk about Western, neo-imperialist utopianism on steroids!
The penile object being sucked and the penile objects being simultaneously grasped with both hands are a bit disturbing. Regardless of how well it reminds us of Willard please don’t do it again.
Impeach Barry,
Apparently you weren’t raised on a farm, nor have you ever raised any boys. You’re wrong about the anatomy of both.
Linda Tripp comes out of retirement to join the anti-Clinton parade.
Expect to start seeing them all on multiple interviews on Fox News; Gennifer Flowers, Kathleen Willey, Paula Jones, Juanita Broaderick.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/09/29/linda-tripp-reopens-vince-foster-filegate-travelgate-scandals/
Hillary opened up a YUGE can of worms on Monday bringing that silly soiled c*nt Alicia Machado to the fore. Bad mistake.
New Jersey train crash.
Anyone want to bet that it isn’t another terrorist attack?
What’re the odds?
Can’t be terrorism. Trump knows how to ‘fix’ that and surely he wouldn’t allow folks to continue to be injured.
Just take a look at Chicago, since Trump can ‘fix’ it there too!
““It was yesterday when it was time to do something, maybe two weeks ago when it was time to do something, maybe when we had 19 presidents ago it was time to do something, so the time is now, it’s not tomorrow,” Dowdell said.”
http://wgntv.com/2016/09/24/two-dead-at-least-12-injured-in-overnight-shootings-in-chicago/
He has no authority yet. Of course you knew that you’re just being stupid and irrelevant. It seems to come so naturally to you. Is it an act?
But he’s got the ‘know how’ David. Are you planning to hire him to go to Chicago personally conducting ‘stop & frisk’ as well as to manage N.J.’s trains? Or are you hiring him for his abundance of ‘know how’? He could provide the information now. Get tons more votes. All while proving just how good he is at ‘artful dealing’. Where’s your faith?
“He has no authority yet.” If I had the ‘know how’ I’d share it right now. But I’m too stup*d. It’s only folks lives after all.
Think you need a new set of pom-poms.
http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/relationships/marriage/former-new-york-mayor-claims-hillary-clinton-is-too-stupid-to-be-president/news-story/e42fcf39ff14c18d8751d0303a6879ed
Former NYC mayor says Hillary Clinton too stupid to be president.
I must respectfully disagree. There is no intelligence test required by law.
She’s too stupid to cross the street without bodyguards on each side.
She’s too stupid to know a [C] designation on state department documents means classified.
She’s too stupid to know that reading and responding to emails on a Blackberry in in Russia while Secretary of State is going to get intercepted.
But she’s not too stupid to be president. Let’s hope the electorate isn’t too stupid to vote for someone else.
Steve Mosher for Trump. Go Steve.
http://scholarsandwritersforamerica.org/
Two different Moshers:
http://berkeleyearth.org/team/steven-mosher/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_W._Mosher
Wrong Mosher. Sorry Steve
“Scholars and writers” should have given away immediately that it wasn’t our Steven.
The Trump Foundation 2014 form 990 here:
https://wordpress.com/post/chaosaccounting.wordpress.com/590
A surprisingly clean appearing 990. Expenses are minimal and the board is not paid. Rather than spending the money on payroll to educate people about global warming or bias or something, they actually gave the money to other charities it seems. They don’t seem to hold conventions that cost a lot and probably accomplish little and seem to resemble a grand party at times.
There are still important questions raised here:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-directed-23-million-owed-to-him-to-his-charity-instead/2016/09/26/7a9e9fac-8352-11e6-ac72-a29979381495_story.html
2012 – 2013 could also be described as A surprisingly clean appearing 990 etcetera as above.
None of this excuses some of the Washington Post’s charges.
Assuming accrual accounting, which I think is a good assumption, if he took it into income in a prior year and paid taxes, I don’t see a problem unless they later wrote it off as a bad debt. If never written off and never paid, his receivable would be overstated; I don’t know how he gets rid of that cleanly.
If he did not take it into income in the year earned, I think it would be called tax evasion. Shifting it to a charity just makes it worse. Better to amend and pay.
I believe he mentioned in the debate that he is audited frequently. I’m sure the IRS would have caught it. Maybe. But at any rate, being an IRS target so often, I doubt he would try any funny business.
And maybe the IRS fishes where the fish keep taking the bait.
The IRS, like the government in general, gets its grubby hands in any pocket possible.
In your scenario where he wrote it off, we’d consider how is that detectible in an audit? I suppose the auditor could contact the source of the revenue that was never received to substantiate the bad debt expense. It’s not uncommon to verify transactions like this. The story they’d get if the source was honest would point them to the Trump Foundation which the IRS might look at anyways. The receivable would sit there indefinetly if not writen off. To get rid of it might be called messy.
1) Reverse the receivable and it’s gone. Reduce equity for the same amount. The result is the answer where he can say he paid the correct amount of tax. He missed his chartable deduction, but the IRS should not be able to bill him for additional taxes related to this.
or
2) Reverse the receivable and it’s gone. Offset that with the charitable deductions account. Here is significant risk. The bottom line answer seems correct. He showed the income and he showed the charitable deduction which can argued to reflect the substance of what happened. He might lose on form though even though I said substance trumps form. Because the IRS has a book of rules that sometimes doesn’t care about substance. That cannot be ruled out. And abnormal entries to the equity account can be scutinized. Quick example. I collect revenue so I debit cash and credit equity. The income ran around the income statement and never shows up as income. It’s best to let your CPA make entries to the equity accounts and not make them yourself.
But how do you bring an ambassador back from the dead?
The most likely is he credited income for 2.3 million and debited accounts receivable for 2.3 million, paid the taxes on 2.3 million, and then told the guy to pay the charity instead of him. Dumb, but he’s paid the taxes.
Wait, he’s smart and never pays income tax…
Ragnaar – if he diverted money to the charity that was owed to his company, then the only way to adjust the receivable would be to pay back his company… credit accounts receivable 2.3 million; debit cash 2.3 million. Clean.
I suspect the guy is a mess. That is why the IRS is always after him. They make a bunch of money every time they ring his doorbell. Shoots from the hip; asks his accountants later; fires the ones who won’t allow him to be gotta be ME!.
They go after repeat offenders… especially the smart ones.
Distracted Donald‘s foundation lacks the certification to raise funds.
Cr_0_0_ked Billary lacks.
The MSM is doing some good reporting. I can’t figure out what lacks certification means? He’s filing with the IRS and the NY AG.
https://www.charitiesnys.com/RegistrySearch/show_details.jsp?id=412967CE-87D6-4FAF-A0E2-58CF382F8F53
Where is the 2015 report?
https://www.charitiesnys.com/charindex_new.html#filing
Above, the extended due date seems to be 11/15/16 for the tax year 2015. At the link they mention Certification.
The way it looks to me here in Minnesota. Send the AG your 990 and the special AG’s annual filing form too. Sign the form. Promise you are being good. Being late? How much weight should that have? I bet there other organizations in NY that haven’t filed yet. Call out the National Guard.
From the article:
…
It’s almost impossible not to correct a lie, especially about yourself, which is why Hillary and Lester Holt’s “baiting” strategy was to make outrageous claims about Trump.
