Further thoughts on the election

1. Perhaps the best way to summarize the decline of the GOP is that they don’t even know when they’ve won an election. There’s all this gloom and doom and handwringing in the GOP, even though they won. At least they won unless you are one of those people who only cares about the cult of the strong leader, and couldn’t care less about policy (a group that now seems to include most GOP voters.)

Here’s Matt Yglesias:

The Dems are not going to win those two Senate seats in Georgia, but even if they do it’s now 100% clear that there’ll be no court packing and no end to the filibuster. That means the Supreme Court will remain highly conservative for decades to come. The GOP won!

Biden won’t be able to get anything “progressive” through Congress. The GOP won!

Because the Dems have the presidency, the GOP will pick up seats in the next midterm. The GOP won!

But they think they’ve lost because the modern GOP cares nothing about policy, they just want a low IQ demagogue to “own the libs” with moronic tweets than they think are actually “clever”. That’s literally all they lost.

2. This election cements the banana republic status of the US. In the 20th century, only the 1960 election was viewed as somewhat tainted. (Not correctly; Kennedy won Texas by a pretty solid margin.) In contrast, all 4 presidents in this century were widely viewed as illegitimate. The Supreme Court “stole” the 2000 election. Obama wasn’t born in America, according to Trump and his followers. Trump’s election was due to Russian misinformation campaign on Facebook. Biden stole the election. It’s just never ends. The US has become a banana republic. How much evidence to you guys need before you finally admit that I’m right?

[Just to be clear, I view all four presidents as legitimate. I’m giving you the popular view among a very large minority of Americans.]

3. On Election Day, I suggested we might have a bad interregnum as in 1933. In early 1933, there were two basic problems. First, FDR refused to commit to the gold standard. This led to a run on gold and the worst three months of the entire depression. FDR also refused to work with Hoover on a bank rescue package, and there was a really bad run on the banks in February. (Back then; the new president took office in early March.)

Today the interregnum might hold up a fiscal stimulus package, and it might lead to a dispute over how to roll out any new vaccine, which slows the planning process. That’s nowhere near as bad as 1933, but I expect some grumbling from people who argue (correctly) that the interregnum is still too long.

4. Over at Econlog, I pointed out that the vaccine that Trump is taking credit for developing was actually developed by the children of Muslim immigrants to Germany. Hmm . . .

5. A few weeks back I used Bayesian reasoning to evaluate election eve charges of corruption leveled against Biden. I said we knew 6 months earlier with 100% certainty that those accusations would be made roughly a week before the election, so there was no new information to react to.

Similarly, we knew last month with 100% certainty that if Trump lost he’d claim the election was stolen and he’d refuse to concede for some time. Thus the press really should not report these facts in the news. Doing so is an insult to the intelligence of the American public. It implicitly suggests that Americans are not Bayesians, and are too stupid to have already known that Trump would claim the election was stolen and would refuse to concede.

The press should report new information, things we don’t already know.

6. All good Republicans believe:

a. Obama had little to do with the huge stock gains under his presidency.

b. Trump caused a huge stock market boom.

c. Biden’s election gave no significant lift to stocks.

And they are right on 2 out of 3 beliefs. Not bad!

7. Over at Econlog, I have a new post pointing out that Dems are the idea party and the GOP is the “thing” party.

8. There are millions of votes yet to be counted, mostly mail-ins from places like California, New York and New Jersey. The Biden lead will widen significantly. Please don’t put too much weight on the current national vote margin, or (inaccurate) exit polls, when making comments below. I’ll ignore your comment if you do.

Wisconsin still looks like the swing state, but it’s too soon to know for sure.

9. All of 2020, in one crazy headline:

Trump Adviser Leading Post-Election Legal Fight Has Coronavirus

10. So far, no commenter has been able to provide any evidence of widespread cheating. Nor has Trump. But “Questions Have Been Raised!!”

11. The NYT has an interesting map of vote shifts since 2020 (provisional due to some votes being still uncounted.) Here’s my take:

a. The Northeast shifted blue.

b. Much of the area west of central Nebraska shifted blue, with two exceptions. The fracking area of west Texas, and the Mormon areas of Utah and Idaho. The latter reflects the fact that Trump picked up GOP votes because McMullin was no longer running. In an absolute sense, Trump still underperformed in Mormon areas, relative to pre-2016 elections.

c. In much of the South and Midwest, Trump gained in rural areas and smaller industrial towns and lost ground in bigger cities, especially those with higher education levels. Trump also gained in Hispanic areas, a trend that will likely continue in future elections. In the very long run, the GOP’s best hope is to bring in lots more immigrants from Latin America. (Just kidding.)

PS. A few arrows may shift bluer as more votes come in, but probably not many.

Update: This map looks different, as it’s scaled by population.


Tags:

 
 
 

74 Responses to “Further thoughts on the election”

  1. Gravatar of bill bill
    10. November 2020 at 11:38

    Irony: Trump did better in Philly in 2020 than in 2016.

  2. Gravatar of Alan Goldhammer Alan Goldhammer
    10. November 2020 at 11:56

    Krugman’s column in today’s NY Times offers the same thesis as Scott does. It is apparent that the huge vote in the Atlanta and the surrounding region highlights the urban/rural split.

  3. Gravatar of sty.silver sty.silver
    10. November 2020 at 12:02

    Sorry to ignore the post again, but I’m very curious if you have anything to say about the markets still having Trump at (checks) 12.0%

    > It implicitly suggests that Americans are not Bayesians, and are too stupid to have already known that Trump would claim the election was stolen and would refuse to concede.

    Well…

  4. Gravatar of foosion foosion
    10. November 2020 at 12:24

    The GOP appears to have ideas: tax cuts for the best off and elimination of laws and regulations that help consumers and workers (at least as first order effects).

    Not only do they not have evidence of cheating, they don’t have concrete allegations, except those that are immediately shown to be false (e.g., no GOP observers).

    The 9/11 commission said that failure to do a prompt transition process hampered national security. Trump, et al. are refusing to cooperate in the transition. I’m old enough to remember when the GOP claimed to care about national security.

  5. Gravatar of sd0000 sd0000
    10. November 2020 at 13:51

    Scott – part of me is very happy that Biden won – he’s obviously far more fit for office and an overall respectable person (as far as politicians go). But then the other side of me sees things like his enthusiastic support for critical race theory madness and the signals of a revitalized attack on police departments across the country (see Heather MacDonald’s newest article for City Journal) and wants Trump to be emperor for life.

