The last edition started wiping out everything on the front page for some glitchy computer reason, and was hard to post in. So, already on to a new one, with which we start with this interesting item:
November 21, 2023
But there happen to be better numbers than the ones Cohn and his prophesizing colleagues are citing. And they show Biden well ahead. The prediction markets for elections — essentially investors putting money on candidates — has a Biden win trading at 43 cents, which implies a 43% chance of victory, according to the Financial Times. Trump is trailing at 37 cents, while the other candidates are long shots.
What might make these markets a better indication of the candidates’ prospects than those political polls? For one thing, they have a better record of accurately predicting the winner.PredictIt is currently the biggest legal site for political-prediction trading in this country.
A smaller political predictions market is Iowa Electronic Markets, at the University of Iowa. Like PredictIt, the Iowa market operates under the academic exception made by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). PredictIt works in a nonprofit arrangement with Victoria University in New Zealand.
The Financial Times sets forth the argument made by PredictIt founder John Aristotle Phillips that “prediction markets are a truth generator, powered by the invisible hand. ... If you trade based on fake news or half-baked punditry, you’re going to lose your money.”
From Harrop: Actually, Biden is ‘polling’ really well in the markets.
Whose running, check the last edition, it hasn't changed.
Breaking tradition and protocol, Speaker of the House Johnson has endorsed Trump.
November 23, 2023
November 28, 2023
Koch-backed super PAC Americans for Prosperity Action endorsed Nikki Haley.
December 4, 2023
Mysterious mailers attack Wyoming lawmakers, prompt investigation
On a different note, one of the panel members on This Week came absolutely unglued at the argument that Trump is a threat to democracy.
Now, frankly, I think Trump is a threat to democracy.
However, the commentator's point was a good one, which was that the Democrats don't believe that. His argument was that if they did, they wouldn't be fielding Biden.
Now, I think many Democrats are correct that Trump is very much a threat to democracy, but it is hard to ignore the fact that it's hard to believe their sincerity in the argument when they only think they're will got five voters is a warmed over Cup of Joe. People keep asking to see the menu, but the waitress just asks, "can I reheat that cup for you?"
Not only that, I'd note, but at the same time that Democrats are arguing that Trump is a threat to democracy, they're also arguing that all third party choices must not be considered.
Eh?
Um, in a functioning democracy they would be considered.
Of course, the reason for that is, to extend the analogy above, you might walk across the street and look at somebody else's menu. "Hmmm. . . I think I've had enough of this coffeee, do you want to walk across the street and get some ice cream?" What? What, are you crazy? Ice Cream will make you fat! Let me reheat that for you.
December 5, 2023
Doug Burgum has dropped out of the Republican contest.
While other candidates do remain, basically this race is down this Haley, DeSantis, Trump and Christie, with it appearing increasingly unlikely that Christie has a chance.
December 6, 2023
Criminal Defendant Donald Trump, in an interview with Sean Hannity, stated:
I love this guy. He says, 'You’You’re not going to be a dictator, are you?' I said, 'No, no, no. Other than Day One.' We’re closing the border, and we’re drilling, drilling, drilling. After that, I’m not a dictator.
So, contrary to the headlines, Trump in fact confirmed that he'd act like a dictator, but confined it to a single day, which gets back to his delusional comments that anything can be done in a day.
President Biden indicated he likely wouldn't be running again, but for Trump, in which case he should not be running, as most Democrats don't want him to be and it looks like he'll lose to Trump.
Liz Cheney is hinting that she may run for the Presidency as a third party candidate.