Hillary, for example, criticized Trump for not releasing his tax returns, saying, “maybe … he’s paid nothing in federal taxes.”
This is exactly what Sen. Harry Reid stated as hard fact about Romney in 2012 — on the Senate floor, so he couldn’t be sued. After the election was over, Reid was asked about this obvious falsehood. He laughed it off and said, “Romney didn’t win, did he?”
This is the game they play.
Trump has got to learn to ignore it. The voters have. They don’t care about his taxes. They want jobs, they want a wall and they’d like fewer Muslims showing up, collecting welfare, then killing Americans.
Trump doesn’t have to do formal debate practice, standing at a podium, facing off against a shorty in pantsuit. But he does need Pavlovian training to stop responding to irrelevancies.
This isn’t about him! It’s about a movement of the people to take back their government from an arrogant plutocracy.
…
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/09/28/ann-coulter-avoid-immigration-terrorism-health-care-90-minutes/
JIm
I saw parts of the debate and the pavlov analogy is a good one. He must stop taking the bait.. The other noticeable traits were his constant interruptions and what appeared to be bullying-the constant interruptions married to a loud strident voice.
These traits all need attention but on the other hand Hillary came across as an untrustworthy smarmy weasel. Obama has created a vacuum in world leadership (currently being filled by Russia and China) I can not see either of these two reasserting western leadership.
tonyb
Warts and all, Trump is miles better than Billary. He’s not a calibrated politician and isn’t polished. But my take is that he does have the best interest of US citizens in mind. That means a lot after the likes of Obummer who takes every opportunity to rag on my country.
Something is very different with this election. For some voters being criticized by the establishment is a badge of honor and a reason to vote for Trump. There are many legitimate reasons to criticize Trump. Those problems with other candidates in other elections would have been enough to torpedo the campaign. Not so now. It is not just antipathy toward Hillary and the Democrats. It is a rejection of anyone and anything associated with the status quo. The American electorate instinctively sense they are getting a screwing with the best days behind them. They are decades ahead of the politicians and see a Rising Sun in their future and it is setting.
Drama Queen Donald Pointed to 9/11 Attacks in Asking SEC for Leniency During Fraud Probe:
From the article:
…
Attackers used an army of hijacked security cameras and video recorders to launch several massive internet attacks last week, prompting fresh concern about the vulnerability of millions of “smart” devicesin homes and businesses connected to the internet.
The assaults raised eyebrows among security experts both for their size and for the machines that made them happen. The attackers used as many as one million Chinese-made security cameras, digital video recorders and other infected devices to generate webpage requests and data that knocked their targets offline, security experts said.
Those affected include French web hosting provider OVH and U.S. security researcher Brian Krebs, whose website was disabled temporarily.
“We need to address this as a clear and present threat not just to censorship but to critical infrastructure,” Mr. Krebs said.
…
http://www.wsj.com/articles/hackers-infect-army-of-cameras-dvrs-for-massive-internet-attacks-1475179428
The LA Times poll shows Trump continuing to gain in the polls. His momentum wasn’t broken.
Maybe the debate wasn’t such a triumph for Clinton after all, as Clinton and her legions of sycophantic “journalists,” “experts,” and other assorted pundits and talking ditto heads keep telling us ad nauseaum.
This is deja vu of the Vietnam War.
The establishment was all on board for that one too, and had all its mouthpieces in the media spouting pro-war propaganda ad infinitum.
But it didn’t work. The estalbishment couldn’t get the public on board.
Hannah Arendt noted in Lying in Politics, her analysis of the Pentagon Papers, that:
Clinton Inc. is mashing the pedal on the identity politics thing — sizeism:
http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/
Dornslife Poll up another point for Trump. Bump looks like it’s coming from women. I guess they didn’t care for Hillary using that troubled Machado girl like a disposable piece on a chess board. That’s Hildebeast. True colors.
She tried to Swift Boat Trump and it backfired. She’s sinking.
Trump was supposed to be the low life piece of shhit and Hillary the Love Trumps Hate gal.
Trump baits Hillary into a race to the bottom then lets her win. Brilliant.
Glug glug glug…
Keep a close eye on rust belt battleground. They aren’t going to like Hillary’s deep-throated defense of NAFTA. Trump’s going to take that home to them. I bet Hillary doesn’t have ground game in Michigan or Wisconsin and it’s in the wrong place in Pennsylvania.
After decades of being identified as a bellwether of Presidential elections and being recently identified as such by the NY Times, with Trump leading in Ohio all of a sudden that state has lost its significance. So says the paper of record, the uber leftist Grey Lady.
Move on . Don’t pay no never mind, the scribe for the intellectual elites, celebrities, academics and power brokers of the world lectures since Trump leads Ohio. A battalion of NY Times investigative reporters is marching off to attack the next pillbox of Trump’s garbage can to get ready for the next debate.
Trumb baits Hillary into race to the bottom then lets her win.
Bucket list getting short:
Take the high ground. [x]
Hammer home failed policies of the past [ ]
Four more years yes [ ] no [ ]
Collect prize [ ]
Donald wins
Donald lets win
Donald for the win
Puppy Dave said it first
Puppy Dave said it twice
Win win win
Bizarre. You feeling okay, Wee Willard?
UN intefering with US election
Bad juju.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/un-news-agency-scrubs-tweet-calling-on-foreign-citizens-to-end-trump-228934
Dancing Donald danced around 124 distinct policy shifts on 20 major issues, and that’s only since June 16, 2015.
Here is the list.
You never said who you think will win this election Willard.
You seem to think we’re in speaking terms, Arch.
Thank you for your kind words.
The point is no answer is an answer, however thank you for your kind words, whatever, you may think.
–snip–
Some of Donald Trump’s biggest whoppers during the US presidential debate were about China
–snip–
http://qz.com/792387/presidential-debate-trumps-first-lies-of-the-debate-were-all-about-china/
So let’s see.
According to the article you linked, the Chinese have devalued the yuan by about 12% over the past couple of years.
But this doesn’t count because “these recent moves remain small, compared with the currency’s historical moves.”
Thus, the author concludes that Trump’s claim that the Chinese “are devaluing their currency and there’s nobody in our government to fight them” is one of “Donald Trump’s biggest whoppers during the US presidential debate.”
Lordy! Lordy! Who can argue with Newspeak and doublethink like that?
Well, you skipped over quite a bit to get to that part, Glenn. I wonder why?
Anyway, you might consider a bit less sycophantism:
–snip– [quoting Trump]
“[The worst of its sins] is the wanton manipulation of China’s currency, robbing Americans of billions of dollars of capital and millions of jobs. Economists estimate that the yuan is undervalued anywhere from 15% to 40%. Through manipulation of the yuan, the Chinese government has been able to tip the trade balance in their direction by imposing a de facto tariff on all imported goods.”
On all these points, Trump is patently wrong. Just ask the IMF, which says the yuan is no longer undervalued.
–snip–
There’s a lot more:
http://qz.com/546812/donald-trump-has-no-idea-what-hes-talking-about-on-china/
Josh ua,
One of the most intriguing facets of this whole spectacle is to watch persons like yourself stake out the most unbelievably conservative, right-wing positions– whatever it takes in order to justify supporting Clinton now that she has made her end run around Trump’s right end.
