Ugly Developments

AL-Monitor reports India is no longer planning to export wheat once current commitments are met:

Wheat prices rose significantly today following India restricting wheat exports — a move that could affect Egypt in particular.

Chicago wheat futures rose around 5% today to $12.40 per bushel, which is the highest price since 2008. The index is considered a benchmark for wheat prices worldwide. A bushel corresponds to roughly 35 liters.

The price increase followed India banning wheat exports over the weekend, citing the risk of food shortages. India was only responsible for about 0.5% of wheat exports in 2020. However, India is one of the biggest wheat producers in the world, and has considered exporting more wheat amid the Russian war on Ukraine. Both Ukraine and Russia are top wheat exporters, and the war has disrupted global wheat markets.

What’s left unsaid here? With the usual caveats about international messaging and nationalist leaders – and India’s Prime Minister Modi is about as nationalistic as they come – the immediate question is Why is India worried about their own wheat production?

Is climate change hitting them now? I know that quite a few years ago, when I was there on a work trip, the monsoon failed, endangering various crops; another time, it rained when it wasn’t supposed to, ruining the mango crop. One or two events are too little for conclusions, but if they’re having trouble growing enough food for themselves because of weather or other problems, is this signaling more problems heading our way?

Exacerbated by Putin’s War?

I’m not looking for food prices to drop any time soon. And, I’m sure to the dismay of domestic natalists, we may see the American birth rate edge down even further as prospective parents take a look at the price of food, which acts as a proxy, imperfect as it may be, for the plenitude of the food supply, and decide to hold off, or not have children at all.

While I appreciate Biden’s position vis a vis Putin’s War, his restraint in not hitting Putin harder – including putting troops in Ukraine – may end up hurting the world long-term, as Ukraine is a major food exporter. Russia’s ruination of Ukraine will not be remedied in a year, or even five. It may take ten or more, depending on the determination of Russian troops to salt the land, so to speak.

That’s Entertainment, Baby

The youngest member of what I’m calling the Young Right-Wing Crazies Caucus, Rep Madison Cawthorn (R-NC), faced a primary opponent last night in his first try at reelection … and lost. From CNN/Politics:

The result is by only a few hundred votes, but reportedly Cawthorn has conceded rather than wrestling violently for his position.

Which is odd.

Steve Benen summarizes the blunders that leaves the 26 year old looking at unemployment starting early next year:

It’s difficult to rank each of Cawthorn’s many scandals, screw-ups, and failures — the list is not short — but one recent incident was largely responsible for derailing his career. As regular readers know, the congressman appeared on a podcast in March and was asked whether the TV show “House of Cards” is realistic. He said he couldn’t help but marvel at the “sexual perversion” of his older colleagues, adding that his congressional colleagues had invited him to orgies and done cocaine in his presence.

House Republicans will tolerate an astonishing amount of misconduct, but this crossed a line: Cawthorn making up nonsense about them was seen as a bridge too far. The North Carolinian conceded that much of what he’d claimed was “exaggerated” — he also claimed not to know “what cocaine is” — but much of the GOP was underwhelmed by his explanation and turned on him with a vengeance.

It’s not hard to visualize this young man, faced with a question out of the entertainment world, and with a background of saying outrageous and possibly false things, jumping at the opportunity to be, well, entertaining. After all, this is the Age of Entertainment, as I occasionally remind friends. He was just going with the flow of his age group.

And lying had not hurt him before, no?

It all ties together with his immediate concession to his opponent, too. The last few weeks have seen his more senior colleagues, outraged at his infamous charges, working against him. Winning this primary, and almost certainly the general election, would result in a position of isolation, with only the other members of the Young Right-Wing Crazies Caucus, plus a few nuts-loose Representatives such as Gosar, etc, to keep him company.

Maybe.

I suspect he welcomes this loss, or should. He may have trouble finding a new political position, presumably as ‘consultant,’ but look for him to try. He might even resign from Congress before then.

And maybe reconsider his role as ‘entertainer.’

Get A Load Of History, Dude

Just dump it in the front yard, yeah?

Erick Erickson thinks he knows what’s wrong with America. See if you can guess what his solution might be:

Our country doesn’t have a partisan problem, a political problem, a social problem, an economic problem, or any other problem as big as the spiritual problem we have.

In the absence of God, Americans across partisan lines have turned to government and celebrity for their gods. They have gone off to worship idols.

Indeed? And somehow Erickson has forgotten about all the intra-<place your favorite religion> violence that has occurred over the centuries? Protestant on Catholic on Protestant, for example? Even peaceful Hindus experience violence over such things as the invasion of Western customs. Imagine getting beat up because someone thought you were celebrating Valentine’s Day. (According to the Times of India article I read while in India 20+ years ago, it was actually a birthday party that happened to fall on Valentine’s Day. Poor guy.)

Religion is the source of much, but not all, violence. There’s nothing like an obscure theological point that some power-seeking person chooses to hang their hat on and start a fight over, that often turns deadly because each side is convinced that the Divinity is on their side. Concerning a Divinity for which they have no objective proof.