    The right’s excesses will always be reined in by an antagonistic media. The left’s excesses will always be *ignored* by a compliant media. Sure Biden is a moderate. But the thousands of 30-something year old mid-level bureaucrats that get installed will most certainly not be.

    I just don’t understand how you can’t be worried about that in the current environment we’re in.

  6. Gravatar of Mark Mark
    10. November 2020 at 13:54

    How do we make sense of PredictIt still giving Trump a 15%-20% chance to win the election? We knew that Trump was going to claim the election was rigged—that isn’t new—but the fact that he has a realistic probability of success is new, and very concerning!

    Earlier there was a discrepancy between polling-based models versus prediction markets where Trump’s odds were substantially higher. What if both were correct, and the difference between the polling-based models and the prediction markets was primarily the risk of Trump managing to invalidate the election despite losing?

  7. Gravatar of J Mann J Mann
    10. November 2020 at 13:56

    I agree with your larger points, but:

    1) I think most Republicans get that this is not nearly as serious a loss as a Blue wave sweeping the Senate. That said, if you didn’t like Obama era regulations and judges, you probably aren’t going to like Biden’s, even tempered by a very likely McConnell Senate. I’d call it a split decision, not a win.

    5) The news should obviously report when things of very high probability happen. First, many people are not strongly Bayesian, and some of them read the news. Second, some Bayesians have weird priors and can use “dog bites man” stories to update them.

    I agree with you somewhat about Biden. I assume the emails to be almost certainly true, and they confirm what I already thought about Biden: that he either is turning a blind eye to or lying about his knowledge of his son’s marketing of the family name, but that there wouldn’t be clear evidence of a Joe Biden quid pro quo. That said, it could be helpful for people who didn’t agree with me to update.

  8. Gravatar of Sean Sean
    10. November 2020 at 14:33

    You are right policy wise. The cultural stuff though is going to be annoying. That’s not unimportant. You already have brainard jockeying for a promotion and showing her ideological purity by trying to add climate change as part of the federal reserve mission. Which of course is another sign of banana republic. I’m also not sure if it’s normal for Biden to be commenting on the pending obamacare legislation on the Supreme Court.

  9. Gravatar of Philo Philo
    10. November 2020 at 14:39

    @sd0000: The Democrats’ bark always seems to be worse than their bite; I expect them to do only about 20% of the socialist/dirigiste stuff they’re talking about. We should worry about them, but nowhere near enough to welcome Trump as emperor for life!

  10. Gravatar of ted ted
    10. November 2020 at 14:40

    The left is so predictable.

    1. There is no fraud.
    2. Okay, there might be some fraud but no “widespread fraud”.
    3. Okay, fine there might be a lot of allegations but it won’t affect his lead in anyway and the supreme court will do nothing.
    4. Supreme court is biased, justices should step down, or we should pack the court.
    5. President trump is illegitimate; these justices are not following the “new constitution” of subjective morality.
    6. Go burn down cities left wing mobsters, and kill white people. They are all racist and bad.

    The division and hatred will NOT stop until the left stops inciting it.

  11. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    10. November 2020 at 14:44

    sty.silver, I’ve commented on that before. I don’t know a lot about the market, but I don’t believe there’s enough liquidity to profit on that. Wouldn’t a big bet sharply tip the odds?

    No one believes that Trump actually has a 3% chance of winning New York, something else is going on. Someone with more knowledge of the market should comment.

    sd0000, I’m sure I will disagree with many things Biden does, just as I disagree with many things Trump does. But he’s not going to rein in police departments, at least not as much as they should be reined in. I wish the police would stop barging into people’s houses looking for drugs, for instance.

    Mark, Trump’s not going to win. See my reply to sty.Silver.

    Mann, I’d put it this way. The absolute worst case for Biden is that he’s 1% as corrupt as Trump, but I find even that claim highly implausible.

  12. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    10. November 2020 at 14:45

    Philo, And in many policy areas, even in economics, they are better than Trump.

  13. Gravatar of Mark Mark
    10. November 2020 at 15:04

    I think there’s a fair amount of liquidity because PredictIt doesn’t just have one market, but it has a lot that are functionally the same as a will-Trump-win market (such as which party will win, whether the VP will be a woman, or whether the winner of the such-and-such Democratic Primary will win the election). They all have Trump at around 15% to win now. I also checked 2016 and this did not happen—Hillary was down to 3% as soon as the election was over. It’s very concerning and suggests this coup stuff is not idle talk.

  14. Gravatar of Market Fiscalist Market Fiscalist
    10. November 2020 at 15:32

    Wikipedia says that ‘PredictIt uses a continuous double auction to sell shares for each event in its markets, meaning that for every person who predicts that an event will take place, there must be another person who predicts that it will not’.

    Doesn’t the 15%for Trump most likely just indicate that there are lot of delusional Trump supporters ready to buy an almost certainly losing position ?

  15. Gravatar of foosion foosion
    10. November 2020 at 15:48

    This was an incredibly clean election. Obviously you don’t offer massive cash bounties if fraud was common.

    “Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick has offered up to $1 million of his own campaign funds for any whistleblowers or tipsters who come forward with evidence of voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election.” https://www.thedailybeast.com/texas-lt-gov-dan-patrick-offers-dollar1-million-in-campaign-funds-for-voter-fraud-evidence

  16. Gravatar of Benjamin Cole Benjamin Cole
    10. November 2020 at 16:02

    Among the considerations the incoming Democratic president will have to weigh are likely calls from progressives for more extensive change at the Fed, given that the party’s platform included reforms to make the Fed more attentive to issues like racial wealth inequality, and whether Powell is the right figure to pursue that.”—Reuters Nov. 10

    Stay tuned. And be careful what you wish for.

  17. Gravatar of sd0000 sd0000
    10. November 2020 at 16:13

    Scott – Singapore went 126 days in 2016 without a single recorded crime of any kind. Not violent crime, ANY crime. Without progressive panic and neutering of our police departments, we could have similar (not exact, given demographics) crime rates here. The fact that there are people trying to stop such efforts in the US and the West in general is the greatest single crime of humanity today. Bar none. Countless needless deaths because progressives do not want to punish criminals. Talk about an invisible graveyard… imagine the lives saved if we just tripled the police force in every major city and blanketed every street in facial recognition cameras. Again, it’s pure evil that there are groups that are against this. There is no other explanation.

  18. Gravatar of Benjamin Cole Benjamin Cole
    10. November 2020 at 16:13

    The bananafication of America continues….

    “Former CIA dir. John Brennan calls on VP Pence and the cabinet to invoke the 25th Amendment and strip Pres. Trump of his powers.”

    Live on CNN.