The second article you cite relies on no less than the IMF to make its point.
The IMF! Imagine that!
Is it possible you are ignorant of what the IMF is, what it stands for, and its long, sordid history of neoliberal advocacy? Heck, even the conservative Fortune Magazine admits it:
But regardless of what spin the IMF puts on things (with something it invented that it calls “nominal effective exchange rates”), real exchange rates are of an objective, empirical nature. And if we look at the real exchange rates, the Chinese “are devaluing their currency” just as Trump claims.
And in fact, since the second article you cited was published, the Chinese have devalued their currency another 5% , from 6.36 yuan per US dollar to 6.67 yuan per US dollar.
Glenn Stehle: “The IMF! Imagine that!”
The enemy of Joss’s enemy is his friend, apparently.
Desperate or what!
You boys seem to have noticed the issues and the truth are no longer relevant in this election. It’s about strippers and temperament.
correction: you boys seemed to have NOT noticed
‘Issues & Truth’ have never been ‘relevant’ in this election. I’ve been telling you that for months and you just now come out with that diamond of a bit of comprehension?
Yes, Trump supporters are not particularly interested in the cost of a college education, but they perk up when mention is made of who has been in a p0rn video, so this debate/tweetstorm has now descended to their level.
–snip–
Clinton is right about Trump’s ‘very small’ $14 million loan
–snip–
http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-presidential-debate-fact-check/2016/09/clinton-is-right-about-trumps-very-small-14-million-loan-228709
–snip–
“I am very under-leveraged. I have a great company,” Trump said. “It’s about time that this country had somebody running it that had an idea about money.”
[…]
In 2000, Trump was estimated to have outstanding loans equal to 69 percent of the money he had himself put into his real-estate projects. That is a very large figure for someone in the real-estate industry, according to John Griffin, a professor at the University of Texas at Austin who has carefully studied Trump’s business career.
–snip–
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2016/live-updates/general-election/real-time-fact-checking-and-analysis-of-the-first-presidential-debate/trump-claims-he-runs-his-businesses-cautiously-we-dont-really-know/
VIDEO: Tom Bevan — Trump Closes The Gap In Key States
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/09/30/tom_bevan_trump_closes_the_gap_in_key_states.html
This video starts out pretty good, because they talk about how irrelevant and unimportant the MSM and its endorsements — as well as all of society’s other institutions and their opinions — are in this election.
But then Rebecca Berg says she can’t understand why Trump keeps pouring gasoline on the Alicia Machado imbroglio.
The reason Trump keeps pouring gasoline on it, of course, is because he believes Clinton misfired badly, and he believes there is political hay to be made there. The polls seem to be bearing him out.
VIDEO: Rebecca Berg — Why Is Donald Trump Still Tweeting About Alicia Machado?
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/09/30/rebecca_berg_why_is_donald_trump_attacking_alicia_machado_on_twitter.html
The elitism and self-absorbtion of the pundit class, combined with their unwavering belief in identity politics — which puts large, diverse groups of people, who have little in common, into little boxes — prevents Berg from seeing that not all women think and feel just as she does.
And the MSM is pushing the topic to the limit, giving Trump more publicity and airing his opinion of Miss Piggy.
It’s not difficult to see why the left has been such a colossal failure when it comes to representing people who have to work for a living:
It’s like these people never learn. For as Hannah Arendt noted in The Origins of Totalitarianism:
Donating Donald‘s illegal foundation donated anti-vaxxers money. Even better, he gave it to former Playboy model Jenny McCarthy.
Just watch the tapes.
Disturbed Donald:
Just watch the tweets.
Here’s a video that illustrates identity politics in action.
It is a debate between two Black women. But when one of the women ventures off the plantation — outside the tidy little box of “black” identity — that the identity politicans have sentenced her to, the other woman attacks her for not representing “black people.”
In identity politics, any sort of individualism, independence or diversity of opinions, beliefs or feelings is strictly taboo. It is the first commandment of identity politics that these must be sacrificed on the altar of “community” conformity and group think.
Here’s the link to the video:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/09/30/cnn_guest_admonishes_black_trump_supporter_im_speaking_on_behalf_of_masses_of_black_people.html
The Marxist thinkers never give up:
But, as Robert Hughes pointed out:
Here’s a video that illustrates how Dopamine Donald should take any reference to someone from his past:
Fox-(Ex)centric Donald held his last press conference on 2016-07-27.
Q&A: Will Deutsche Bank become the next Lehman?
https://www.mail.com/int/business/markets/4639204-qa-will-deutsche-bank-lehman.html#.1258-stage-hero1-1
Trump Picks Top Climate Skeptic to Lead EPA Transition
Choosing Myron Ebell means Trump plans to drastically reshape climate policies
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trump-picks-top-climate-skeptic-to-lead-epa-transition/
Just watch Centerfold Donald’s dirty tape:
Yup. Billary lets people die in the wee hours of the morning. From the tweeter …
For those few people knocking me for tweeting at three o’clock in the morning, at least you know I will be there, awake, to answer the call!
From the article (about Ly_i_n Billary and Ly_i_n Politi”fact”):
…
The most recent Uranium One fact-check article was researched by Tom Kertscher and edited by Greg Borowski. In July, PolitiFact staff writer Linda Qiu published a piece full of factual errors, glaring inaccuracies, and omissions.
Breitbart News published a full-scale 13-point refutation of the last Politifact Uranium One piece, which the latest one references.
Kertscher’s piece, however, is more of the same sloppy script.
Several of the 13 refutation points still apply to this latest “fact-check” article, but below are two additional points that deserve attention:
…
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/09/30/again-politifact-fails-whitewash-hillary-clinton-uranium-scandal/
Jim2,
Content smontent. We don’t care about content since we already are aware that the source is disreputable.
From the article:
…
Incoming migrants are bringing long-eradicated diseases to Germany and are putting the medical system under extreme stress.
As well as bringing a rising tide of crime and attitudes towards women that many consider incompatible with modern European values, the over one and a half million migrants who flowed into Germany last year have also brought unheard-of and rare strains of diseases to the continent. The new arrivals and their illnesses are putting pressure on the German health care system, reports Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.
…
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/09/30/migrants-bring-diseases-strain-german-medical-system/
jim2
At the end of the Viet Nam military exercise, people who had fought the Viet Cong and the Northern Vietnamese from Laos swam across the Mekong River into Thailand and into refugee camps. Whole families came, some of the sick and infirm, didn’t make it.
From the refugee camps, families were sent to receptive cities in the US, flying first to Seattle, then being redistributed to fly to an awaiting, usually, Catholic sponsored organization, in another city. Our city was one of the recipients.
In order for a family to leave a refugee camp in Thailand, all members had to be certified by a refugee camp physician to be free of Tuberculosis, primarily identified by Chest X-ray. Well, in the over crowded refugee camps the tuberculosis pestilence was passed from one to another, at no time would all the family be tuberculosis free at the same time. In exasperation, the refugee camp physicians declared the family tuberculosis free and sent them with their chest x-ray on their merry way to America’s heartland.
