Category Archives: Uncategorized

It’s been a frenzy out there, use an umbrella to stay safe from rogue polls….

Debacle: North Carolina

Will the North Carolina embarrassment of nominating Mark Robinson (R-NC) for the governor’s race, in light of his extremism and dubious viewing matter as a fundamentalist Christian, affect the Senate races?

Only among those voters actually paying attention, and, given how busy our lives have become, that’s not a big number.

Still, there will be independents for whom this is a final straw. But don’t try to count them, even if they break the camel’s back, it’ll be small.

And Now For That Frenzy

• kos of Daily Kos has a report on how the Republican’s fixation on Haitian immigrants eating pets, a fallacious claim according to those in the know, may come back to bite them on the ass in Florida.Speaking of Florida, I just learned that Amendment 3 on the 2024 Florida ballot concerns legalizing recreational marijuana, an issue that will certainly lure some otherwise dormant voters to the polls, and as Senator Scott’s reputation for having run a corrupt company, and then for being generally repugnant during his Senatorial term, are quite negative, voters may simply pick the “not-Rick Scott” on the ballot, regardless of their knowledge and/or opinion of his challenger.That said, Morning Consult (1.9) shows Senator Scott (R-FL) continuing to show a consistent lead over challenger former Rep Mucarsel-Powell (D-FL), 46%-42%.
• It did happen before: Pollster GQR (1.9) shows Missouri’s Senator Hawley (R-MO) with a mere four point lead over challenger Lucas Kunce (D-MO), 50%-46%. These numbers are in stark contrast to the last Missouri Senate poll I cited, a YouGov (2.9) poll giving Senator Hawley a large lead. Their disparate ratings throw a shadow on GQR’s poll results.Casting more doubt on this result is the fact that the sponsor of this poll is Democratic candidate Mr Kunce. GQR is new to me, but pollsters are known to skew results to make for happy customers. Similarly, pollster Change Research (1.4) is giving Hawley a five point lead, 46%-41%.Finally, a poll I didn’t cite when it came out, as I consider(ed) Missouri a settled issue, is that of Remington Research Group (a very respectable 2.6) from a week earlier than the GQR poll, finding Senator Hawley with an even bigger 52%-37% lead (here’s a link, but it’s not very good).So why am I not discarding the GQR poll? There are too many unknowns. Is GQR willing to skew its results, or is this an honest result? Is this quote trustworthy?
  

  “Hawley and his allies are clearly seeing the same movement in the polls,” a source close to the Kunce campaign told Newsweek on Friday, pointing to negative attack ads targeting the Democrat and increased ad spending by Hawley and his supporters.

  Is it important? Are pollsters really having trouble gathering data reflecting the youth vote, as progressives claim and divergences between poll and election results over the last two years suggest, and maybe GQR found a way to reach them?

  And what about the race between Senator Fischer (R-NE) and challenger Dan Osborn (I-NE) in Nebraska? (Wait, what?) To recap, Mr. Osborn trailed Senator Fischer substantially in a series of dubious quality polls until highly respected YouGov (2.9), sponsored by Osborn, gave the Senator a two point lead, followed by similarly respected SurveyUSA (2.8), sponsored by Split Ticket, giving Senator Fischer a one point lead.

  Sure, the analogy isn’t nearly perfect. GQR’s rating is not that of YouGov and SurveyUSA, for example. There were two polls in Nebraska, while only one in Missouri.

  But there are also similarities. Republican political establishments in both States are unapologetically hostile towards abortion, motivated as they are by current social structures in their Party to be as uncompromising as possible. This attitude motivates otherwise dormant voters who’ve suddenly lost abortion protections and worry about it – and resent it. And there’ll be an abortion protection amendment on the Missouri ballot, a worthy encouragement.

  Finally, Senators Hawley and Fischer have similar profiles when it comes to their political positions; indeed, Hawley’s made positive noises about Christian Nationalism, demonstrating either ignorance or arrogance shocking in a former law professor and current Senator concerning the history and makeup of politics and governance in America.

  We’ll have to see more polls before deciding if this is an outlier poll – or a prescient poll.

  Incidentally, Newsweek also provides some good context on the previous polls, for which they deserve an earnest pat on the back.

  A Short While Later: Emerson College (2.9) has just published a poll giving Senator Hawley a twelve point lead, 51%-40%, over challenger Lucas Kunce. While, yes, Emerson has been trending a little conservative compared to other top pollsters, 11-12 points is quite a gap. Or even, perhaps, the GQR and Change Research polls, mentioned above, are wishful thinking.

• It’s not really worth mentioning: Lake Research Partners (1.2 … ugh) is awarding Texas Senator Cruz (R-TX) a 47%-43% lead over challenger Rep Allred (D-TX). That link isn’t really worth a click, and Texas Public Opinion Research is using a cut-rate pollster, so who knows if these numbers are good. However, the numbers are reasonable in the light of other polls.And here’s another one now: Morning Consult (1.9) is giving Rep Allred (D-TX) a small lead over Senator Cruz (R-TX), 45%-44%! Now, do you think Morning Consult is worth trusting?
• While it’s not unusual to hear that a politician is ambitious and arrogant, most of them usually figure out how to get along with the folks on their side. This may be another norm that’s breaking up in the Republican Party:
  

  Donald Trump declined to formally endorse Steve Garvey, the Republican running for Senate in California.

  “I don’t know much about Steve Garvey. I think he’s made a big mistake because he hasn’t reached out to MAGA,” Trump told reporters as he was leaving his news conference in Southern California. He added: “I’m hearing he wants the MAGA endorsement, but he’s got to call me.” [WaPo]

  Not that the Democratic candidate for the late Senator Feinstein’s (D-CA) seat, Rep Adam Schiff (D-CA), is likely to lose, no matter what the Republicans do short of getting God to come on down and endorse Mr. Garvey.

  But, you know, good for Mr Garvey and for California for shunning Mr Trump.

• Senator Brown (D-OH), defending his seat in Ohio against challenger Bernie Moreno (R-OH), has another foe in league with Moreno: The cryptocurrency industry. The Senator does not seem unduly worried.For processed numbers, Morning Consult (1.9) gives the Senator a small lead of 46%-44%.
• In Minnesota, unknown pollster Embold Research, working for news site MinnPost, gives Senator Klobuchar (D-MN) an 11 point lead over challenger Royce White (R-MN), 52%-41%. A new pollster makes it hard to trust them, but eleven points is not entirely out of line.

  Mr White may have more troubles than just a popular incumbent to defeat:

  If you ask Minnesota Republicans about fellow GOP candidate Royce White, many are likely to pivot.