December 17, 2023
Drawing his lines clearer than ever, Donald Trump unleashed a series of far right dog whistles this past week, including those that recall strongly racist and fascists elements. To start with, regarding immigration:
TRUMP: No, nobody has ever seen anything like this. And I think we could say worldwide. I think you could go to the... you could go to a banana republic and pick the worst one, and you're not going to see what we're witnessing now. No control whatsoever. Nobody has any idea where these people are coming from, and we know they come from prisons. We know they come from mental institutions. . . insane asylums. We know they're terrorists. Nobody has ever seen anything like we're witnessing right now. It is a very sad thing for our country. It's poisoning the blood of our country. It's so bad, and people are coming in with disease. People are coming in with every possible thing that you could have. And I got to know a lot of the heads of these countries. They're very cunning people. Very street-smart people. If they're not street-smart, they're not going to be there very long. And when they send up those caravans, and I had it ended, we had the safest border in the history of our country, meaning the history, over the last 80 years. Before that, I assume it was probably not so bad. There was nobody around. But, we had the safest in recorded history by far. The least amount of drugs in many, many decades. The least amount of human trafficking, which is a tremendous problem. But, when you look at what's taking place now, nobody's... first of all, it's not sustainable by any country, including ours, even from a (inaudible) standpoint. And, you know, we built over 500 miles of wall. We were going to put up another 200 miles. And, we had it bought. Everything was bought. Everything was purchased. They were going to ready. It could have been done within three weeks. Another 200 miles, all done. And they didn't want to do it. When you look at the numbers of people coming in, and the numbers, Raheem, are much bigger than anyone understands. I really believe it's going to be 15 million people by the end of this year during this administration. That's larger than New York state. Ok, this is what we have.1 2
Trump also stated that immigrants would be subjected to stout entry testing, including determining if they agree with "our religion".
And now Donald Trump has stated this at a campaign rally:
I’ll implement strong ideological screening of all immigrants…If you don’t like our religion…then we don’t want you in our country.
One Twitter commentator that I follow stated that this was the most anti-American statement he could imagine, but it really isn't. It's a very Southern populist viewpoint, of the type that we haven't seen openly from the 1960s and which most people believed was behind us.
This is ample evidence of how a genuine problem, the absurdly high level of immigration, legal and illegal, that has existed in the country for decades now, but which has been consistently ignored, has festered in the rust belt and populist populations. It could have been addressed in an equitable fashion before, but now it's threatening to breakout in a really malevolent fashion. This issue alone may end up defeating Biden, and we should take Trump fully at his word in what he intends to do.
The citation to religion, we'd note, is ironic, as Trump is not a religious man in any fashion, which again demonstrates the extent to which Southern Cultural Christianity has crept into the GOP, and particularly the New Apostolic Reformation movement. Apostolic Christianity and Judaism are full of Biblical injunctions that immigrants are to be welcomed, something that has long made conservative American Catholics uncomfortable. But this approach that Trump has now adopted is radical in pledging a religious test for entry, something that has never existed in the country's history. This too has been a smoldering cultural problem, although it's camouflaged here. Prior to Ted Kennedy's redrafting of American immigration, US immigration policy strongly favored immigrant pools that reflected existing American demographics. His reforms, adopted by Congress, changed that, and many have been uncomfortable with those changes, and this is again erupting in a malevolent fashion.
Trump also quoted Vladimir Putin about Joe Biden being a threat to democracy, which is absurd, but which again demonstrates the very weird Putin/Trump connection which has never been fully explored.
The truly scary thing here is that we seem to have gone over a tipping point where these views aren't shied away from, they're being endorsed by large segments of American society.
Footnotes:
1. Once again, I'm left amazed by some of the ignorance and weirdness in Trump's speech. The repetitious childishness of his speech patterns, and in this case prior to "80 years ago" "there was nobody around".
Trump just isn't right. Why is this being ignored?
2. Some have noted that the "poisoning the blood" language recalls Mein Kampf. In fact, it does. Hitler uses that line repeatedly, for example:
Unfortunately the German national being is not based on a uniform racial type. The process of welding the original elements together has not gone so far as to warrant us in saying that a new race has emerged. On the contrary, the poison which has invaded the national body, especially since the Thirty Years' War, has destroyed the uniform constitution not only of our blood but also of our national soul. The open frontiers of our native country, the association with non-German foreign elements in the territories that lie all along those frontiers, and especially the strong influx of foreign blood into the interior of the Reich itself, has prevented any complete assimilation of those various elements, because the influx has continued steadily.