  19. Gravatar of Benjamin Cole Benjamin Cole
    10. November 2020 at 16:51

    From Bloomberg:

    “All Patriots Now?

    China may require all Hong Kong lawmakers to be “patriots” as soon as Wednesday, local media reported, a move to curb debate in a democratic institution that has endured more than two decades after the former British colony’s return. China’s top legislative body is considering a measure behind closed doors in Beijing this week that would allow Hong Kong’s government to eject lawmakers deemed insufficiently patriotic, local media including HK01 and the Sing Tao Daily reported this week. The proposal has alarmed the 20 opposition lawmakers on the city’s 70-seat Legislative Council, with the bloc threatening on Monday to resign if any of their own are disqualified.”

    —30—

    Just gets uglier and uglier. I see no solution. The CCP is winning.

  20. Gravatar of agrippa postumus agrippa postumus
    10. November 2020 at 16:54

    oooooh. Bayesian Statistics! A tool, no doubt, not received wisdom from God or the all knowing. It is an automatic inference system that is based on subjective priors. Any systems analyst knows it’s just a tool, a good tool, but not what the forever crank Sumner tries so hard to scare people into believing it is. Nothing is known until it is known.

    who cares about the muslim parentage of the vaccine discoverers? apply bayesian stats to that to find sumners subjective priors in the trash heap of the hollywood and cnn prop junkyard.

    if you are an “idea” party all you care about is “things” that can come from your “ideas”; likewise if you are a “thing” all you care about is the “ideas” that get the things; or is it vice versa, or is it just nonsense by a frustrated film noir gaffer dreaming about being the best boy who nails the secretary sleeping with the screenwriter fired for his lousy grasp of statistics, but we knew all this from applied subjective priors.

  21. Gravatar of Cartesian Theatics Cartesian Theatics
    10. November 2020 at 17:43

    I am truly very surprised by this take. It’s about the truth, period. There are anomalies to be investigated. It’s probably nothing super out of the norm, but it should be taken seriously. Is everyone freaking out because Trump is an idiot and claimed fraud? Yes, but so what. A primary purpose of the media is to answer the questions that the public has. It’s a unprecedented election at a time of unprecedented division. I analyzed the election data myself last night, the D/R ratio in the PA data does in fact appear anomalous. I’m sure there’s a reason, so why not explain it? Why jump to immediate smears? The way it’s being played is truly very odd.

    Trust me I don’t want to Trump to be president, I wish the GOP would dump Trump and just move on to the next round, but that’s not where were are. The constant smearing and suppression of any opposition is damaging this country.

  22. Gravatar of Chuck Chuck
    10. November 2020 at 17:57

    Bagel Republic

  23. Gravatar of Benjamin Cole Benjamin Cole
    10. November 2020 at 18:05

    “Press Releases
    November 10, 2020

    The following information is now available on the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta’s website:

    Atlanta and Kansas City Feds Release Guide to Support COVID-19 Recovery for Small Businesses of Color

    The Atlanta and Kansas City Feds have published a guide to help communities support small businesses of color as they recover from the damage brought on by the pandemic.”

    —30—

    Preparing for the Biden Presidency?

    So…what is the role of a central bank in a Biden Presidency?

    Is a guy from India a person of color? How about Armenians? People from East Asia? Koreans?

  24. Gravatar of Matthias Matthias
    10. November 2020 at 19:19

    sd0000, where do you get that statistic about Singapore from?

    I happen to live in that fine city, and this sounds rather implausible.

  25. Gravatar of martha martha
    10. November 2020 at 19:23

    There is no evidence of “widespread voter fraud”, but there is evidence of direct voter fraud on a significant scale in swing states – potentially enough to overturn the results. Statistical improbabilities outlined below:

    1. The turnout in the state of Wisconsin is 90%. To put that into perspective, Australia fines people who don’t vote and the turnout in Australia is 92%. Turnout in Wisconsin in 2016 was 68%.

    2. The city of Milwaukee, a place that Biden had to win in huge numbers, had a voter turnout of 84%. Cities with similar demographics such as Cleveland had a turnout of 51%. This trend of extraordinarily high voter turnout holds true ONLY in cities BIDEN had to win big – particularly in Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Atlanta, and Detroit.

    3. Biden outperformed Obama by enormous margins in swing state counties, but underperformed Obama in counties outside of swing states.

    4. There are 450K Biden only ballots in swing states, which is more than the rest of the United States combined. This means that people ONLY voted for Biden, and no other candidate on the ticket. To put this in greater perspective: 857 people voted for a Trump only ticket in Georgia. 91000 people voted for a Biden only ticket in Georgia. This trend continues throughout swing states, but not in other states.

    5. There doesn’t appear to have been vetting of mail in ballots. Pennsylvania, for example, had a rejection rate of 0.03%, when historically the rejection rate is closer to 3%.

    This evidence is circumstantial, but when you combine the statistical anomalies with what now appears to be 240 affidavits of poll watchers alleging they were unable to verify the count, USPS workers signing affidavits alleging direct fraud, and, of course dominion software issues, there does appear to be more than enough — from a legal perspective — to make a legitimate case.

  26. Gravatar of Sean Sean
    10. November 2020 at 19:33

    Yes I saw the fed comments on minority and women job losses. I guess I’m a crazy out of touch person but I care about all unemployed people regardless of race religion or gender. Just run monetary policy for full employment

  27. Gravatar of mbka mbka
    10. November 2020 at 19:34

    sd0000,

    “Singapore went 126 days in 2016 without a single recorded crime of any kind. Not violent crime, ANY crime. Without progressive panic and neutering of our police departments, we could have similar (not exact, given demographics) crime rates here.”

    I’ve got to comment on this because there is a serious attribution error here. I’ve now lived in Singapore for 20 years. I see highway patrol cars about 4, 5 times a year. A year. I see police walking patrols about twice a year. A year. (except the occasional anti terror patrol in airport or subway). There is no police to be seen anywhere, any time. According to the Atlantic, the US spends “… more on domestic public-safety programs than virtually all of its peer nations, double what Singapore spends in GDP terms”. And on the citizen side, in Singapore, mere possessions of guns or ammunition can get you the death penalty.

    From these factoids it should be clear that the difference in crime statistics between Singapore and the US have very little to do with policing, or police funding, and certainly nothing at all with armed citizenry fending off criminals (in case you’d bring this up). It is entirely due to culture, overwhelming power of the state beyond just police power, and a long history of clean government that keeps on enforcing cleanliness in all walks of life (anti-corruption laws etc) . Plus, mind you, yes enforcement where appropriate, Singapore has a fairly high prison population, per capita. One example, you can get jail for breaking Covid quarantaine or attending parties during lockdown.