  White is the only Minnesota Republican running statewide this year, but fellow GOPers are keeping a distance on the campaign trail from a candidate with past legal troubles and known for derogatory remarks, some of which align with conspiracy theories. [MPR News]

  It’s hard to win when your Party is half-hearted about your candidacy.

• While Cygnal (2.1) may be a conservative pollster who seems to skew poll numbers, I’ll nevertheless note, in respect of their fairly good rating, that they give Rep Slotkin (D-MI) a mere one point lead, 44%-43%, over former Rep Mike Rogers (R-MI) for the soon-to-be-empty Michigan seat. I’m sure that’s within the margin of error. It’s also a strong contrast to Morning Consult’s (1.9) polling showing a nine point lead for Slotkin in the last update. And then there’s a Quinnipiac University (2.8) poll showing Slotkin with a 51%-46%, or five point, lead, ker-plunk in the middle.

  Marist College (2.8) has Slotkin leading 52%-45%, while Emerson College (2.9) has the lead at 47%-42%, and a later Morning Consult poll … this must be a typo, but I can’t verify it … a lead of 51%-37%. What does it all mean? Michigan may still be a tight race.

• Emerson College (2.9) is giving the Democratic candidate for the open Maryland seat, County Executive Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), a seven point lead, 49%-42%, over former Governor Larry Hogan (R-MD … sort of).  Morning Consult (1.9) gives Alsobrooks a bigger lead of 50%-39%, and Public Policy Polling (1.4) give Alsobrooks a ridiculous lead, at least in comparison with better rated pollsters, of 50%-33%. Honestly, I’m not taking that last pollster seriously, but there is a point made by them:
  

  Part of Hogan’s problem is that a fair number of conservatives remain suspicious of him. His favorability with Trump voters is only 54/32 and that’s sending 14% of them over to vote for the Libertarian candidate. Hogan does tighten the race to 52-37 in a head to head but that represents a widening from 48-40 in June as well.

  And the MAGA base is suspicious and inflexible. Either you’re bought fully into their world-view, or you are out. Often, right wing pundits will remark that the Republican tent is so big they’re hard to keep together, but, to my eye, it’s shrinking due to furious demands of purity, and we’ve been seeing such demands for more than a decade.

• Hey! Indiana does exist! Emerson College (2.9) is giving the Republican candidate for the open Indiana Senate seat, Rep Jim Banks (R-IN), a 47%-33% lead over Democrat Valerie McCray (D-IN). This is an improvement over the last Senate contest in Indiana, back just two years ago, when Senator Young (R-IN) won by 20+ points. The mountain still seems overwhelming for McCray.
• Suffolk University (2.9) is giving Pennsylvania’s Senator Casey (D-PA) a four point lead, 47%-43%, over Mr. McCormick (R-PA), which must be a bit disappointing for Pennsylvania Democrats. InsiderAdvantage (2.0) is scarcely more encouraging at 49%-44% for Casey, and a 2.0 rating is mediocre. Pennsylvania has 19 electoral votes and is evenly balanced between Republicans and Democrats, or so recent history suggests, so Pennsylvanians will be exposed heavily to the Presidential candidates between now and November. If either has a public meltdown it may affect the Senate contest as well. Finally, Quinnipiac University (2.8) is giving the Senator a much larger lead, 52%-43%, with a margin of error of ±2.7 points. You don’t get to cancel Suffolk with Quinnipiac, Democrats, but you can try to reconcile the clashing results with yoga.A Little Later: SIX MORE POLLS appeared, ranging from the two being even (Washington Post) to a nine point lead (The New York Times/Siena College). Here’s the link, but it’s a dynamic page, I’m here to publish and not drive myself mad with data.
• Wisconsin’s Senator Baldwin (D-WI) has two polls in her favor over challenger Eric Hovde (R-WI?): Quinnipiac University (2.8) gives her a 51%-47% lead, and Frankensteinian Fabrizio, Lee & Associates/Impact Research (1.7) has the race at 50%-47%. Meanwhile, Emerson College (2.9) also gives Baldwin a lead, this time 49%-46%.
• Senator Warren (D-MA) scoops up some headlines in Massachusetts by advocating for cheap money:
  

  Fed Chair Jerome Powell announced a half percent cut to benchmark interest rates on Wednesday — the first cut since March 2020. The move was cheered by Wall Street as a boon for the economy and will help make mortgages, car loans and business loans more affordable.

  While a half percent cut is considered large, the Senator from Massachusetts wanted more. Warren, along with two senate colleagues, sent a letter to Powell’s office on Monday ahead of the announcement, advocating for the Fed to cut rates by three-quarters of a percent. [WBUR]

  If Senator Warren is trying to backseat drive for Mr Powell, perhaps she should volunteer to join the Fed the next time an opening comes available.

• Rhode Island gets its first Senate race poll since their primaries from University of New Hampshire Survey Center (2.6), and it shows Senator Whitehouse (D-RI) leading challenger Patricia Morgan (R-RI) 51%-33%. That’s not so much a mountain to climb as a walk to the Moon, and I doubt I’ll be mentioning this race again unless the black swan comes by.

A number of polls were ignored, since New Mexico, New York, and others do not appear to be in doubt. Feel offended? Visit FiveThirtyEight yourself.

Stop looking for polls!

On the whole, Sir, I cannot help expressing a wish that every member of the Convention who may still have objections to it, would with me, on this occasion doubt a little of his own infallibility–and to make manifest our unanimity, put his name to this instrument.”–He then moved that the Constitution be signed by the members and offered the following as a convenient form viz. “Done in Convention, by the unanimous consent of the States present the 17th. of Sepr. &c–In Witness whereof we have hereunto subscribed our names.” – Benjamin Franklin to the Federal Convention

The arrogance of humanity, identified. My thanks to Professor Richardson for pointing me at this quote, delighting me.

OK, the guy on the right is just the smallest bit fun. But no more than that.

From Time To Time (2009) is a saccharine and unchallenging movie concerning the ghosts of children who can time travel. This isn’t challenging, you say? No, it’s not.

It doesn’t say Hallmark, but it should.

Such fantasy movies need strong motivations, such as an otherwise terrible fate, and this is not really conveyed to the audience, as nearly everyone is, ya know, dead. It puts a real pall on the movie.

Dull and Boring are, I believe, the producers. Don’t bother.

It’s been a while since I’ve dipped into the “conservative” email bloodstream, and I’m not going to actually rip another one apart here. They’re either offensive or, worse, simply inferior to previous examples.

However, I cannot resist this anti-immigrant poster here, as it’s a bright example of a now-chronic problem for conservatives – projection:

Here’s but one example of projection from January 6th, 2021, a date that will live in infamy…

There were a number of others, but the point is made: hostile folks running around with their hair afire, waving their own flags. Couldn’t have said it better myself.