In our schools, churches, and community organizations alert county public health nurses began case finding and lo and be hold, “consumption” had returned, and for some, multi-drug resistant tuberculosis became a childhood infectious pathogen. Several children died, others were maimed by tubercular meningitis, and others still would go on to become adolescents, and for the girls, reactivate their latent Tbc.
Not many of the modern day European refugees that I am aware of have passed through the gauntlet of a refugee camp where immunizations were mandatory. The refugees have just come over en mass. As these refugees may not have had the luxury of vaccinations the Mong people had, maybe we will see another epidemic of multiple infectious disease from re-introduction. We shall see.
Europe’s and ours health care systems can and will case find the people within our midst burdened with scourges of the past and administer to them through nutrition and drugs and dedicated public health nurses once again.
For those “anti-vaxers with children in school, I say, wait for the letter from the school principle to let you know that not vaccinating your child was a very very bad whimsical stance. Johnny and Jane will bring home the lesson.
Good point. Darwin.
Turkey hoards well-educated Syrians.
Highly qualified refugees who want to migrate may find themselves barred from leaving.
http://www.politico.eu/article/turkey-prevent-well-educated-syrian-refugees-from-leaving-migration/
The Wholesale Failure of American Foreign Policy
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-wholesale-failure-of-american-foreign-policy/
OBAMA SCAPEGOATS THIRD PARTY VOTERS TO DISTRACT FROM CLINTON’S ENTHUSIASM PROBLEM
https://shadowproof.com/2016/09/29/obama-scapegoats-third-party-voters-distract-clintons-enthusiasm-problem/
Chelsea Clinton Uses Private Jet to Travel to ‘Clean Energy’ Roundtable
http://freebeacon.com/politics/chelsea-clinton-uses-private-jet-travel-clean-energy-roundtable/
Will you show me how it is in the ECONOMIC INTERESTS of black people, at least the non elites, to have more immigration?
Discriminate Donald wanted to fire women who weren’t pretty enough, say employees at his California golf club:
I wonder how many millions of times that has been said by other business owners in similar situations. You need to get out more. There truly is a real world out there. Join it.
Discriminate Donald’s only does the best in everything, Kid. And you know what was best? The 70s:
Let’s make discrimination great again!
Trump Tees Up a Necessary Debate on the Fed
http://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-tees-up-a-necessary-debate-on-the-fed-1475102579
There has been little discussion of the massive power cut to the whole state of South Australia, which is still not over. SA have recently shut down their last coal power station and have sharply increased their wind and solar generation.
Needless to say the media have been quick to pronounce denials of any possible link with renewable energy, including a predictable reflexive squirt of verbal diarrhoea from the Grauniad. Here is a slightly less hysterical assessment from the conversation:
http://theconversation.com/what-caused-south-australias-state-wide-blackout-66268
“Don’t believe anything till you hear the official denial” might be a little over-cynical but is likely wise advice in this case.
It appears SA needs to rely less on transmission lines and more on locally produced power. But the article you linked it very pro-“green” energy.
Donaldify your Internet.
Take this for your example.
http://www.webmd.com/add-adhd/childhood-adhd/news/20130531/research-shows-how-ritalin-affects-brains-of-kids-with-adhd#1
Deplorable anti-vaXer II… from the looks of things.
Here would be a more appropriate example of the Donaldify extension in action:
Drug Lord Donald admits cutting off medical treatment for his nephew’s sick baby
Drug Lord Donald admits having acted out of anger.
If he was doing this in the name of AGW…
https://www.yahoo.com/news/philippines-duterte-not-hitler-wants-kill-millions-spokesman-051531950.html
is he still a skeptic? Or as they like to say way down under in Oz, a naughty Z. It’s only been a war on drugs for half a century for gods sake, you should all be used to it by now.
Wow! The people of this town addressed the problem of migrants before it became a problem! From the article:
…
The mayor of a small German town has been assaulted and beaten unconscious after receiving threats because he planned to settle migrants in the area.
Joachim Kebschull, the 61-year-old mayor of Oersdorf near Hamburg, was pushing to house migrants in a property in the town of 900.
The attack occurred immediately before a meeting of the town’s urban planning committee where migrant issues were due to be discussed.
…
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/10/01/migrant-centre-plans-tiny-german-town-mayor-attack-bomb-scare/
You say “the people” when it was actually more likely a xenophobic minority thug. The people, like the mayor, there had welcomed the idea of housing refugees.
From the article:
…
The Socialist former mayor said he was “shocked” to see the flyers in the Normandy commune of Bretteville-sur-Laize.
Titled “No to the reception centre”, the notices appear in several shop windows. Underneath reads: “migrants with nothing to do in Bretteville = incivility, theft, assault, rape, loss of value to our businesses and our property”.
Mr Lacoste was “appalled” to discover the posters, which call on residents to sign a petition to stop migrants from being moved from the so-called “jungle” camp at Calais to the Normandy commune.
…
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/10/01/former-mayor-suing-welcome-migrants/
Frau Merkel invited these refugees so she should take responsibility for them and not expect everyone else to clear up the mess she created in a moment of madness (quite a few moments actually if you include the euro crisis and Greece)
If Hillary wins, perhaps the US would like to welcome them?
tonyb
Tony,
Both Trump and Clinton chose her as their ‘most admired’: http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/29/politics/donald-trump-angela-merkel-praise-criticism/index.html
if not fully on the immigration concern.
Wondering out loud what exactly a humane world is to ‘do’ with/about refugees going forward? Don’t expect we’ll see fewer. http://www.unhcr.org/en-us/news/latest/2016/6/5763b65a4/global-forced-displacement-hits-record-high.html
One out of 113 in the world? It’s disturbing to consider that figure when visiting any location or event with a high level of population. Then, especially considering this figure: “Distressingly, children made up an astonishing 51 per cent of the world’s refugees in 2015, according to the data UNHCR was able to gather (complete demographic data was not available to the report authors). Many were separated from their parents or travelling alone.” much needs to be done.
Suggest it’s a ‘wicked problem’.
Simple, Danny. Let the Muslim world take care of the refugees, in a country compatible with Islam.
Danny
We need to make a clear distinction between refugees and economic migrants the latter of which at varying times have been estimated as some 60% of those reaching Europe. Much of the trouble stems from the enormous birth rate increase in many third world countries which means there are limited economic opportunities for them at home. their country should be helped at source as the UK does. They have few skills that we need and their versions of their religion often appears to be incompatible with modern western values. and European voters increasingly resent being invaded and our border controls over run. We haven’t travelled through Calais for two years because of the lawless and frightening situation there.
genuine refugees should be held in much more humane camps close by in the expectation they will be needed when the situation stabilises in their country. As jim says, other muslim countries need to do much more as, except for turkey, Lebanon and Jordan they take very few.
What is noticeable and causes further resentment is how many fleeing are men of army age. is there an equivalent in recent history of so many men avoiding fighting for their country?
Whatever, Merkel invited them so she needs to take responsibility. It will be interesting to see how the Hungarians vote today on the question. I suspect they will vote overwhelmingly for refusing refugees that Merkel wants them to take as part of their ‘quota.’.
tonyb
Miss California comes out in support of Trump. Big time. She’s pissed off that her words were twisted by the New York Times.