    I am not sure if these are policies you had in mind, but if you want to make the US as safe as Singapore, crime wise, you have to change the whole country’s culture. Police has little to do with it.

  28. Gravatar of sd0000 sd0000
    10. November 2020 at 19:58

    mbka – the point is that cost/benefit for crime is totally different in the U.S. than in Singapore. There are cameras on every block – if you commit a crime, you will absolutely get caught and punishment will be dealt swiftly. In the U.S., almost entirely due to progressive policies, clearance rates for crimes – especially non-violent crimes – are EXTREMELY low. And the punishments themselves are very, very minor (less so than in Europe, but still very minor vs. Asia). So the effective overall punishment for petty crime is basically zilch. That’s why it is rampant. In San Francisco there is a car break in on average every 15 minutes. Less than 2% are caught and the average jail time is 4 months (making effective jail time TWO days). Try breaking into a car in Singapore and you’ll be caught the next day and caned within the week. Which do you think has more of a crime stopping effect?

    Again, crime has been solved in East Asia. There is virtually no crime in China, Singapore and Japan. The only reason why you don’t live in a place with no crime is because progressives do not want you to. That is evil incarnate.

  29. Gravatar of Matthias Matthias
    10. November 2020 at 20:11

    A police report says:

    > Singapore remains a safe place. In 2016, there were 135 days free from snatch theft, housebreaking and robbery.

    There were plenty of other crimes.

  30. Gravatar of mbka mbka
    10. November 2020 at 20:25

    sd0000,

    if you care to look it up, the crime situation in Singapore was the same before there were “cameras on every block”, another misconception. I thought you’d bring it up but I was too lazy to pre-empt it. The high clearance rate for crimes likely has more to do with mandatory national IDs with mandatory fingerprinting if you ask me (my fingerprint is printed on my ID). Again, not sure if you had this policy in mind for the U.S.

    Small tidbit, caning is only for vice crimes (or particularly odious, ant-social, or immoral acts, as an add-on to say, 20 years jail). It’s not a standard punishment in Singapore. Standard punishment is actually the monetary fine (e.g. for Covid rule violations, up to $10,000), moving on to jail time for repeat offenders.

    Not to mention what Matthias said.

  31. Gravatar of mbka mbka
    10. November 2020 at 20:30

    Just a general note, Singapore is kind of a political Rorschach test – every political flavor sees what they want to see. Liberals love the public policies and social programmes, the 85% of the population in pubic housing. Conservatives love the law and especially, the order. Libertarians love the free market economy and the low taxes. None in the West seem to understand that all of this works because Singapore is NOT the West (nor are China or Japan or Korea). It’s its own unique culture that has grown organically, historically. To implement what Singapore does, in your own country, you’d also have to implement the relevant aspects of Singapore’s culture. As Peter Drucker said, “Culture eats Strategy for Breakfast”.

  32. Gravatar of Dale Doback Dale Doback
    10. November 2020 at 21:30

    Agreed that it is hard to see this election as anything but a huge GOP victory. In addition to confirming the Electoral College, Supreme Court, Senate, and redistricting advantages of the GOP, Trump basically proves that white evangelicals can be taken completely for granted going forward as reliable GOP voters, and also the GOP can actually do just fine in a high turnout election.

  33. Gravatar of Steve Steve
    10. November 2020 at 23:58

    Trump is the worst Nazi ever!

    https://twitter.com/RyanGirdusky/status/1326190869163225090

    Westminster, CA (49% Asian) there was a 23 point swing to Trump.

    Garden Grove (40% Asian) there was a 21 point swing to Trump.

    Santa Ana (77% Hispanic) there was a 13 point swing to Trump.

    Stanton (49% Hispanic) had a 18 point swing to Trump

  34. Gravatar of Benjamin Cole Benjamin Cole
    11. November 2020 at 00:03

    Steve-

    “Hong Kong ousts four pro-democracy lawmakers
    Legislators deemed to threaten national security under Beijing resolution”—Nikkei Asian Review, today

    Some communities may be sensitive to news from the Asian Pacific…

    Not everyone takes their lead from the NBA…

  35. Gravatar of Postkey Postkey
    11. November 2020 at 01:16

    L.O.L: “Further thoughts on the election”.

    “Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. The results provide substantial support for theories of Economic-Elite Domination and for theories of Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism. “
    https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S1537592714001595

    Like the gosling that imprints on the first moving object it sees, some cannot divorce themselves from ‘democracy’ that they were initially imprinted with?

  36. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    11. November 2020 at 03:31

    Perhaps the best way to summarize the decline of the GOP is that they don’t even know when they’ve won an election.

    Scott,

    “Victory” seems a bit stretched, but it is certainly a respectable draw. Or to put it another way: if the Democrats manage another “victory” like this, the Democrats might be utterly ruined.

    Nevertheless, there are enough plausible reasons why the GOP does not emphazise their “victory”:

    1) They have just lost the re-election of their president, and quite narrowly, which hurts all the more, especially since incumbents are usually re-elected. This is a huge defeat.

    2) They face a really serious leadership problem, which is completely unresolved. It even worsened. It can drag the whole party into the abyss. They are stuck between a rock and a hard place. They need to get rid of Trump, but they don’t have a good alternative in sight that can energize the base in a similar way.

    3) It would be arrogant and strategically unwise to celebrate their current situation, this would only cost votes and distract them from the problems they currently have.

    4) Like stock markets, political evaluations are forward-looking and the future of the GOP appears to be fairly uncertain.

  37. Gravatar of Postkey Postkey
    11. November 2020 at 03:46

    From the goose information center.

    According to K.S..
    “ . . . the person that’s supposed to sign off
    19:20 the federal appointee and apparently an
    19:22 appointee of the trump administration
    19:24 who is supposed to sign off
    19:26 on the transition has not signed off
    19:29 they have not declared they have not
    19:31 declared Biden the winner
    19:33 and have not signed off on the
    19:34 transition
    19:36 the federal official whose job is to
    19:38 sign off on president-elect Joe Biden’s
    19:40 election victory
    19:43 and begin the mammoth tax task of
    19:45 transitioning
    19:46 between presidents has refused to do so
    19:51 and this was reported on Sunday evening
    19:55 so not too long ago that has not
    19:56 happened yet Emily Murphy
    19:58 a trump appointee who heads the general
    20:00 services administration
    20:02 has resisted signing the paperwork that
    20:04 would give Biden and his team access to
    20:06 millions of dollars in transition funds
    20:08 as well as official access to government
    20:10 officials
    20:11 and equipment to prepare the incoming
    20:14 administration . . . “
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mv8dujE0vbo

  38. Gravatar of Steve Steve
    11. November 2020 at 03:51

    Biden’s win was legitamite and Lee Harvey Oswald was a lone gunman.