I’m glad I’m not living in Lebanon:

Footage shared online shows people in Lebanon going about their days before their pagers exploded.

In one video, a man is seen shopping in a fruit and vegetable market before an object explodes from his midriff. The man collapses to the ground and cries out in pain, while other bystanders scatter in fear.

In another, security camera footage shows a man about to pay for goods at a store before something on his person explodes, sending a burst of smoke into the air.

In another, a person films the damage inside a bedroom after an apparent explosion. Two holes have been torn through the top and bottom of a drawer, smashing a nearby mirror and scattering debris across the room. [CNN]

Reminds me of Stand On Zanzibar by John Brunner, which is weird since I don’t remember anything more of the novel than a scene in which a soldier is killed with a nanowire. I get the impression the novel was all about future political violence, which I suppose we’ve been living ever since that novel was published in 1968.

My Arts Editor and I occasionally watch clothing designer shows together, but this was something else. It left me gaping.

I don’t know anything about the fashion world, but it appears Robert Wun treats the designer shows more like a moving art installation than something that looks, at least superficially, like clothing. It is slightly reminiscent of the late Lee Alexander McQueen’s work, with which I’m familiar only because of the documentary McQueen (2018): the telling of a story as a designer show.

This Robert Wun show was delightful.

In The Dash

Is the vice president hitting her stride?

Democratic U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris leads Republican Donald Trump 47% to 42% in the race to win the Nov. 5 presidential election, increasing her advantage after a debate against the former president that voters largely think she won, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll that closed on Thursday.

The two-day poll showed Harris with a five percentage point lead among registered voters, just above the four-point advantage she had over Trump in an Aug. 21-28 Reuters/Ipsos poll. [Reuters]

Ipsos has a 2.3/3 star rating from FiveThirtyEight.

A five point lead is larger than my last citation, which was four, but it’s still not big enough, to be conservative about it.

Oh, And This …

A local interview quoted an Iowan as saying this was not about a date with Mr. Trump, but a vote, and they were voting Trump. Unfortunately, the two are a lot more alike than perhaps that Iowan realizes.

And speaking of Iowa, the Iowa Poll, conducted by highly respected Selzer & Co (2.8), shows a startling shift in the Presidential race in Iowa:

Kamala Harris has significantly narrowed the presidential race in Iowa, cutting Donald Trump’s lead to 4 percentage points in a dramatic turnaround from Joe Biden’s double-digit deficit.

A new Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll shows that Trump leads Vice President Harris 47% to 43% among likely Iowa voters — a far slimmer margin than the 18-point lead the former Republican president enjoyed over Democratic President Biden in late spring. [Des Moines Register]

If Iowa is suddenly competitive, then that suggests other states regarded as Republican safe territories are suddenly not. While Selzer expresses strong doubt that Harris can actually take Iowa, it’s worth wondering if Iowa’s six electoral votes are worth pursuing by a Harris or Walz stop in, say, Des Moines.

In fact, Trump is in so much trouble that Democrats have some helpful advice:

“If we are being honest, last night’s debate performance by former President Donald Trump was disastrous and hard to watch,” Moskowitz said Wednesday in a statement titled, “Trump’s ability to continue campaign.”

“I believe now is the time for the former President to have those difficult conversations about whether or not he should continue serving as the Republican Party’s nominee for President,” Moskowitz continued. “For now, I want to give him the space to meet with his family and make that decision.” [The Hill]

Advice that I’ve given to the Republican Party.

Less than two months ago.

Or so goes the old stock market aphorism, and, sure, it’s a good one. But it also explains this:

Former President Donald Trump lashed out at Nasdaq over a routine trading halt in shares of his social media company and even threatened to move the listing to the New York Stock Exchange.

“Why is NASDAQ halting the sale of DJT?” Trump said Friday on Truth Social, referring to the ticker symbol of Truth Social owner Trump Media & Technology Group. “What right do they have to do this? They have done it twice today. What’s going on?”

Trump suggested Nasdaq was “taking orders from the SEC,” an agency he accused of delaying Trump Media’s merger “for political reasons.”

What happened is Trump Media’s stock, which trades on the Nasdaq Composite, skyrocketed on Friday, after Trump himself made very big news: He announced he won’t be selling shares in the company.

That spike was so big that it triggered two five-minute trading pauses designed to provide a cooling period. [CNN/Business]

The trading halts are a non-sequitur, which I suspect Mr Trump put out there in order to keep his base enraged, banking on the likelihood that his base will be ignorant of standard procedures and take it as persecution. Heck, I wasn’t aware of this procedure, although it makes sense on its face.

The real news is that, as I bolded above, Mr Trump will not be attempting to sell out of his company. I think investors chose to read this as Mr. Trump having confidence in his company’s future. But now investors need to consider these questions:

1. What is Mr Trump’s investment term? Five years? Five months? Five minutes? All of these are congruent with his statement. And keep in mind Mr. Trump is quite old at this point; it may not make sense for him to make a promise on the order of decades.
2. When he does sell out, what does the company have? Will he even continue to use Truth Social? He is its star attraction, after all.
3. If his investment term is best measured in a few days, that is, his statement is effectively a lie, then is it true that this is a sophisticated pump ‘n dump, once again taking advantage of MAGA-heads who are naive, vulnerable investors?
4. Does his business history, both in Truth Social and his other businesses, justify a continuing stake in Truth Social?

DJT – Click to enlarge.

In other words, and in reference to that hoary old aphorism, above, Truth Social was sitting near or at the bottom of its market cap range when he published that remark; it then regained a small amount of value. I won’t be the least surprised if he continues to publish remarks that burnish the image of Truth Social. Some of it will be double talk, as the SEC frowns on outright lies concerning publicly traded companies and their stock – and a SEC frown can lead to a term in the pokey. But he may try to double talk his company back to some price level where he’ll feel that he can make an acceptable amount of money by selling out.

Nor is it out of the realm of the possible that the price will rise on its own. Not that I think the MAGA-heads or the QAnon types have the kind of buying power to raise the price of DJT more than momentarily. However, a foreign adversary may prop the price up using the resources of a big nation, if they see advantage in putting Mr. Trump in a position where he owes them something. Their investment would not be in hopes that DJT goes up in price, except to the extent that it makes Mr. Trump happy, but rather they hope that Mr. Trump will attain the Presidency, again – and they can hope to manipulate him.

The next month’s behavior of DJT may prove very interesting.