Well, that cinches my vote. What could be more persuasive than a endorsement from Miss California?
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/sep/29/alicia-machados-shady-history-foils-clinton-sex-sm/
Springer,
How in the world would you choose to post an article which ends with:”Now let’s get back to the issues, which is what should matter in this election.”?
Thought we were past all that and down to hookers and temperament. Unless those are ‘what matter’ in this election.
The election was over a long time ago. Trump hasn’t lost the lead when undecided voters are asked which way they lean. Only one poll I know of does this:
http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/
This poll asks voters on a scale of 0% – 100% how likely they are to vote for each candidate. Other polls are just yes/no/undecided.
When the results are tabulated including which way undecideds are leaning there is a very consistent +6 bias to Trump revealed. In other words you can take the RCP average of polls, add +6 for Trump to it, and you’ll get the result of the LA Times poll that includes which way undecided voters are leaning.
A rule of thumb from past elections is that when an incumbent party front runner has much fewer than 50% of the votes late in the campaign the undecided voters break for the challenger.
In other words if a voter hasn’t decided to vote for Clinton by now they are voting for Trump unless something big happens to change their mind. A campaign creating an attack ad that dredges a south american stripper out of the gutter to put her on parade and a few tweets in explanation from the attacked candidate isn’t big. That’s a distraction. Hillary doesn’t want anyone discussing her record, the state of the economy, national security, jobs, and things like that, so she invents PiggyGate for everyone to fret about instead.
Pitiful. She’s desperate. Her people know that if they haven’t closed the deal with undecided voters by now they are going to break for Trump.
Incumbent 50 rule
http://politicaldictionary.com/words/incumbent-rule/
Thanks Dave.
Guess rules are meant to be broken. From your link: “Nonetheless, empirical data suggests the rule may be a myth. Nate Silver notes that it is “extremely common for an incumbent come back to win re-election while having less than 50 percent of the vote in early polls.” In addition, “there is no demonstrable tendency for challengers to pick up a larger share of the undecided vote than incumbents.””
And point of interest. There is no ‘incumbent’ in the race.
And I’m not sure that there’s ever been s challenger that claimed 900 million in losses while stiffing debtors and proclaiming business genius.
It’s pretty ‘genius’ to get you and I and all his supporters here to finance it.
You’d think that since losing 900 million proves his genius, he’d be happy to produce his other tax returns. I guess he’s just being most about his genius. He such a humble fella, doncha know.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/440399/donald-trumps-conservative-agenda-reason-trumps-gaining-ground
Trump’s Secret Weapon: The Conservative Agenda BY DEROY MURDOCK
September 27, 2016 12:00 PM
From school choice to black outreach to rebuilding the military, he’s running solidly on the right. Why is Donald J. Trump neck and neck with Hillary Clinton? For the most part, he is doing exactly what the Right would want and expect from a Republican nominee.
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/440399/donald-trumps-conservative-agenda-reason-trumps-gaining-ground
Divorce Donald praised Saudi Arabia’s Shariah Law for making it easy for men to get divorced.
David Post asks two questions to Volokh Conspiracy readers who are Dangerously Unstable Donald supporters, the first being:
From the article:
…
An RNC memo from chief strategist Sean Spicer spells out the mystery:
Justin Cooper owns an almost $900,000 home in the lush hills of an upscale Los Angeles suburb.
But interestingly enough, he doesn’t live there. Roger Clinton does.
Cooper is Bill Clinton’s body man turned wheeler-dealer. He’s gone from making a modest salary working in the White House to setting up an LLC just to buy a home for the president’s brother to live in.
But how and why has he suddenly become Roger Clinton’s real estate agent and financier?
Why would Cooper, despite living in Manhattan, be the one to purchase a home in California that was intended as someone else’s residence? And how did he get the money to do it?
Before the time of the sale in 2009, Roger Clinton already had over $89,000 in numerous federal and state tax liens against him, which would have made purchasing a property for himself difficult.
How did Cooper, a career body man, scrounge up the money necessary to pay for a mortgage that no doubt would have been over a million dollars, including interest?”
…
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/09/30/rnc-finds-roger-clinton-living-in-house-owned-by-former-bill-clinton-adviser/
Is there still hope? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/01/brexit-begins-theresa-may-takes-axe-to-eu-laws/
Why are we funding Trump’s business losses in such a socialized way when not benefiting from the following proceeds?
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/politics/donald-trump-taxes-explained.html?_r=0
It doesn’t make him smart especially since I don’t know if he ‘squandered’ the millions anyway.
““Mr. Trump is a highly-skilled businessman who has a fiduciary responsibility to his business, his family and his employees to pay no more tax than legally required,” the statement continued. “That being said, Mr. Trump has paid hundreds of millions of dollars in property taxes, sales and excise taxes, real estate taxes, city taxes, state taxes, employee taxes and federal taxes. Mr. Trump knows the tax code far better than anyone who has ever run for President and he is the only one that knows how to fix it.””
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/donald-trump-tax-records-new-york-times-229012
If he were so ‘highly skilled’ and has the ‘know how’ to ‘fix it’ why wouldn’t he do so by providing a plan which will be to his benefit IN CASE he doesn’t get elected………..oh, wait…………
http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-tax-plan-populist-rich-2016-8
Can Republicans be Rational?:
Records Obtained by The Times Reveal that Decadal Donald Could Have Avoided Paying Taxes for Nearly Two Decades.
Boom.
And socialistically speaking, ‘we’ funded his business operations. Here’s hoping he didn’t ‘squander’ the losses.
> ‘we’ funded his business operations
More than that, Danny –
Double-Dealing Donald‘s buildings were built with tax breaks:
Well. It’s October. So guess this is at least one ‘surprise’. Wonder what will be the discussion of the talking heads on teevee in the morning?
“They fear Saturday night’s surprise bombshell might lead voters to question another pillar of his candidacy — his claim to be a successful businessman and an anti-politician who, unlike the insiders he maligns in Washington, tells the truth.”
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/donald-trump-tax-records-new-york-times-229012
” But for now he probably has miscalculated, ignoring the fundamental truth that although Americans may not love paying taxes, what they hate even more is rich people not paying their fair share.”
http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/4419720-155/steven-weisman-americans-dont-mind-paying
Just saying, in this case, maybe Mrs. Clinton was the ‘smart one’, and Trump not so much.
Guessing someone will take his Twitter account from him for tonite so he’ll get some sleep.
My first thought was that the wikileaks thingy is going to have to be big to counterbalance this. My next thought was who am I kidding. His supporters won’t care one iota about this.
Trump continues to move up in the LA Times poll.
Does Trump have Clinton checkmated?
Clinton couldn’t, and can’t, win by talking about substantive issues — things like the economy, crime, national security, and permanent war — so she engaged Trump in a pig fight by bringing up the Alicia Machado thing.
But when it comes to pig fights, she looks to be outclassed there too.
Meanwhile, Clinton’s legions of sycophantic reporters, pundits and other assorted “experts” are scratching their heads, trying to figure out what happened:
Now Clinton Inc. is dragging out Trump’s tax records from 20 and 30 years ago. We’ll see how that plays in Peoria.