And, of course, Erickson ends his rant in the worst possible way, and, as a lawyer and intellectual, he knows better:

We need Jesus, not partisanship. We should expect our President to do anything but say that. Our leaders have failed us on all sides. They’ve led us to idols and performance art on social media.

Sheer, shameful pandering to the audience. This is how to solidify the base – don’t give them a reason to question, play to their biases. And he knows that, besides the fact that a good chunk of the United States isn’t Christian, and many of those that are know this, the President can’t do that. A President, in his official capacity, cannot advocate for a particular religion. Even if prosecuting him would be dicey, he’d immediately lose support right across the spectrum.

And does Erickson want to be told he should convert to Catholicism, if Biden were to choose to go full Jesus?

I won’t presume to prescribe for what ails us, because I think it’s a complex problem involving religion, intellectual laxness, arrogance, and the insane reach of the Web, but I do think that prescribing the source of many bloody wars as a solution is a bit of … well, self-delusion or pandering. Take your pick.

That Anti-Immigrant Shrieking

Every time I run across another reference to Rep and GOP leader Stefanik (R-NY) refusing to see a connection between her comments on immigration and the reported motivations of the Buffalo mass murderer (alleged, of course), to wit, replacement theory, which is best summarized as “The Democrats are letting all those non-white immigrants in in order to replace us Republicans!”, I simply want to scream.

I want to scream,

Immigrants are neither liberal nor, for that matter, conservative by virtue of their being immigrants!

Seems obvious, no? But it’s not just a theoretical wave of the hand, meant to trick naive Republicans into denouncing a murderer who acted on a message which should be confined to the far-right fringe, but is actually advocated by Fox News personality Tucker Carlson – or so I’m told. No, no, no – which applies to taking Carlson seriously or my point as theoretical.

One of the factors that has made the Democrats position less stable than they’d like is that certain immigrant groups, such as Latinos originating from socialist, or so claiming to be socialist, nations don’t want to be in a socialist nation again. Ask former Cubans in Miami. Heck, I know a former Cuban, I should ask her. The point being that they came here seeking freedom to work, freedom to live, and a word they associate with a less salubrious environment is thrust upon them.

Similarly, there are other Democratic ideologies that are known to grate on immigrants’ nerves – with Latinos, again, the entire LatinX replacement for Latina and Latino is a well-known friction point.

And then add in a certain thread of autocracy that seems to run, ever so delicately, in the Democrats. We’ve seen it with their botching of the transgender issue. They seem to have grown a tendency to want to impose their views, large and small.

And, to some extent, that’s a governmental operational characteristic. But when it comes to public policy, it shouldn’t be.

Oh, sure, when faced with the fourth-raters that make up the opposition, it can be hard to have a serious discussion. The last time what passes for conservatives tried to have a discussion – the gay marriage issue – they were positively creamed. Nowadays they find some nasty word to scream and otherwise refuse to engage.

But that doesn’t make the Democrats look any better. When 25% of the gay community votes conservative, you can bet that the Democrats and their left wing has a problem.

But neither left nor right seem to understand that immigrants are neither liberal nor conservative, which is odd.

Pricing Ourselves Out Of Smart

CNBC reports on a local company’s analysis of kids and college:

More than two years into the pandemic, nearly three-quarters, or 73%, of high schoolers think a direct path to a career is essential in postsecondary education, according to a survey of high school students.

The likelihood of attending a four-year school sank from 71% to 51% in the past two years, ECMC Group found.

High schoolers are putting more emphasis on career training and post-college employment, the report said. ECMC Group, a nonprofit aimed at helping students find success, polled more than 5,300 high school students five times since February 2020. …

Even before the pandemic, students were starting to consider more affordable, direct-to-career alternatives to a four-year degree, said Jeremy Wheaton, ECMC Group’s president and CEO.

The rising cost of college and ballooning student loan balances have played a large role in the changing views, but “they [students] are more savvy than we give them credit for,” Wheaton said. “They are aware of the jobs that are in high demand.”

But is that the way to run a society? Kids are rarely aware of their potential, even encumbered as it may be by upbringing, environment, hormone-driven bodies, and other barriers to achievement.

But, then again, those jobs in high demand are, in part, critical or close to critical to society. Who’s to deny them the opportunity to serve society in such a capacity?

Nor is college necessary at age 18; in fact, in some may consider it a detriment, given the fact that the brain is not yet completely wired in virtually everyone at that age. However, I wonder about the importance of stress, such as the stress of college, in facilitating the proper wiring of the brain. It seems unlikely that the wiring aspect of brain development is immune to outside influences.

In the end, we may see universities reaching out with special packages emphasizing the liberal arts / civic responsibilities that may not have reached these adults back in high school – if, in fact, they were taught at all.

And that’ll be yet another node of the culture wars.

Currency Always Has Costs, Ctd

It’s been a bit of a scramble in the arena of selling cryptocurrencies to the general public, public relations-wise, over the last month. WaPo covers a couple of points:

Yet that digital coin, a type of crypto known as a stablecoin because it aims to keep its price at $1, has been in free-fall this week. TerraUSD, or UST as it is known, was priced as low as 30 cents on Wednesday and was trading around 40 cents Thursday evening (crypto trades around the clock).