The religious test quote Trump made, makes a person wonder if he's genuinely holding views of this type, although his language recalls anti desegregation Southern whites more strongly in my view.
December 20, 2023
The Supreme Court of Colorado, just as we predicted, has disqualified Donald J. Trump from appearing on the Colorado ballot.
Under the doctrine of full faith and credit, every state is now legally obligated to do the same, or at least give serious weight to Colorado’s decision. At least some other states will follow this route and as some, like Wyoming, will decry it, it will head to the United States Supreme Court. I’ll predict right now that the U.S. Supreme Court will uphold the Colorado decision, putting an end, although a precariously late one, to Trump as a candidate.
December 28, 2023
The case noted above has been appealed by the Colorado GOP to the United States Supreme Court, while at the same time, a similar effort in Michigan has failed to take Trump off of that state's ballot.
Should the U.S. Supreme Court take this matter up, which the Trump lawyers also say they will seek, it will prove to be an error and likely end up removing Trump from the race entirely.
Regarding Colorado, a surprise move by Lauren Boebert:
In a true Colorado political surprise, U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert announced Wednesday night that she will abandon the congressional district she has represented for nearly three years — and seek her party’s nomination in 2024 on the other end of the state.
Boebert said she will run to represent Colorado’s 4th Congressional District, vying to succeed retiring U.S. Rep. Ken Buck, a fellow Republican.
“Personally, this announcement is a fresh start following a difficult year for me and my family,” Boebert said in a video announcement on Facebook. “I will not allow dark money that is directed at destroying me to steal this seat. It’s not fair to the 3rd District and the conservatives there who have fought so hard for our victories, of which I’m incredibly grateful.”
Boebert must be in real political trouble in her district to attempt this move, which very well may fail. She's going to have to relocate to get on the ballot, and presumably she'll have to resign her current seat when she does.
cont:
Colorado Supreme Court Ruling in Anderson v. Griswold Appealed to U.S. Supreme Court
Denver, December 28, 2023 - The Colorado Republican Party has appealed the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision in Anderson v. Griswold to the U.S. Supreme Court. With the appeal filed, Donald Trump will be included as a candidate on Colorado’s 2024 Presidential Primary Ballot when certification occurs on January 5, 2024, unless the U.S. Supreme Court declines to take the case or otherwise affirms the Colorado Supreme Court ruling.
Secretary of State Griswold has commented: “Donald Trump engaged in insurrection and was disqualified under the Constitution from the Colorado Ballot. The Colorado Supreme Court got it right. This decision is now being appealed. I urge the U.S. Supreme Court to act quickly given the upcoming presidential primary election.”
On December 19, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled Donald Trump is ineligible to appear on the Colorado 2024 Presidential Primary Ballot due to the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Colorado Supreme Court simultaneously stayed that ruling until January 4, with that stay remaining in place in the event of an appeal.
Key Upcoming Dates:
- January 5: Deadline for Secretary of State Griswold to certify the names and party affiliations of candidates on the 2024 Presidential Primary Ballot.
- January 5: U.S. Supreme Court conference day
- January 20: Deadline for 2024 Presidential Primary Ballots to be sent to military and overseas voters.
- February 12: First day 2024 Presidential Primary Ballots can be mailed to active registered voters.
- February 26: First day of in-person voting for the 2024 President Primary.
- March 5: Colorado 2024 Presidential Primary Day, polls close at 7:00 PM Mountain Time.
cont:
January 3, 2024.
Donald Trump's is appealing the ruling of the Secretary of State that Trump cannot stand for election under the 14th Amendment.
Last Edition:
No comments:
Post a Comment