The dogs (aka “deplorables”) wouldn’t eat the dog food, so now the “experts” are completely stumped:
Glenn –
I noticed that you and David keep pointing to that one poll, over and over, to the exclusion of other polls. It’s the s reason for that?
I’ll never vote for anyone named “Bush” again. They’re in the same sewer as the Dimowits now, along with the elite billionaires who own Billary. From the article:
…
Another Bush for Hillary! Barbara Bush spends Saturday night in Paris partying with Huma Abedin at a Clinton fundraiser
Huma Abedin and Anna Wintour hosted a Clinton fundraiser Saturday
A $500-$1,000 reception was followed by a $5,000-$10,000 per ticket dinner
Barbara Bush, 34, one of George W. Bush’s two daughters, attended dinner
Grandfather George H. W. Bush is voting for Hillary, uncle Jeb isn’t voting
…
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3817829/Another-Bush-Hillary-Barbara-Bush-spends-Saturday-night-Paris-partying-Huma-Abedin-Clinton-fundraiser.html
A new level of too funny…
NY Times Didn’t Pay Any Taxes in 2014
The NY Times yesterday somehow obtained and released a few pages of Trump’s 1995 taxes showing he paid no taxes in that year. He also had a $900,000,000 loss that year which can be deducted from taxable income for up to 18 years.
The funny part is that anyone who berates Trump over having large write-offs is saying the same thing about the libtards most beloved newspaper The New York Times.
In case you don’t want to believe Breitbart on principle without reading the article then I provided the proof of NYT not paying any taxes in 2014 in a Forbes article earlier this year.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/10/02/new-york-times-paid-no-taxes-2014/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2016/01/31/new-york-times-hypocrisy-on-corporate-taxes-reaches-record-high/#76702c9d6577
Why do you care if NYT is paying taxes or not? It’s okay that Trump hasn’t right? Oh, and NYT isn’t running for office of the prez while touting how great they are at ‘business’ while we peruse documentation that shows they may indeed not be so great at ‘business’ after all (unless you consider a $900 million loss as ‘great business’).
And just to be thorough, 2014 is one single year not 18. Got any proof that Trump paid any for any year?
I understand if you choose not to respond.
And that was his venture after the $916m loss from businesses such as the Taj. The Taj limped along, but now it is like this.
http://www.trumptaj.com/
Hope America doesn’t get such management.
The only thing we know is Trump paid the amount of taxes he owed. So did the NY Times. Sometimes years that amount is zero. [shrug]
There’s one other thing we know. According to Forbes Trump has a conservatively estimated net worth of $4B. If he lost a billion in 1995 he made it back plus more. The bottom line is all that counts.
“The bottom line is all that counts.”
Well now. That’s interesting. Is this a new twist in thinking (more likely convenient in this case only for you)? Do we no longer care about the journey (and the debris trail left behind) for our candidates and all that matters is the destinations?
So we’ll presume that very same standard applies to all. Maybe that’s why you didn’t respond to this https://judithcurry.com/2016/09/24/week-in-review-politics-edition-11/#comment-814313
Same standards vs. double standards. Looking forward to all revelations.
They say it is equally wrong to move operations outside the US to avoid US taxes as for local or state governments to give companies tax breaks for keeping jobs local. How is that equal?
What Puppy Dave may never grasp is that Dirty Donald made money by double-crossing people:
“What Puppy Dave may never grasp”
There’s no “may” about it, dummy. I never grasp libtard L.ies.
Is Billary out to X Assange? Hmmm … From the article:
…
‘October Surprise’ Thwarted? Wikileaks Cancels Highly Anticipated Tuesday Announcement Due to ‘Security Concerns’
By Heat Street Staff | 12:56 pm, October 2, 2016
Wikileaks has abruptly canceled a much-anticipated announcement on Tuesday, according to NBC News. The announcement had been expected to be founder Julian Assange’s long-promised document dump on Hillary Clinton.
NBC’s Jesse Rodriguez reported that the Tuesday announcement — which was to come from the balcony of London’s Ecuadorian Embassy, where Assange has sought sanctuary for years – was canceled due to “security concerns”.
…
http://heatst.com/politics/october-surprise-thwarted-wikileaks-cancels-highly-anticipated-tuesday-announcement-due-to-security-concerns/
Wikileaks release on Tuesday. Clinton memorial service on Wednesday.
Assange is going to appear by video link as usual instead of live on the balcony.
Tuesday is Wikileaks 10-year anniversary. They won’t not have anything for the anniversary. One should think this will the big one that puts Hillary’s dick in the dirt for good.
Clinton Inc. is still floundering, trying to find that silver bullet that will stop Trump’s momentum with the American people.
So far, though, neither the Alicia Macado thing nor all the speculation about Trump “not paying taxes” has managed to move the needle.
It appears most Americans just don’t care about all the irrelevant nonsense that Clinton Inc. is trying to make the campagin about.
Here’s the RealClearPolitics average this morning. Trump has narrowed Clinton’s lead to 2.5%
The LA Times poll this morning, which gives a more current metric of public sentiment, also shows no break in Turmp’s momentum.
Thanks
Ruh roh…
About those Trump Net Operating Loss (NOL) carryforwards. Businesses and rental buildings can generate them. I have never considered not utilizing them by my clients as long as the rules are followed. An NOL is the flip side of taxable profits. We agree they should be taxed.
Say we have this for a business:
2010 $100000 loss
2011 $100000 profit
2012 $500000 loss
2013 $700000 profit
Taxes should be paid on a total $200000
What was the total profit for the 4 years? $200000
This is simple. What does a bank consider when evaluating a potential loan to the business? The $200000.
What does the bank not consider? Some new made up tax law that says the profit and therefore taxes to be paid was higher.
The profit was $200000. I see nothing unfair about this, but have not considered all possible scenarios. And the NOL rules are not as simple as I have portrayed them.
I think the attacks on the NOL rules are nothing but populist anti-business unfairness. They have been trotted out as some kind of subsidy for corporations. But I can’t find the subsidy in my example. Some people don’t like businesses.
This is where I think there should be a cap for the carried forward deduction such as $1m. This limits the government/peoples liability for huge personal business losses. I heard that Trump accounted for 2% of the total national NOL that year. He cost hundreds of millions of dollars of lost tax revenue because of this failure.
Another example. You build large buildings and then sell them. Your cash flow is zero in and material amounts out. So you show losses until you finish the thing and it sells. You could say, all the costs should be capitalized anyways so you don’t have a loss. But it is likely some will escape capitalization which means add it to basis to be used upon the sale. So you do have a loss. Say you have an office. It’s kind of hard to capitalize those costs that allow you to build the large building in the large building’s basis. Say you buy some equipment to do your own work on the foundation. Are we really going to put the cost of a backhoe into the basis of the large building? My examples may not be perfect but the idea I am trying to convey is that such timing differences may be fairly reconciled by the use of the NOL carry forward. The lack of the carry forward option can certainly be argued to be unfair.
If JimD had his way a lot of businesses would go under. So would a lot of jobs. So would businesses that supply that business. Typical short-sighted dreck from our Socialist friend.
If a business goes under just by having to pay income tax like their competitors, they have issues with their business model and don’t deserve to survive.