  39. Gravatar of sstrassman sstrassman
    11. November 2020 at 04:58

    On the question of predict-it, it is a nearly meaningless market to look at. Other markets are functional (betfair for example) but anytime someone points at predict-it to prove a point about the stupidity of markets (Nate silver) or to prove some event is more likely than the evil media would have you believe (trump supporters), it should be ignored (and corrected If the person is someone who might possibly listen to rational argument).

    Predict problems:
    1. The max bet size is 850$ per contract per account. So unless you want to engage in account fraud the possible money made, particularly for low likelihood events Does not entice the kind of real money that makes markets accurate. I can assure you those real money players have better things to do with their time than making a couple 100$ once in a while.
    2. There is a 5% fee for withdrawal. So if you are forced to keep money in their indefinitely or it becomes extremely expensive. This means as the number of dumb bets fluctuates (and it gets much bigger than normal near the election) it is not easy to just increase your capital for that period of time. on top of the 850 contract cap, this makes it even harder for smart money to actually make any serious money here.
    3. There is a 10% fee on profits only, and your losses are ignored (from predictit, even before regular taxes). That means if you buy a contract for .9 that has intrinsic value of .95. 95% of the time you will win .05-.005= .045, 5% of the time you lose .9. The expected value of this bet is .045*.95-.9*.05= -.0025 that’s a losing bet! And it gets even worse when they send you a 1099-misc and the it’s wants you to pay taxes on it.
    4. Many of the markets you see are not actually tradable. The back end code is shoddy and they quickly hit limits- too many total bets open on a contract, too many total traders active in a contract, etc. in these cases only people who have an open position can trade, and it happens frequently in the highest demand (and highest profile) contracts.

    Predict it is a joke.

  40. Gravatar of sstrassman sstrassman
    11. November 2020 at 05:20

    Whoops – mistake on easy math on one of the previous points (#3). Reposting here and leaving that one out. It is still a problematic distortion but more nuanced and the effect isn’t nearly as big as the other ones, so I’ll focus on those:

    On the question of predict-it, it is a nearly meaningless market to look at. There are other functional event markets (e.g. betfair), but anytime someone points at predict-it to prove a point about the stupidity of markets (Nate Silver) or to prove some event is more likely than the evil media would have you believe (trump supporters), it should be ignored (and corrected if the person is one who may possibly listen to rational argument).

    Predict-it Problems:
    1. Max bet size is 850$ per contract per account. So unless you want to engage in account fraud, the possible money made does not entice the kind of real money that makes marekts accurate. I can assure you those real money players have better things to do with their time than making a couple 100$ once in a while.
    2.There is a 5% fee for withdrawal. So you are forced to keep money in their indefinitely or it becomes extremely expensive. This means as the number of dumb bets fluctuates (and it gets much bigger than normal near the election), it is not easy to just increase your capital for that period of time. On top of the 850 contract cap, this makes it even harder for smart money to actually make any serious money here.
    3. Many of the markets you see are not actually trade-able (you can only know by actually attempting to trade). My guess is the back end code is shoddy and they quickly hit silly limits: too many total bets open on a contract, too many total traders active on a given contract, etc. in these cases only people who already have an open position can trade, and it happens frequently in the highest demand (and highest profile) contracts.

    Predictit is a joke.

  41. Gravatar of sstrassman sstrassman
    11. November 2020 at 05:23

    Whoops – mistake on easy math on one of the previous points (#3). (to moderator: feel free to just delete that one). It is still a problematic distortion but more nuanced (particularly bad for arbitraging related markets) and the effect isn’t nearly as big as the other ones. The other three points are already plenty to distort the market nearly to the point of uselessness.

  42. Gravatar of Mark Mark
    11. November 2020 at 06:07

    Steve, California hasn’t finished counting the votes, and you also realize the actual Nazis were allied with Japan and pretty friendly with China, and also had many sympathizers in Latin America such that many of them went to Argentina after the war?

  43. Gravatar of sstrassman sstrassman
    11. November 2020 at 06:33

    Sorry for multiple posts (and to moderator: might be best to just keep this last one). But on further thought I think I was obscuring the main point about predict-it by mentioning multiple things.

    The key problem that makes it a mostly useless market is the 850$ cap per contract per account. There are several other issues but this is by far the biggest.

    In normal financial markets it is not millions of low-informed people making small bets with low stakes that make them accurate. It is a much smaller percentage of people, making much larger bets, who give the market predictive value. The high monetary value is the incentive for some people to do the work/take the risks and make the predictions right.

    Predict its 850$ cap has removed the high incentive, high information participants from the market, or at least made them such a small percent of the overall betting value (when they would typically be quite large in value, despite the smaller number of them), that the market cannot function correctly.

    Also note it’s not all predict-its fault- the $850 cap is CFTC mandated….

  44. Gravatar of Michael Sandifer Michael Sandifer
    11. November 2020 at 06:43

    To off topic a bit, we should dispense with the fantasy that “conservatives” in the US will be happy if the Supreme Court overturns Roe versus Wade, for example. They will not be content with simply having abortions illegal, or greatly curtailed in red states. They will want to come after blue states after that. Abortions, whether in absolute numbers, or in per-capita terms, have been falling in the US for years. This is rarely mentioned, as most anti-abortionists don’t care about numbers. They want an absolute ban on abortion, at least when it doesn’t involve the survival of the mother or incest. Some even want a total ban, whatever the cirumstances.

    The same is true of the teaching of evolution in schools. I recall being surprised years ago when discussing vouchers with a number of “conservatives” over dinner. I actually favor vouchers, but found that it didn’t move any of the people around the table. They said that even with vouchers, they’d want creationism taught in all schools in the US, public and private.

    There is a large element of fundamentalist religion that is the problem here. It’s one reason the Trump movement is so cult-like. Manay of it’s adherents are relgious kooks who are predisposed to a total lack of critical thinking and simple good/evil narratives, in which faith long ago replaced the need for evidence or even logical coherence.

  45. Gravatar of Michael Sandifer Michael Sandifer
    11. November 2020 at 06:45

    I want to make clear, by the way, that while I’m atheist, I don’t think religion is necessarily a problem. I’m focusing on a large number of religious extremist fundamentalists.

  46. Gravatar of J Mann J Mann
    11. November 2020 at 07:59

    Scott: “Mann, I’d put it this way. The absolute worst case for Biden is that he’s 1% as corrupt as Trump, but I find even that claim highly implausible.”