Seiche:

A seiche (/seɪʃ/ SAYSH) is a standing wave in an enclosed or partially enclosed body of water. Seiches and seiche-related phenomena have been observed on lakes, reservoirs, swimming pools, bays, harbors, caves, and seas. The key requirement for formation of a seiche is that the body of water be at least partially bounded, allowing the formation of the standing wave. [Wikipedia]

Noted in “A landslide triggered a 650-foot mega-tsunami in Greenland. Then came something inexplicable,” Laura Paddison, CNN/Climate:

The subsequent mega-tsunami — one of the highest in recent history — set off a wave which became trapped in the bendy, narrow fjord for more than a week, sloshing back and forth every 90 seconds.

The phenomenon, called a “seiche,” refers to the rhythmic movement of a wave in an enclosed space, similar to water splashing backwards and forwards in a bathtub or cup. One of the scientists even tried (and failed) to recreate the impact in their own bathtub.

I wonder what that does to the fish!

We have a door to the computer room we rehabbed by scraping off the paint and restaining it. Unfortunately, this scraped up the little windows in it, so Deb found a solution which occasionally gives us quite a colorful display.

Oh, and here’s one now:

Add creepy music and stir.

Steve Benen summarizes the nightmare of a debate for Mr Trump:

A few weeks ago, Kamala Harris delivered an acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention and told an obvious truth: Donald Trump, the vice president reminded voters, is “easy to manipulate.” In context, she was referring to foreign powers, but the simple observation also proved to be the basis for Harris’ strategy for her first debate against the former president.

Headed into the event, the Democrat’s strategy was hardly a secret. I lost count of how many published reports I saw exploring Harris’ plan to bait the Republican with traps she hoped he’d fall into. Hillary Clinton told The New York Times last week that she’d spoken to her party’s candidate about the debate, and the former secretary of state said her advice was straightforward: “She should bait him. He can be rattled.”

In theory, Trump and his team should’ve seen all of this and prepared accordingly. After all, Democrats spent weeks effectively broadcasting their playbook, telling the whole world exactly what Harris intended to do. It was like watching the run-up to a Super Bowl, in which one team’s coaches speak publicly about which plays they are eager to call.

But in practice, the GOP nominee simply couldn’t help himself.

It’s been a long summer, and the succulents seem to love it.

And Mr Trump has long been rumored to be both a misogynist and a bigot. I can’t really speak to those points, although circumstantial evidence does support the contention – including this one.

A bigot, and a misogynist is a bigot as it applies to women, isn’t just a hater. A bigot has a certain set of beliefs concerning a group of people that is at variance with reality. For example, the Southern racists believed their slaves were, truly, subhuman, and when freed slaves formed military units and marched against the Confederates, sometimes successfully, it was a shock for the Confederates. Welcome to reality, boys, and hell is your first stop after you’re dead.

Thus, the reports that Trump hardly prepared, if at all, make sense: he believes himself innately superior to his opponent, a woman, and thus didn’t prepare. He discovers, too late, the discordancy of his beliefs with reality, and loses so badly he feels it necessary to run back out and “report” snap polls made him the victor.

And it doesn’t help that he’s aged and mentally deficient, untrained in governance, and generally a failure in his one term.

This is why true bigots continually fail, with only occasional success when their opponents are also unprepared: they don’t apprehend reality properly. That’s what appeared to happen with Mr Trump.

Results are delivered via rake… previous results were delivered via coffee filter….

Hey, About Morning Consult

Morning Consult (1.8) released a number of polls overnight, and I noticed they use a larger sample size than most pollsters. It guarantees nothing, but it does make it more likely they’ll get accurate results.

Chances are. That 1.8 rating still doesn’t look good.

Most Obvious Right-Wing Grifter Pollster

Obviously, this is all speculation, since there are no objective baselines from which to measure; other sensibilities must be used to make the call. For me, claiming Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) has a mere six point lead, 42%-36% over challenger Royce White (R-MN), when that gap should be in the upper teens, is a big red flag, and we can see that in previous, far more authoritative polls. A supporting flag is the insistence of the pollster that Minnesota is, somehow, a swing State! No, we learned our lesson from former Senator Coleman (R-MN) and former Governor Pawlenty (R-MN), and the Minnesota Republicans. Some folks were fine with them, but most of us didn’t enjoy the experience.

So, step on forward, Redfield & Wilton Strategies (unknown to FiveThirtyEight, no surprise there!), and receive your prize, a good, old-fashioned clout^[1] upside the head. Not all of their polls seem fraudulent, but that Minnesota poll makes me wonder who else they’re misleading, and whether they’re being paid gobs of money to do so.

That Presidential Debate Means Nothing To The Senate Races, Right?

And I saw this! Yes, that big collapse in price is this morning, the morning following the debate.

No, I didn’t watch the debate. My appetite for political events and analysis is actually quite limited. However, I’ve seen bits and pieces, along with other analyses, enough to convince me that Mr Trump’s string may have run out last night.

And, if this is so, the various GOP Senate candidates who are in tight races may have cause to bitterly blame Mr Trump come November, as independents and moderate Republicans who might’ve been inclined to vote for Mr Trump and his allies scurry hurriedly away, convinced that the GOP has become peopled by the terminally crazed and their parasites.

And will Mr Trump abandon the ticket? While I don’t want to be another But he’s a racist! parrot, he’s more or less a misogynist, and so being chased from the race by Mz Harris may be a bit too much for him to swallow.

I think it’s entirely possible that two or three Republican Senate candidates who are thought to at least have a chance, such as Scott and Cruz, may suddenly be viewed as being in the same room as Trump, and voters will walk swiftly away.

Finally, I believe all the polls cited in this message date from before this debate.