Yep, JimD. Make sure the money-grubbin’ gubmint gets their hands all all the money.
jim2, you are supporting welfare for the millionaires.
Another example. Capital loss carry forwards. You decide to become a day trader with some of your after tax money. You suck at it. You report your gains and losses on schedule D. You lose $100,000 before you decide you better stop being a day trader. The IRS lets you deduct $3000 a year of those losses. Btw, that $3000 has not been indexed up for the COLA in over 2 decades. See, money grubbing Congress backdoor tax increases. The rest of the losses are carried forward to offset future gains and/or give a $3000 loss each year. See the instructions for schedule D and the worksheets. This isn’t too different from what Trump did in substance. All kinds of people do this. Many of the them middle class. Few were actually day traders. Most had lousy financial advisers. Where did this $3000 per year limit come from? Congress. What arguments could be used to support it? They tax gains in full if you don’t have carry forward losses. But losses can be deferred into the future. I suppose it had something to do with balancing the budget that can include such timing differences that sometimes make this accountant cynical.
First you learning accounting which makes sense, is simple and pure. Then you learn all the screwed up stuff Congress has thought up that disagrees with what accountants first learned.
What may happen here? Probably nothing. Getting Clinton elected is the only point here. After that, nothing will change. Until the next person with money tries to get elected. It’s like the Democrats laid a trap. If you have money and follow the tax code. We got you.
Yeah it’s worse than that. Beginning 17 years ago I started whittling down $120,000 in day trading losses @ $3000 per year. I’ll be well over the average lifespan if I manage to deduct it all.
Ragnaar will probably say I’m wrong…
You can offset long-term capital gains with a capital loss carry forward. Say your loss carry forward is $250,000. At $3,000 per year, you’ll never use all of it. You buy ACME common stock. 20 months later you sell it for a long-term gain of $260,000. 260 minus 250 = gain of $10,000. Pay your capital gains tax on $10,000.
On NOL, many taxpayers, based upon income, lose deductions many taxpayers get to take. One is college loan interest. Why should a billionaire get to write off business his stewpudity when thousands of Americans can’t deduct college loan interest in the same way millions of other Americans get to deduct college loan interest? We used to deduct the interest on our Rolls Royce loans. Now we can’t. If we lose deductions, why can’t Donnie, the greatest businessman of all time, lose his?
Lol, so he has to leap buildings that are slightly taller; no problem for the business superman.
JCH:
You are not wrong.
Large capital loss carry forwards might never be used up. Congress can say, they didn’t take it away, they deferred it. Might be page one in their playbook, timing differences. Imagine the revenue gains going from pre $3000 loss limit to limited.
You mention deductions lost based on higher incomes. Page two to their playbook. We ask the question, did you raise tax rates? No. But they got a backdoor tax increase anyways.
Say we wanted to limit NOLs. One avenue is to limit the loss taken to 50% of adjusted gross income each year. Here I compromise to deferral hoping not to lose the loss carry forward.
I came across a situation that may only apply to Minnesota. Client had large NOL. Closed his business. Debt was forgiven which gave him cancellation of debt income. The two offset. No problem right? Minnesota corporate AMT kicks in arbitrarily excluding 10% of his NOL at the state level.
The Federal AMT was supposed to be about fairness. It is probably one of the most disparaged sections of the code. With the AMT they used to not COLA it. It would creep to capture more people over time. Some people are punished for the terrible act of paying a lot of state income and property taxes by the AMT.
The establishment hates old people. There are two threshold numbers for, Are my social security benefits taxable? $25k and 32k. They have never increased in the past two decades. No COLA. Creeping capture again.
Ragnaar – perspective is everything. The reason they did all those duplicitous things was the threat of a veto if they tried to raise marginal rates. Can’t raise marginal rates; you chip away at loopholes. All one has to do to satisfy the angry voter is to call them loopholes. He’ll gladly take one in the shorts to get rid of his own loopholes.
Also, to simply the tax code, they keep simplifying it by complicating it. Just tell the angry voter they’re simplifying the tax code; print 8,000 pages of instructions; repeat same thing next year; angry voter happy as a clam.
But seriously, there is no reason to allow the world’s greatest businessman to write off one billion in losses against !!billions!! in his other ingenious business income. The great one will not be disadvantaged by the meager additional challenge of not being on billionaire welfare.
List of some loopholes that are limited in some cases:
Student loan interest deduction
IRA deduction
State income and real estate taxes
Medical and dental costs
Contributions to Health Saving Accounts
My favorite:
“Student activity fees and expenses for course-related books, supplies, and equipment are included in qualified education expenses (Tuition and fees deduction) only if the fees and expenses must be paid to the institution as a condition of enrollment or attendance.”
I can still write of the fees of my graduate student son, but his books? Nope. No benefit. When he claims himself for 2017 as he’ll be supporting himself, nothing for the books again.
Here it is for the American Opportunity Credit:
“However, expenses for books, supplies, and equipment needed for a course of study are included in qualified education expenses whether or not the materials are purchased from the educational institution.”
So undergrads may get a credit for books in some cases. Graduate students – Never! Clamp down on those loopholes. We don’t like TAs. Bunch of loopholers.
President Obama has over $100,000 of carry forward capital losses. Their 2015 return is simple and straight forward. It’s boring. He took a foreign tax credit. Same as ExxonMobil does. And that’s a subsidy if you are an oil company.
Secretary Clinton has almost $700,000 of carry forward capital losses. Using a 500 index fund reported on their 2015 return they have about $3 million worth of big bad corporations stock through a mutual fund. In one area they are smart. They use the Vanguard company. Now do as your Secretary does. Use Vanguard. Even though she is a globalist they don’t invest their money in overseas stock as far as I can see from their return.
It’s OK if the Socialist Dimowits do it. It’s only bad if a Redimowit or quasi-Redimowit does it.
Typical knee-jerk reaction. What JimD suggested was a dollar limit. That limit knows no party affiliation.
I’m not agreeing with or defending Jim, but thought I’d point a mirror your direction. It’s apparently only WRONG if Jim D or a Democrat does it and only Right if Brietbart or a Republican (no matter their stripes) does it.
That big bad double headed double standard monster of yours Jim2. Try applying things to both sides even if its not equal.
The current tax laws know no party affiliation. The dollar limit is a dumb idea. (Oh, the tax laws know no party affiliation unless it’s Obumbles IRS targeting conservatives. O is much more corrupt than Nixon ever was. He and Lyin’ Billary both belong in jail.)
Jim2,
“The dollar limit is a dumb idea.” Maybe. But that still has nothing to do with party affiliations.
And you speak with forked tongue and continually prove that you are not trustworthy when it comes to politics. But that’s your choice.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/DC-Decoder/2013/0517/Playing-the-IRS-card-Six-presidents-who-used-the-IRS-to-bash-political-foes/President-Calvin-Coolidge
You should know that the amount you can claim on capital losses is limited each year and limited a lot. Capital losses include those on stocks. Many had this issue after 2008. NOL has no such limits and can wipe out your whole income tax burden.
A NOL and a LT capital loss carry forward are not equal.
From the article:
…
“I was standing on the Miss USA stage, a dream come true for so many young women and an incredible memory that I will treasure for years to come. But an even greater experience that stemmed from my time at Miss USA was my time with Donald Trump,” Gesiotto wrote.