    I was more interested in the philosophical question about whether Bayesians should update based on information that confirms their predictions, but on the specifics, that seems in the right range to me.

    As PJ O’Rourke put it when he endorsed Hillary last time: “She’s awful, but she’s awful within normal parameters.”

  47. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    11. November 2020 at 09:46

    Martha, You said:

    “The turnout in the state of Wisconsin is 90%.”

    Not even close (more like 75%), and no higher than Minnesota. When your very first point is incorrect, I stop reading.

    And you didn’t even provide any links to back up your misinformation.

    mbka, A voice of reason.

    sd0000, In the US, both the left and the right support the camera on every block. Don’t worry, your 1984 society is coming to the US, and to the entire world.

    Steve, Good to know that there aren’t any racist Hispanic voters.

    Steve, You said:

    “Biden’s win was legitamite and Lee Harvey Oswald was a lone gunman.”

    That’s right. Finally, a non-crazy commenter.

    sstrassman, Thanks for that info, very helpful.

    Michael, Overturning Roe v. Wade might actually hurt the GOP in swing states, where most voters are pro-choice.

    JMann, Agreed.

    A Bayesian would look at the evidence and ask, “Is this more or less persuasive that the dirt I expected them to release on Biden right before the election.” For me it was “about as expected”.

  48. Gravatar of harry harry
    11. November 2020 at 11:14

    First of all, there is no guarantee that democrats will not win the senate.

    Second of all, if you haven’t noticed, there has been a significant movement within academia to brainwash students with a new form of little red books. Radical left IS the democratic party. They DO want a totalitarian state very similar to the CCP. This is a party that LITERALLY kneeled in allegiance to the BLM Marxists and ANTIFA anarchists.

    Finally, the idea that somehow the left is mostly moderate liberals who are fighting for more equality is simply NOT TRUE. They are vastly out numbered now by far left, red book youth, who want to overthrow capitalism, rip up the constitution, make a list of people who don’t agree with them (look at AOC’s recent comments; has there ever been a dumber politician in American History?), and create “equality of outcome”.

    Let’s be real: New Yorkers didn’t board up businesses because they were afraid of the far right. They boarded up in fear of the BLM lunatics. Another brainwashed red book youth just ran into a caravan of trump supporters in California, nearly killing a mother and child.

    You clearly don’t see what is happening right before your ideas. But it’s not surprising. Academics thought Hitler and Stalin were just a phase too. Like them, you are wrong! And like them, the mob will be at your door too.

    It’s only a matter of time.

  49. Gravatar of xu xu
    11. November 2020 at 11:28

    GAME. SET. MATCH CORRUPT LIBTARDS! Sidney Powell just “OWNED” you. YOUR PARTY IS FINISHED.

    ALL VOTES EITHER LOST OR SWITCHED TO BIDEN. TAKE A LOVELY LOOK AT BEAUTIFUL PA. ITS OVER! YOUR COMMIE CCP LOVING PARTY IS FINISHED.

    Nebraska : Switched : 30,086 Lost Votes : 50

    Connecticut : Switched : 3,834 Lost Votes : 272

    Massachusetts : Switched : 3,613 Lost Votes : 51

    Oregon : Switched 2,557 Lost Votes : 0

    Alabama : Switched : 1,170 Lost Votes : 408

    Mississippi : Switched : 355 Lost Votes : 0

    Maine : Switched : 271 Lost Votes : 35

    Rhode Island : Switched : 6 Lost Votes : 13

    West Virginia : Switched : 0 Lost Votes : 78,300

    Idaho : Switched 0 Lost Votes : 0

    Oklahoma : Switched : 0 Lost Votes : 0

    Indiana : Switched : 0 Lost Votes : 0

    Delaware : Switched : 0 Lost Votes : 0

    Vermont : Switched : 0 Lost Votes : 0

    Pennsylvania : Switched : 220,883 Lost Votes : 941,248

    New Jersey : Switched : 80,242 Lost Votes : 20

    Florida : Switched : 21,422 Lost Votes : 456

    Michigan : Switched : 20,213 Lost Votes : 21,882

    New York : Switched : 18,124 Lost Votes : 623,213

    Georgia : Switched : 17,407 Lost Votes : 33,574

    Ohio : Switched : 14,965 Lost Votes : 5,102

    Virginia : Switched : 12,163 Lost Votes : 789,023

    California : Switched : 7,701 Lost Votes : 10,989

    Arizona : Switched : 4,492 Lost Votes : 0

    Minnesota : Switched : 2,766 Lost Votes : 195,650

    Tennessee : Switched : 2,330 Lost Votes : 0

    Louisiana : Switched : 2,322 Lost Votes : 0

    Illinois : Switched : 2,166 Lost Votes : 54,730

    Wisconsin : Switched : 2,078 Lost Votes : 3,408

    Colorado : Switched : 1,809 Lost Votes : 0

    Utah : Switched : 1,627 Lost Votes : 0

    New Hampshire : Switched : 973 Lost Votes : 116

    Iowa : Switched : 938 Lost Votes : 477

    New Mexico : Switched : 268 Lost Votes : 4,610

    Missouri : Switched 0 : Lost Votes : 20,730

    Nevada : Switched : 0 Lost Votes : 0

    Alaska : Switched : 0 Lost Votes : 0

    Washington : Switched : 0 Lost Votes : 0

    Hawaii : Switched : 0 Lost Votes : 0

    Kansas and Texas use Premier Election Solutions, owned by Dominion Voting Systems.

    Texas : Switched : 14,954 Lost Votes : 30,557

    Kansas : Switched : 1,674 Lost Votes : 2,154

    Election Systems & Software :

    Nebraska : Switched : 30,086 Lost Votes : 50

    Kentucky : Switched : 8,129 Lost Votes : 23,849

    Arkansas : Switched : 3,664 Lost Votes : 20,748

    South Carolina : Switched : 2,779 Lost Votes : 2,119

    Montana : Switched : 2,330 Lost Votes : 1,276

    South Dakota : Switched : 1,347 Lost Votes : 1

    North Dakota : Switched : 234 Lost Votes : 681

    Maryland : Switched : 203 Lost Votes : 0

    North Carolina : Switched : 0 Lost Votes : 15

    District of Columbia : Switched : 0 Lost Votes : 0

    BYE BYE COMMIES

  50. Gravatar of Todd Kreider Todd Kreider
    11. November 2020 at 12:27

    “You clearly don’t see what is happening right before your ideas. But it’s not surprising. Academics thought Hitler and Stalin were just a phase too. Like them, you are wrong! And like them, the mob will be at your door too.”