The Rake’s Leavings

• Morning Consult’s (1.8) latest poll in Arizona gives Rep Gallego (D-AZ) an eight point lead over Republican candidate and election denier Kari Lake (R-AZ), 49%-41%. That’s a trifle on the short side of other, more reputable pollsters, with the noteworthy exception of Emerson College. Meanwhile, Redfield & Wilton Strategies is giving Rep Gallego a six point lead of 48%-42%. Go figger.
• Morning Consult’s (1.8) latest poll in Florida gives Senator Scott (R-FL) a five point lead over former Rep Debbie Mucarsel-Powell (D-FL), 47%-42%. And then, in a puzzling move, Redfield & Wilton Strategies is giving Senator Scott a smaller lead of three points, 44%-41%. Is this pollster trying to zig enough to make them seem trustworthy? Or does their “true” reading of the race have Mucarsel-Powell actually leading? It’s even puzzling that they would list Florida as a swing state. That is the fervid hope of Democrats, but right now both Senators and most of the Representatives are Republican, as is the State Legislature. Maybe poll sponsor The Telegraph, a UK news site, wants to fill more inches?
• Morning Consult’s (1.8) latest poll in Maryland gives Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD) a five point lead over Republican candidate and former Governor Larry Hogan (R-MD), 48%-43%. This must be giving Democrats little nightmares. On the other hand, they may plan to ask Hogan to switch parties if Alsobrooks fails. It’s not like the national Republican Party is a warm & comforting home to a politician of Hogan’s middle-of-the-road stripes.
• Morning Consult’s (1.8) latest poll in Michigan gives Rep Slotkin (D-MI) a nine point lead over Republican candidate and former Rep Mike Rogers (R-MI), 49%-40%, while YouGov (2.9) is giving Rep Slotkin a seven point lead, 48%-41%. Redfield & Wilton Strategies is giving Rep Slotkin a five point lead, 44%-39%. And co/efficient (1.1, which is nearly the bottom of the heap), possibly competing with Redfield & Wilton Strategies for top douchebag pollster, has Rep Slotkin’s lead at one, 39%-38%. Yep, that’s four polls in Michigan on this report, affirming the quality of Michigan restaurants.
• Morning Consult’s (1.8) latest poll in Ohio gives Senator Brown (D-OH) a nine three point lead over Republican candidate Bernie Moreno (R-OH), 46%-43%.
• Morning Consult’s (1.8) latest poll in Pennsylvania gives Senator Casey (D-PA) a nine point lead over Republican candidate David McCormick (R-PA?), 49%-40%, while YouGov is giving Senator Casey a seven point lead, 48%-41%. Redfield & Wilton Strategies is giving Senator Casey a lead of eight points, 44%-36%, and that 36% share suggests Mr McCormick is simply not that popular with voters, if you take this pollster seriously. co/efficient (1.1) is giving Senator Casey a 45%-36% lead. which is healthy enough, although a 1.1 rating is hardly inspiring of any confidence in their accuracy.
• Morning Consult’s (1.8) latest poll in Texas gives Senator Cruz (R-TX) a five point lead over Democratic candidate Rep Colin Allred (D-TX), 47%-42%.
• Morning Consult’s (1.8) latest poll in Wisconsin gives Senator Baldwin (D-WI) a seven point lead over Republican candidate Eric Hovde (R-WI?), 49%-42%., while YouGov (2.9) is giving Senator Baldwin a nine point lead, 51%-43%, Marquette University Law School (3.0) gives Senator Baldwin a six point lead, 51%-45%, and BK Strategies (1.3 – why do I even bother?) gives Senator Baldwin a slimmer lead of 49%-44%, a five point lead.
• In Missouri, a circuit court disqualified from this November’s ballot the Abortion Amendment to the State’s Constitution that I mentioned earlier, and then, a couple of days later, as if to illustrate the fragility of citizens’ rights, the Supreme Court of Missouri hurriedly reversed that ruling, putting the amendment back on the ballot. If that doesn’t shake up voters, I’m not sure what will. This particular version permits abortions up until fetal viability, so it sounds like a nightmare for physicians, but at least it’s progress for patients. But will it affect the Hawley (R-MO) – Kunce (D-MO) contest? It may make Hawley’s margin smaller, but so far there’s no indications of an upset in the making.
• Rhode Island has finally held its primaries, as Senator Whitehouse (D-RI) wins nomination for reelection, and his challenger will be state Rep. Patricia Morgan (R-RI). On The Issues has little information on Patricia Morgan. Democratic primary voters outnumbered Republican primary voters more than 2 to 1.

And Now For A Commercial-Free Break

• Remember, you pay for cable so that you never have to watch a commercial again. That, folks, is what they were telling us on Showtime 50 years ago. Welcome to the insatiable financial maw of companies, eh? That’s not irrelevant to the question of Senate campaigns.
• For those who are interested in trivia, the rake picked up polls from Nevada, Virginia, New Mexico, and Missouri, with the expected results. That’s why they’re stuck in the rake.

No more room for substantive content, I’ve run out of bits.

¹ Clout has a delightful set of meanings that lend themselves to mildly disgusting visuals. Keep in mind that the piece of cloth version often refers specifically to the small piece of cloth concealing one’s genitals.

There’s a difference, of course, between promises and ability, as Transport Topics notes:

Former U.S. President Donald Trump said that if elected he would declare a national energy emergency to “achieve a massive increase in domestic energy supply” to bring gasoline below $2 a gallon. He would also reduce electricity prices, he said.

A goal of sub-$2 gasoline, last seen during the pandemic shutdown that caused demand to collapse, would be difficult to achieve, since presidents have little control over pump prices.

In an address to the Economic Club of New York on Sept. 5, Trump also pledged to rescind unspent funding from Democrats’ signature climate law in the most definitive remarks yet on his intentions for the Inflation Reduction Act.

That’s one way to alienate fossil fuel company executives. They must be feeling a bit lonely these days, what with Mr Trump offering to betray them on one side, and Democrats discouraging demand for their products on the other, and many of their children suggesting their own parents are dooming their future.

But, if you’re angry about energy prices, along with the above, remember this: Mr Trump is a mildly successful actor. He’s quite capable of being convincing on a subject over which he’d actually have little or no influence.

And that’s today’s PSA.

Potassium permanganate:

Potassium permanganate is an inorganic compound with the chemical formula KMnO₄. It is a purplish-black crystalline salt, that dissolves in water as K⁺ and MnO⁻₄, an intensely pink to purple solution.

Potassium permanganate is widely used in the chemical industry and laboratories as a strong oxidizing agent, and also as a medication for dermatitis, for cleaning wounds, and general disinfection. It is on the World Health Organization’s List of Essential Medicines. In 2000, worldwide production was estimated at 30,000 tons. [Wikipedia]

Seems a bit out of my usual run of words, but just hold on here. From “Why is water in this Iowa town turning pink? Don’t drink it, officials warn,” Mike Stunson, Kansas City Star:

“Every time you flush toilet, you turn the water on — pink,” Kara Robinson, who lives in Shelby, Iowa, told KETV.

Robinson is one of many Shelby residents encountering the issue that city officials said began overnight Sept. 8 when two of the town’s four wells did not properly reset.

It caused an excess of potassium permanganate to penetrate the system, turning the water pink.

I didn’t watch the debate last night. I do enough reading of political stuff. I did catch Colbert’s monologue from last night, today, so I do get the impression that Trump didn’t do as well as he could have wished.

But this may be more indicative:

Yes, his stock’s market cap declined by 10+%.

What does it mean? It means investors, the hard-headed sort, watched the debate or the summaries and came to the conclusion that Mr Trump is unlikely to win the general election.

There is an element of the investing community who is there to share in the dreams of Mr. Trump, but they, it turns out, are unable – or even unwilling – to buy in sufficient numbers to prop up what I perceive to be a trash stock. A stock with no interesting technology, small revenues with little prospect of increasing them, and a star attraction who appears to be losing his facilities, it’s not obvious what makes this an attractive buy.