…
http://conservativetribune.com/fed-up-miss-usa-hits-universe/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=THENewVoice&utm_campaign=manualpost
The Obumbles administration cover-up for Billary. Dimowits – if their lips are moving, they’re lyin’. From the article:
…
The FBI agreed to destroy two Clinton aides’ laptops after granting them immunity as part of a “side agreement,” according to a letter from House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte to Attorney General Loretta Lynch.
Goodlatte alleges that the FBI promised to destroy the laptops of Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s former chief of staff, and Heather Samuelson, an ex-campaign staffer and deputy to Mills, after conducting its search.
Fox News cites unnamed sources in a report saying that the FBI’s search was also limited in scope, in order to “[prevent] the bureau from discovering if there was any evidence of obstruction of justice.” Investigators could not review documents created after January 31, 2015:
…
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/10/03/fbi-agreed-destroy-clinton-aides-laptops-granting-immunity/
From the article:
…
Tax preparer and Forbes contributor Ryan Ellis writes that “professional” journalists’ hot takes about Donald Trump’s 1995 tax return show how little they know about taxes and business.
From Forbes:
To state the obvious, political reporters don’t know a damned thing about taxes. I know this–believe me (to channel my inner Donald). Part of what I do for a living is prepare people’s taxes in the Washington, DC area. As an Enrolled Agent, I run into all sorts of clients. The most political (that is, horse race/hot take) clients compete with performing artists for the least amount of knowledge when it comes to taxes. I’ve even had some of them forget to bring their W-2s to a tax session.
That ignorance was on display in vivid colors over the weekend. We were told that this tricky NOL was some sort of “loophole” that only super-rich bad guys like Donald Trump got to use. We were told that this relieved him of having to pay taxes for 18 years, a laughably arbitrary, made up number that is the tautological output of simple arithmetic and wild assumptions.
…
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/10/03/tax-expert-journalists-proved-donald-trumps-returns-ignorance/
Imitation! The sincerest form of flattery?
http://thehill.com/media/296324-media-we-all-got-rick-rolled-by-trump
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/10/04/trump-backers-feel-played-as-wikileaks-fails-to-come-through-on-october-surprise/
Bill Clinton calls Obamacare ‘the craziest thing in the world’
http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/04/politics/bill-clinton-obamacare-craziest-thing/index.html
Isn’t Obamacare an offshoot of what Hillary was trying to promote under Bill??
“On Wednesday, The Times presented the tax documents to Jack Mitnick, a lawyer and certified public accountant who handled Mr. Trump’s tax matters for more than 30 years, until 1996. Mr. Mitnick was listed as the preparer on the New Jersey tax form.”
“Mr. Mitnick, 80, now semiretired and living in Florida, said that while he no longer had access to Mr. Trump’s original returns, the documents appeared to be authentic copies of portions of Mr. Trump’s 1995 tax returns. Mr. Mitnick said the signature on the tax preparer line of the New Jersey tax form was his, and he readily explained an obvious anomaly in the way especially large numbers appeared on the New York tax document.”
“A member in public practice shall not disclose any confidential client information without the specific consent of the client.”
Mitnick might be argued not to be in public practice anymore. I can’t imagine confidentiality requirements stop upon retirement. I would not be surprised if CPAs go after Mitnick. He called himself one. I do not think that what he did is what we are supposed to do.
I think he should have asked for information from those that presented him the tax documents to determine who they were. Asked for a copy of the documents. Then just explained what he knew for many years about confidentiality, while confirming nothing. Did he have a responsibility to inform Trump of the situation? I think so.
Come One, Come All… See the amazing Donald J. Trump, debut as: President of the United States of America
Third Debate, Wednesday, October 19, 2016
From Guccifer 2.0, October 4.
…
GUCCIFER 2.0 HACKED CLINTON FOUNDATION
Many of you have been waiting for this, some even asked me to do it.
So, this is the moment. I hacked the Clinton Foundation server and downloaded hundreds of thousands of docs and donors’ databases.
Hillary Clinton and her staff don’t even bother about the information security. It was just a matter of time to gain access to the Clinton Foundation server.
Here’s the contents of one of the folders that I got from there
…
https://guccifer2.wordpress.com/2016/10/04/clinton-foundation/
“None of the folders or files shown are from the Clinton Foundation.”
Guccifer 2.0, an online persona widely regarded as a front for Russian intelligence operatives, claimed Tuesday to have hacked the Clinton Foundation, the non-profit organization that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton founded with her family.
“I hacked the Clinton Foundation server and downloaded hundreds of thousands of docs and donors’ databases,” Guccifer said in a post on the self-proclaimed hacker’s blog. “It was just a matter of time to gain access to the Clinton Foundation server.”
“A Clinton Foundation official denied the claim in a statement to Fortune. “Once again, we still have no evidence Clinton Foundation systems were breached and have not been notified by law enforcement of an issue,” the official said. “None of the folders or files shown are from the Clinton Foundation.”
Guccifer posted screenshots of folders and spreadsheets allegedly pulled from the foundation’s computer network along with an 860-megabyte file of alleged donor information. A photo of the alleged directory included folders named “DCCC,” “DNC,” “Donor Research and Prospecting,” “Large Contributions,” PAC Fundraisers,” and suspiciously, “Pay to Play.”
“As you can see, the private server of the Clinton clan contains docs and donors lists of the Democratic committees, PACs, etc. Does it surprise you?” Guccifer wrote.
Guccifer also claimed that one spreadsheet showed how banks like Goldman Sachs contributed some portion of bail-out funds from the 2008 financial meltdown to Democrats. “It looks like big banks and corporations agreed to donate to the Democrats a certain percentage of the allocated TARP funds,” Guccifer wrote.
For more on political hacking, watch:
Despite the hacking claim as well as reports that the foundation has been investigating suspected computer network intrusions, the documents posted by Guccifer seem to correspond to files that were stolen in an earlier breach of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, as The Hill noted.
Among the clues: the listed donors match contributors to the DCCC; the donors do not match the names of contributors disclosed on the foundation’s website; and one of the spreadsheets seems to have been created by a DCCC staffer, Kevin McKeon, in 2009.
Guccifer has attempted to repurpose DCCC documents before. Last month the person or group behind the alias posted files allegedly filched from a computer used by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. In actuality, the documents appeared to have originated with the DCCC.”
http://fortune.com/2016/10/04/clinton-foundation-guccifer-hack-claim/
2nd and likely more helpful link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disinformation
Ah, so you are saying Guccifer 2.0 published a list of UNDISCLOSED donars!!
http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2016/10/04/496543317/amid-deteriorating-u-s-russia-relations-questions-grow-about-cyberwar
I would like to share this, but will put it on the political thread even though it doesn’t fit. It might be fun sometime to have a thread to post stupid things from the internet. Get this one.
…
To combat the rampant heat loss through a wall of spaced 2x4s, builders place petroleum-based fiberglass insulation
…
https://www.good.is/articles/build-a-better-home-with-these-alternative-construction-methods
To drop into moderation: Nazi.
Would a new political thread be OK?
Regards, j2.
I’ll put one up later today, thx