    I think this leaves out that Scott retired a couple of years ago. It will take a while for the mob to get to his door.

  51. Gravatar of Michael Sandifer Michael Sandifer
    11. November 2020 at 12:35

    Scott,

    Yes, good point about restricting abortion in some swing states being unpopular, which brings us to one reason many on the right are turning against democracy. They know they can’t win the culture wars democratically. They can’t compromise on such absolutist views, such that abortion is murder. Is it possible to be okay with merely a reduced number of murdered children, as they see it?Yet, our abolitionist founders were willing to establish the 3/5 compromise. They valued having a broad republic even above the issue of slavery.

    Fundamentalist religion is central to this, as very few non-believers oppose abortion. It’s primarily those who believe in the concept of a soul who consider it murder.

    I think many of us, and I do mean to include myself, haven’t taken the threat of religious fundamentalism seriously enough, believing it would die fast enough on its own. I don’t even like thinking about religion.

  52. Gravatar of Carl Carl
    11. November 2020 at 12:53

    @xu
    Were the Republican Secretaries of State in Texas, Missouri, Georgia and West Virginia in on the conspiracy to overthrow Trump?

  53. Gravatar of sty.silver sty.silver
    11. November 2020 at 13:03

    So far, xu has actually been well-mannered compared to various other people that this blog has attracted in the past, for reasons that are beyond me. Now we’re at caps and name-calling? That’s a step backward.

  54. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    11. November 2020 at 13:52

    <blockquote
    They can’t compromise on such absolutist views, such that abortion is murder.

    Michael Sandifer,

    According to Pew Research, only 17% of Republicans follow your absolutist theory, the others are willing to compromise.

    You are following your classic bogeyman strategy again. Roe v. Wade was 1973. It was never overturned. According to my German sources, by 1992 eight (!) of the nine Supreme Court judges had already been appointed by Republican presidents.

    Nevertheless, in 1992 the Supreme Court upheld the principle of the previous decision in the case of Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

    This has not changed until today. The GOP cannot even overturn Obamacare, how will they ever change Roe v. Wade in a relevant way. They won’t.

    I think many of us, and I do mean to include myself, haven’t taken the threat of religious fundamentalism seriously enough, believing it would die fast enough on its own. I don’t even like thinking about religion.

    Another bogeyman, in reality the global trend is that people are becoming less and less religious, particularly in the US. You present the problem in exactly the opposite way. Why?

    This seems to be a typical phenomenon of the human brain, the less something becomes, the more people are afraid of it. Classic example: The anti-Semitism in Germany in the 19th and 20th century also became worse and worse, although there were fewer and fewer religious Jews. Although? No, because of it!

    Maybe this form of scapegoating even makes “sense” to some extent: The majority always chooses a bogeyman according to their preferences, which of course must have as little to do with the real problems as possible, since the real problems are usually unpleasant in the ears of the majority, otherwise the problems would not exist in the first place.

  55. Gravatar of Michael Sandifer Michael Sandifer
    11. November 2020 at 15:03

    Christian List,

    You miss my point. I never said it was likely that abortion would be severely restricted in most states, and I doubt the Pew number you cite, though it isn’t very relevant anyway. If even political polls are pretty far off at times, what hope does Pew have at surveying opinions well?

    According to Gallup, only about 25% of voters identified themselves as Republicans in May of this year. By October, the number was 31%. That’s a lot of fluidity in just a few months. That is, it’s beyond the margin of error. How seriously should we take such polls?

    https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx

    According to Wheaton College’s Institute for the Studies of American Evangelicals, about 30-35% of the US population are evangelicals, and supposedly about 80% of evangelicals voted for Trump in 2016. Can these numbers be trusted?

    More important than the near uselessness of such surveys, is that the intensity of belief is sometimes more important than how broadly held the beliefs are. Many evangelicals are extremists, and are obviously kooks, and many of their leaders are crooks. Are you familiar with the likes of Kenneth Copeland, Jesse Duplantis, Creflow Dollar, Bennie Hinn, Jim Bakker, etc.? How about Trump’s supposed spiritual advisor Paula White? Trump publicly chose an obviously nutty spiritual advisor for a reason. It also explains the right’s stupid obsession with Israel.

    I agree that the number of people who report being religious has long been on the decline, but this actually has seemed to increase the desperation of the holdouts. They feel the society they think god wants slipping away, and think it will literally bring Hell on all of us. As I stated, they know they can’t win the culture wars through free speech or the democratic process. That’s what makes them so dangerous.

    You should also understand that the US is considerably more religious than western Europe, and much more fundamentalist, though religion is slowly dying here.

  56. Gravatar of ann ann
    11. November 2020 at 15:49

    Why does Scott lambast identity politics, yet resort to ad hominem name calling. Saying conservatives have a “low IQ” is not going to bring people together.

    And let’s be honest with ourselves for a moment:

    Does anyone really believe Roger Scruton had a low IQ?
    How about Ted Cruz? Does he have a low IQ?
    Does Alan Dershowitz (libertarian) have a low IQ?
    Does Marco Rubio have a low IQ?
    Does Sidney Powell have a low IQ?
    Does Mitch McConnell have a low IQ?
    Does Ben Carson have a low IQ?
    Does Michael Sandel have a low IQ?

    Sumner is either an egotistical megalomaniac, or he is living in a fantasy world.

    Any reasonable person can agree that there are brilliant people on both sides of the political aisle.

    Democrats tend to favor subjective morality, and view constitutions as a living document grounded in utilitarian concepts: i.e., morality is based on prevailing notions of utility.

    Conservatives tend to favor Universality, and view the constitution as inalienable and immutable.

    Of course, there is so much more that separates the two. But at their core that is what defines them.

    The truth is that we need both parties. We need democrats to fight for change in areas that make sense, but sometimes change can happen so quickly, and so abruptly, or in such a way that disenfranchises people, that it destabilizes entire demographics and industries. We need conservatives for their orderliness, and willingness to put the breaks on, think things through methodically, and reign in some of that creative chaos.

    Without both, the nation fails. There is no such thing as one party having a low IQ. You have morons and brilliant people on both sides of the aisle.

  57. Gravatar of Carl Carl
    11. November 2020 at 16:44

    @Michael Sandifer
    I’m not sure I believe your contention that there’s a significant cohort of pro-lifers who have given up on democracy. Where are you getting that from?

  58. Gravatar of janice janice
    11. November 2020 at 17:12

    I guess all conservatives are idiots now according to Sumner.
    I wonder what the late great Roger Scruton would think about that.