What happens from here? There will be ups and downs, but I suspect that we may be seeing the stock cut in half while we’re still in Trump’s lock-up period (i.e., can’t sell his 60% holdings). After that, Mr Trump may walk away, leaving his investors holding quite a holey bag.

But I do not recommend going short. Stocks that are targets of manipulation, and this is one of them, do tend to bob up and down in the most alarming way.

It’s been forty years since I came out of college, harried and undistinguished. A number of Cs – yay, Calculus! – and maybe even by the skin of my teeth.

But, according to Yascha Mounk, maybe it’s different now, if you avoid STEM, and this is problematic if you ask him:

Now that the most common grade at most four-year colleges is an A, the stakes for each individual course are much higher. Since there is no way for students to distinguish themselves by doing exceptional work, a single negative outlier takes on outsized weight. To get a stellar GPA, a student doesn’t have to be exceptionally good at any one thing; they have to manage risk in every single course they take over the course of four years.4 As a result, today’s grading system has come to express a perverse set of institutional values: “We care much more about your ability to jump through any hoop we put in your path than about your ability to excel in your strongest subject or about your intellectual curiosity for challenging fields outside your main focus.”

I suspect very little effort would lead to the idea that education is a private sector endeavour, and how this has bled, if inadvertently, into even public universities as the source of these problems, as I’ve outlined elsewhere. It’ll be vital to return education to a place in society where it is responsible for teaching, with its own metrics, and not for selling education.

Incidentally, for the last twenty years I’ve detested grading on a curve, particularly those curves derived from those being tested. As an engineer, I want to see standards that don’t just float relative, relative to what is not apparent, but are anchored in reality. If everyone gets a 95% on a test and the bar for an A is 90%, then everyone gets an A. It should indicate mastery of the material, and if everyone getting an A raises suspicions, fine. Adjust the test material.

But grading on a curve is precisely Mounk’s solution. I personally don’t agree, but the recognition of a problem doesn’t mean the answer is obvious. Sometimes more subtlety is necessary.

This appears to be a reproach of the increasing radicalizaton of SCOTUS. From Wolford v. Lopez:

Having concluded the historical analysis required by Bruen and the Supreme Court’s other Second Amendment cases, we close with a few general observations. First, taking a step back from the historical analysis, the lists of places where a State likely may ban, or may not ban, the carry of firearms appear arbitrary. A State likely may ban firearms in museums but not churches; in restaurants but not hospitals; in libraries but not banks. The deep historical analysis required by the Supreme Court provides the missing link, but the lack of an apparent logical connection among the sensitive places is hard to explain in ordinary terms. In addition, the seemingly arbitrary nature of Second Amendment rulings undoubtedly will inspire further litigation as state and local jurisdictions attempt to legislate within constitutional bounds.

Bold mine. The author, a Judge Graber, just politely suggested that one of the more logical and prestigious groups has been issuing arbitrary opinions. The implication is that they decide on their preferred conclusion, and then, not even bothering to work backwards to the premises, which is awkward and not encouraged, instead simply said, “This is how it’s going to be.”

Which is just how certain anti-gun control decisions have recently seemed.

We must warn Judge Graber not to hit SCOTUS on the nose too hard with that rolled up newspaper.

Daniel Drezner is professor of international politics at The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University, so he has deep cred when it comes to foreign policy. He gives a light going-over of Mz Harris foreign policy accomplishments here, resulting in this:

This is a pretty substantive record for a vice president! It’s not, as [former foreign policy aide John] Hannah claimed, “a relatively limited foreign policy resume.” Furthermore, Harris’ two key foreign policy advisors, Phil Gordon and Rebecca Lissner, are also seasoned professionals. A Harris administration would likely be better prepared to conduct foreign policy on day one than former president Trump.

To sum up: Kamala Harris possesses far more foreign policy experience than most other post-Cold War presidents. Her track record in her foreign policy forays is pretty impressive. And her foreign policy team is better prepared to take over on January 20th than Trump’s D-listers. And the media coverage of this particular angle of the 2024 campaign remains… odd.

As ever, vice presidents hardly ever get proper coverage, leading everyone astray. It makes me wonder if Mike Pence had hidden accomplishments, or Dick Cheney, or Dan Quayle.

It’s reassuring that we’re not thrusting a naif out onto the international stage. The only thing worse would be … a self-dealing twerp who doesn’t understand the importance of international relations.

What might this be?

The mental incompetence of Mr Trump described by Professor Richardson in her September 7, 2024 post …

Then, tonight, Trump posted on his social media site a rant asserting that he will win the 2024 election but that he expects Democrats to cheat, and “WHEN I WIN, those people that CHEATED will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the Law, which will include long term prison sentences so that this Depravity of Justice does not happen again. We cannot let our Country further devolve into a Third World Nation, AND WE WON’T! Please beware that this legal exposure extends to Lawyers, Political Operatives, Donors, Illegal Voters, & Corrupt Election Officials. Those involved in unscrupulous behavior will be sought out, caught, and prosecuted at levels, unfortunately, never seen before in our Country.”

Is it the Justice Department indictments that showed Russia is working to get him reelected? Is it the rising popularity of Democratic nominees Kamala Harris and Tim Walz? Is it fury at the new grand jury’s indicting him for his attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 election and install himself in power? Is it fear of Tuesday’s debate with Harris? Is it a declining ability to grapple with reality?

Whatever has caused it, Trump seems utterly off his pins, embracing wild conspiracy theories and, as his hopes of winning the election appear to be crumbling, threatening vengeance with a dogged fury that he used to be able to hide.

… leaves me with one simple question: When will the GOP replace Mr Trump with former Ambassador Nikki Haley? While the latter has some serious problems of her own, mental stability is not in the list.

And she’s probably the only chance for the GOP, and even that is small. But Haley is comparatively young and would attract the spotlight back to the GOP.

Uh, do bees snuffle?

He’s an agnostic bee.

Maybe not so wrong there.

Out with the old, in with the new….

Will The Apalachee High School Tragedy Affect Senate Races?

It can, but it must handled with delicacy by those candidates willing to take the risks. Republicans, in general, take the position that nothing can prevent these tragedies, and thus the only appropriate response is “thoughts and prayers.” Any sort of gun control measure is verboten.

But tragic events, such as the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor or the killing of union members by union-busters, are important signals that something in society is structured improperly. The chaos of never knowing if the next person through the door will be shooting a gun is deleterious to everyone in society, and deputizing part of society just to function as a patch, a bandage, on a bad policy decision – a public security force, if you will – is inefficient. Costly, if you prefer.

And don’t get me going on the hoary old arguments about self-defense and that rot. I used to argue for them on social media myself, thirty years ago, but not anymore.