    Sumner isn’t even 10% of Scruton. Maybe a Peterson, or a Dawkins has the same level intelligence as Scruton, but not Scott Sumner, lol. Not even close.

  59. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    11. November 2020 at 17:17

    Carl, And Arizona too!

    Ann, You said:

    “Saying conservatives have a “low IQ” is not going to bring people together.”

    I agree, which is why I never do that.

  60. Gravatar of Benjamin Cole Benjamin Cole
    11. November 2020 at 17:31

    OT, on monetary policy:

    From Nikkei Asian Review:

    “3:37 p.m. The Nikkei Stock Average rose to 25,349.60 yen, up 444.01 yen, or 1.78%, from the previous day’s close, surpassing the psychological milestone of 25,000 yen and reaching its highest level in 29 years, since June 1991. Expectations for a practical vaccine for the new coronavirus spread, and the inflow of surplus money generated by global monetary easing further intensified the rise.”

    —30—

    That is interesting, the last sentence about the “inflow of surplus money generated by global monetary easing further intensified the rise.”

    This is what I have been wondering about. If we have globalized capital markets, and money is very fungible…then we have to think about major central banks (not just the Fed) acting upon global capital markets.

    So…when the Fed engages in QE, it is injecting money into global capital markets…in an effort to boost real demand in the US.

    Not true?

  61. Gravatar of Steve Steve
    11. November 2020 at 21:59

    Trump is the worst Nazi ever, Part 2

    https://twitter.com/VenturaReport/status/1322659701545439232

    “We love Trump” chants a group of Japanese supporters of the presidents moments after his speech concluded in Reading,PA

  62. Gravatar of Steve Steve
    11. November 2020 at 22:08

    Trump is the worst Nazi ever, Part 3

    https://youtu.be/raauy1CLFYE?t=1845

    Watch LIVE: President Trump Holds Make America Great Again Rally in Miami, FL 11-1-20

  63. Gravatar of Michael Sandifer Michael Sandifer
    11. November 2020 at 22:58

    Carl,

    Does Trump respect democracy at all? What percentage of the anti-abortion vote do you think he gets? Do most anti-abortionists think abortion is murder? Are most Americans anti-abortionists?

  64. Gravatar of Skeptical Skeptical
    12. November 2020 at 00:07

    The vast majority of Americans have pretty similar opinions on abortion, I don’t know where you’re getting this craziness. Pro-life / pro-choice binary misses the vast majority even if they self identify as one or the other for tribal reasons.

    And who cares ? Roe v Wade isn’t going anywhere. Lot of kvetching over nothing.

  65. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    12. November 2020 at 01:57

    You miss my point. I never said it was likely that abortion would be severely restricted in most states,

    Michael,

    then what is your point? My impression is that you have no point. Even all the “conservatives” here don’t seem to be interested in abortion, they didn’t take your bait.

    You hijacked a thread in order to talk about Roe v. Wade, abortion, religious people, and other bogeymans.

    These are all topics that have nothing to do with Scott’s blog entry in the first place. And on top of that you didn’t even make a point.

    The only thing “missing” in this thread now is me talking about CCP China. I think then Scott’s gonna kill us.

    😂

  66. Gravatar of mbka mbka
    12. November 2020 at 02:28

    Christian,

    “The only thing “missing” in this thread now is me talking about CCP China. ”

    ROTFL. I know, that dates me.

    But what about Benghazi?

  67. Gravatar of Postkey Postkey
    12. November 2020 at 03:01

    From the non-goose information center.

    “our best estimate is that the net energy
    33:33 per barrel available for the global
    33:36 economy was about eight percent
    33:38 and that in over the next few years it
    33:42 will go down to zero percent
    33:44 uh best estimate at the moment is that
    33:46 actually the
    33:47 per average barrel of sweet crude
    33:51 uh we had the zero percent around 2022
    33:56 but there are ways and means of
    33:58 extending that so to be on the safe side
    34:00 here on our diagram
    34:02 we say that zero percent is definitely
    34:05 around 2030 . . .
    we
    34:43 need net energy from oil and [if] it goes
    34:46 down to zero
    34:48 uh well we have collapsed not just
    34:50 collapse of the oil industry
    34:52 we have collapsed globally of the global
    34:54 industrial civilization this is what we
    34:56 are looking at at the moment . . . “

  68. Gravatar of Postkey Postkey
    12. November 2020 at 03:51

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxinAu8ORxM&feature=emb_logo

  69. Gravatar of J Mann J Mann
    12. November 2020 at 06:38

    Ann, Scott didn’t say conservatives have a low IQ. He said that the GOP doesn’t appreciate that it had effectively won the election, and that the modern GOP wants a low-IQ demagogue as a leader. So Scott more or less called Trump a low-IQ demagogue, and isn’t impressed with the current GOP, but didn’t have anything to say about conservatives as a group in this post.

    FWIW, I disagreed with the first point, but it’s arguable. I don’t have a strong opinion on Trump’s IQ, but he has a number of qualities that I think limited his effectiveness as a president, as well as a few that improved it.

    Finally, I don’t think Dershowitz is a conservative. He’s pro-Trump relative to the average talking head these days, but I think he’s still fairly libertarian.

  70. Gravatar of Michael Rulle Michael Rulle
    12. November 2020 at 06:50

    Scott says —“at worst Biden is 1% as corrupt as Trump”

    C’mon man! I think you engage in hyperbole. But “opinions” are once again demonstrated to be useless.

  71. Gravatar of Michael Rulle Michael Rulle
    12. November 2020 at 06:58

    @Xu

    Was looking at your list. Assuming it is 100% accurate, I believe Trump still loses.

  72. Gravatar of Carl Carl
    12. November 2020 at 09:01

    @Michael Sandifer:
    I think your implied syllogism is flawed. You can’t infer that people who support Trump because they believe he purports to be pro-life also don’t respect democracy just because he doesn’t respect democracy.

  73. Gravatar of Cove77 Cove77
    12. November 2020 at 10:00

    It’s all performance …it’s you’re not supposed to take so seriously

    https://theweek.com/speedreads/949542/trump-reportedly-aware-lost-election-but-putting-fight-theater

  74. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    12. November 2020 at 11:17

    Steve, Japanese? So remind me, did Japan support Hitler or the allies in WWII?

    Michael, Hyperbole? There’s basically one corruption accusation against Biden. In contrast there are over 100 against Trump. Sure, they may not all be true, but the same is true of the Biden accusation.

    Cove77, Of course it’s theatre; I’ve been saying that for 5 years.

Leave a Reply