The basic question: Is it better to be dodging bullets or giving up your guns? And then it comes down to policy: all guns? All but hunting guns? That’s local politics.

Bitterness Is Part Of Republican MAGA DNA

This WaPo article concerning the fall of Congressional Freedom Caucus founder Rep Bob Good (R-VA) in a bitter primary fight illustrates one of the prime features of an extremist voter, regardless of left or right: A pig-headed certainty that they are right, everyone else is wrong, and No, We Won’t Close Ranks!

To be clear, the last clause, above, isn’t entirely bad. A truly unacceptable candidate who, somehow, manages to gain the nomination to the general election should be shunned – and, as the Republican population of the House demonstrates, unacceptable successful candidates are shockingly rife. At least such shunning is a message that this candidate is seriously flawed; at best, it may help eliminate them from an important position, and if that’s a hit to the Party, once again, it’s a message.

However, the expressed bitterness is an important indication that norms of behavior and politics, that exist for very good reasons, are really going to pieces in the Republican Party, and if it continues then the Democrats, with all their positives and negatives, will end up in control of the Legislative and Executive Branches. Given the reprehensible behavior of the Republicans ever since Newt Gingrich (R-GA) was Speaker, it’s hard to be against such an outcome, but it’s certainly a situation that merits pause and, hopefully, a replacement Republican Party that does not accept such folks as Greene, Gaetz, Gosar, McConnell, and, for that matter, Good, into its ranks.

What’s This About Pollster CNN/SSRS?

I’m not sure about this pollster name. No pollsters are listed by FiveThirtyEight in their pollster rankings as CNN/SSRS; however, there is an SSRS listed, with a rating of 2.0, sort of middle of the road. Since CNN is a news source, I would not expect them to also be a pollster, although, of course, there’s the famous The New York Times/Siena College (3.0) pairing, so it’s not out of the question.

For the nonce, I’ll consider this a mistake by FiveThirtyEight: the pollster is, I’m thinking, SSRS, and the sponsor is CNN.

And their polling seems more conservative than other polling: for example, in Arizona they give Rep Gallego (D-AZ) a 47%-44% lead over Republican Kari Lake (R-AZ), while highly respected pollsters place his lead in the double digits.

Good, Bad, And The Indifferent

• And That’s A Damp Squib, Isn’t It? Unknown pollster ActiVote may or may not be conservatively aligned, but I don’t doubt that Senator Blackburn (R-TN) has a commanding lead in Tennessee over “Tennessee Three” member and State Rep Gloria Johnson (D-TN), 60%-40%. I’ll desist from future reports unless a black swan starts circling.
• If unknown pollster SoCal Strategies, working for right-wing Red Eagle Politics, is giving Senator Brown (D-OH) of Ohio a five point lead, 50%-45%, over challenger Bernie Moreno (R-OH), then Brown’s lead may be greater than that. On the other hand, formidable Emerson College (2.9) is giving Senator Brown a one point lead, 46%-44% (rounding) , well within the margin of error. He could be behind. It’s sort of like your cat sleeping in that closed box, isn’t it? Dead? Alive? Superposition? Yes, a super position for pouncing as you walk by. Oh, sorry, a quantum mechanics joke. Yes, it’s an early morning.
• Senator Rosen’s (D-NV) challenger in the Nevada race, Sam Brown, is a member of the Paul Brown clan, who own the NFL’s Cincinnati Bengals.
• Following up on the dubious pollster result of only a seven point lead for Minnesota Senator Klobuchar (D-MN) over challenger Royce White by Redfield & Wilton (unknown pollster), SurveyUSA (with a hefty 2.8 rating) gives Senator Klobuchar a fourteen point lead, 50%-36%. That’s still short of my prediction of twenty, but a heckuva lot better and more accurate, at least in my opinion.
• SSRS (2.0) is calling it dead even in Pennsylvania, Senator Casey (D-PA) and David McCormick (R-PA?) tied at 48%. This is at considerable variance to other pollsters, who have given Senator Casey a lead as big as twelve. I don’t see anything in the news that would spell disaster for the Senator.
• In Wisconsin, which last saw Senator Baldwin (D-WI) clinging to a one point lead in Emerson College’s (2.9) eyes, SSRS (2.0) gives the Senator a six point lead over Eric Hovde (R-WI?), 51%-45%.
• Michigan must have a warm and comforting restaurant scene, because they have three pollsters covering their Senate race this time ’round, along with having been popular all along. SSRS (2.0), again working for CNN, gives Rep Slotkin (D-MI) a 47%-41% lead over former Rep Mike Rogers (R-MI), Glengariff Group (1.5), new to me and not having a great rating, inflates the lead by another three points, 44%-35%, and what appears to be right-wing leaning ActiVote (unknown) drags the lead back down to six, 53%-47%, but allows that Slotkin is in the 50+% land. The last pollster has an “average expected error” of 4.9%, which is not a familiar term to me – am I behind the times in polling, or is this a bunch of amateurs? It’s probably me, I was never an enthusiast of statistics and probability, at least not in college. I did start to implement … sorry, that’s an unneeded tangent. Talking about myself, I mean. Back on point, ActiVote is only working with 400 voters, but the other two are working with 50% more voters, so that could also explain ActiVote’s variance from Glengariff.
• Maryland is lightly polled, perhaps too lightly polled, and the polling I don’t like. Not the results, but the historical quality: Gonzales Research & Marketing Strategies (1.2, yes, 1.2) finds Democratic nominee Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD) leading popular former governor Larry Hogan (R-MD), 46%-41%. But a result from a 1.2 rated pollster really has no assurances.
• What to make of Fabrizio Ward/David Binder Research? The bad news is there’s no such combo-pollster listed; the good news is that there is a David Binder Research listed, although the rating is only 1.7. And Fabrizio Ward? No listing. There is a Fabrizio, Lee & Associates, but again a rating of 1.7. So I suppose we just list them as unknown, and then look at their polling of Montana’s Senate race, which comes in at an unlikely 49%-41% favoring Republican challenger Tim Sheehy (R-MT) over Senator Tester (D-MT). That’s a roughly 14 point difference from the last poll by RMG Research (2.3) that gave Senator Tester a six point lead. The Republican supposition prior to election season was that Senator Tester was the most likely Democratic incumbent to be flipped, and it looks like they’re trying hard to make it happen, but this and wishing may not be enough. Waiting on the next reputable pollster. I wonder if Erick Erickson’s comments about grifters in the conservative leadership extends to the right-wing pollsters; heck, in this poll, while the bottom-line numbers lead to a supposed eight point lead for Sheehy, the headline on the press release is much more brazen: Sheehy Leads Tester by 16 Points in Montana Senate Race. Read the article and you discover that the alleged 16 point lead is among older voters only, but come on! This is straight-up misleading. I wonder how the sponsor, the AARP, will react if Senator Tester emerges victorious? Sue the pollster for malpractice?
• Emerson College (2.9) reduces their estimate of Florida’s Senator Scott’s (R-FL) lead to one point over former Rep Mucarsel-Powell (D-FL), 46%-45%, which is definitely within the margin of error. With November 5 coming up fast and Mucarsel-Powell with the momentum, Scott may be in deep trouble. Harris still trails Trump by five points in Florida, according to the pollster. And if Emerson College is running a trifle conservative, as I’ve been suspecting, the Democratic candidate may already have a lead in reality.
• Emerson College (2.9) gives Texas Senator Cruz (R-TX) a four point lead, 48%-44%, over Rep Allred (D-TX), while YouGov (2.9) doubles that lead to eight, 44%-36%. It’s interesting that two top pollsters diverge this much, but there’s time to go.
• The Massachusetts primaries took place on September 3rd. Senator Warren (D-MA) was unopposed and no ballot count is given; her Republican-backed challenger is John Deaton (R-MA), who won in excess of 64% of the Republican ballots. If you look at the On The Issues website, their data on Mr Deaton is thin, so his summary as very moderate is suspect. That said, the summaries I’ve seen of the Republican candidates suggested two of the three of them were moderate, while the third was MAGA. However, both moderates are heavily connected to the cryptocurrency … industry. Scam, if you prefer, as I see the industry as a home of scam artists and folks who don’t understand currency. In the end, I suspect Mr Deaton won’t have much of a challenge in uniting Republican votes behind his candidacy, and it won’t be enough, despite his claim that “… [she’s] losing support every day because of her hyper-partisan politics and her loyalty to just a particular agenda.” A quick glance at reporting suggests he’s using the apocalyptic style of campaigning, and I’m not sure that’ll work with Massachusetts moderate Democrats and independents, two groups he’ll have to attract.
• And in Nebraska, the distraction of a third-party candidate in the tight Senator Fischer (R-NE) and Dan Osborn (I-NE) race has disappeared as candidate Kerry Eddy (Legal Marijuana NOW Party-NE) has withdrawn from the race. She has endorsed Mr Osborn. Additionally:
  

  [Eddy] also acknowledged that part of her decision was calculated to give Osborn a better chance. Political observers said clearing the ballot of other names helps avoid splitting the opposition vote. [Nebraska Examiner]

  How many votes will transfer to Mr Osborn is unclear to me, as the polls have not, to the best of my knowledge, mentioned Mz Eddy.

What Comes Next?

Next week is the Rhode Island primary, the last Senate primary of the season. A reminder that Delaware canceled their primaries for the open Senate seat.

At this juncture, it’s not news that evangelical voters form the core of the Trump base. But what if they begin to fragment? The SBC (Southern Baptist Convention), the primary association of evangelical voters, has been steadily shrinking over the last few years, no doubt due to repulsive behavior such as that of Pastor Robert Morris:

Robert Morris, who founded and led Gateway Church for nearly 25 years in the affluent Dallas-Fort Worth suburb of Southlake, Texas, resigned after the scandal [of child sexual abuse] came to light in June. His exit sent thousands of evangelicals into a season of struggle that has lasted months. [CNN]

And what has that meant for Gateway?

The church has seen a decrease of 17% to 19% in weekend services attendance, a church spokesperson told CNN.

Thousands of probably conservative members, walking away in disgust at the behavior of the leaders of their church, realizing that they are the marks in a giant game where figures of authority abuse their positions, and therefore them.

Over and over and over again.

This despicable behavior, which is not within Mr Trump’s ability to control, may cripple his reelection run. How can he claim that he has enough votes when his very foundation cracks, even if it’s not guaranteed that their disgust extends to him, when the evangelicals continue to shrink?

He can’t.

This may explain Trump’s turn to religion of late.

Trump [asserts he] is destined for success, unless the Democrats “cheat.” And in an interview with television’s Dr. Phil that aired on Tuesday, Trump added another validator to that point: God wants him to win.

Speaking to Trump at the former president’s Las Vegas hotel, Phil McGraw asked the former president to weigh in on last month’s assassination attempt. Had it inspired self-reflection, McGraw wondered, a reconsideration of “why am I here”?

Before answering that question, Trump outlined the ways in which his survival was a function of chance. That, just as the bullet was fired, he turned toward a (misleading) graph on immigration being displayed on a large screen at the Butler, Pa., rally. That, because he turned when he did, the bullet clipped his ear instead of doing far worse damage. [WaPo]

Everyone was surprised when God turned out to be a patch of scruffy sunflowers behind a garage.

Speaking as an agnostic, the problematic part of God is that the Divine can be interpreted in so many ways, and, to someone like me, they all seem equally valid. Trump, if we’re to believe him, along with a bunch of his base, thinks God favors him.

To me, though, this is self-contradictory. God is God, after all, and God could have simply materialized on the roof top, wrung the neck of the shooter, and disappeared. The shooter was due to die anyways, and the other victims of the tragedy, well, their wounds would never have occurred.

Instead, the better interpretation is that the attempted shooting was a warning to Trump: Stop your foolish shenanigans, desist from your evil ways, and repent. That is a very traditional Christian interpretation. The shooter, who was looking to do evil, pays for it, and Trump, spared for many years, gets a warning. The accompanying tragedies are still unacceptable and horrific.

Mr Trump doesn’t appear to be bright enough to come to this conclusion, or at least not admit to it.

Will his invocation of the Divine work? I doubt it, as the organized Protestant sects that are, de facto, supporting him are shrinking quickly:

And I expect they're becoming more savvy about grifters and other abusers.

So, I'm sure his making a claim of being favored by God will be accepted by a few, saving him those votes, but I also suspect this election is already decided as Harris and Walz are being successful at lifting the mood of the nation.

Lest anyone think I hate or despise Mr Erickson, no, I don’t. I, in fact, appreciate his willingness to criticize his own side, because self-critics are often more honest than adversarial critics. Far more honest, far more insightful.

In his post referenced below, I have not listened to the radio show he attaches, but the text gives a flavor and the post title kinda says it all:

The Grifters On The Right

I have to wonder how long before he realizes all the honest folks have left leadership, either discouraged about the abrupt moral degradation of their fellow leaders and followers brought on by Mr Trump, or chased out by mostly the aforementioned, and grifters and allied criminals are now ascendant.

Even as a kid I remember the moaning about how the generation of the time didn’t measure up to the standards of the World War II generation, aka The Greatest Generation, and it looks like they may have gotten it right.