It isn’t clear yet what sent UST into a tailspin. But the cratering of what had been the third-largest stablecoin by total market value points to a wider reckoning for a hype-fueled asset class that is deflating as dramatically this year as it inflated in 2021.

It gets worse.

A sell-off over just the past seven days has erased more than a quarter of the value from the global crypto market, according to CoinMarketCap. Most dramatically, UST’s sister coin, Luna, lost almost all of its value in the past week, all but wiping out most people who had invested in it.

And they’re not supposed to be investments for most people. They’re supposed to be currencies. Yes, words matter. The fact that Luna can fall to zero suggests it, and its brethren, are not immune to manipulation.

But here’s what worries me:

Institutional players have overtaken retail investors on Coinbase [the largest U.S.-based crypto trading platform], for example. Mom-and-pop traders accounted for a third of the volume on the platform last year, down from 80 percent in 2018, according to new research from Morgan Stanley. And Wall Street firms continue edging into the sector. Goldman Sachs in March executed its first over-the-counter trades of bitcoin options; BlackRock last month announced it is investing in the stablecoin company Circle Internet Financial.

And if everything goes kaplooey?

Remember Long Term Capital Managment? Maybe not. Back in 1998, this hedge fund, using work by several Nobel Prize winners, went right over the ol’ financial cliff, after some initial successes. But when many of us expected the wealthy investors who were using it to become more wealthy to, instead, lose their shirts, well, let’s have Wikipedia tell us:

LTCM was initially successful, with annualized returns (after fees) of around 21% in its first year, 43% in its second year and 41% in its third year. However, in 1998 it lost $4.6 billion in less than four months due to a combination of high leverage and exposure to the 1997 Asian financial crisis and 1998 Russian financial crisis. The master hedge fund, Long-Term Capital Portfolio L.P., collapsed soon thereafter, leading to an agreement on September 23, 1998, among 14 financial institutions for a $3.65 billion recapitalization under the supervision of the Federal Reserve. The fund was liquidated and dissolved in early 2000.

Which leads to this question: If these big institutions cited as becoming movers and shakers in cryptocurrency find it suddenly becomes little more than rainwater in an asbestos gutter – will they be running to the Federal Reserve or the Federal government, gnashing their teeth, beating their breasts, and wailing to be bailed out?

How big is that going to be?

And how are these institutions going to learn to stop being foolish if their fingers aren’t burned? I know, I know, Lehman Bros was the sacrificial lamb in 2008, meant to learn them darn competitors of their’s.

Will the banks have to eat those losses if they occur?

And that’s what I fear in light of this, from the WaPo article:

Tyler Gellasch, founder of the nonprofit Healthy Markets Association, said traditional financial institutions have missed too many years of booming crypto values to be dissuaded from the crypto market now. “Concerns over fraud, volatility, and regulatory uncertainty kept many traditional financial firms on the sidelines for the boom in digital assets,” he said. “After several years of missing out on the profits, many in traditional finance have just recently committed to getting involved in digital asset markets. I’ll be surprised if they immediately U-turn now. They’ve committed too many resources to figure out how to offer something to their customers.”

If that’s not emotional manipulation, I don’t know what is. At best, it’s foolish. At worst? Use your imaginations.

Belated Movie Reviews

All I can think is that Anguirus, the dude on the right, was on testosterone shots. I mean, he never had a chance. – Words of famous Godzillaologist.

Godzilla Raids Again (1955) is the follow up to Gojira (1954), the original Godzilla movie, and is an inferior sequel. A pilot employed by a fishing outfit to guide big fishing trawlers to big schools of fish runs into engine trouble while out working, and manages to set the seaplane down in a bay of a relatively rocky island. As his partner comes to his rescue, Godzilla hoves into view on the island, and is engaged by a giant ankylosaurus, later to be named Anguirus.

The distraction of Godzilla permits the aviators to escape in the rescuer’s seaplane, but, to the dismay of the Japanese authorities who thought Godzilla had perished in Gojira, Godzilla is sighted closing in on Japan. Near Osaka, Godzilla’s attraction to light is used to lure him back out to sea, but an unfortunate accident involving escaped convicts and an oil refinery spoils the plan, and Godzilla stomps up on shore to enjoy his bonfire. His pleasure is disrupted when Anguirus emerges from the sea as well, and attacks again, but this time Anguirus has overreached, and Godzilla wins the day, returning to the sea covered in glory. Blood. Whatever.

Next sighted in some rich fishing grounds, the fishing company and the Japan Self Defense Forces combine their resources to hunt the recalcitrant kaiju. Will they succeed? Or will Godzilla run rampant?

And what about the love subplot?

While Godzilla remains mysterious, it’s not the terrifying What’s he got against us? mysteriousness of Gojira. It’s more along the lines of Oh, not Godzilla again. Who the hell knows what it is this time. Who has the can of RAID bug spray? Maybe that’ll OOPS —

Anyways. The jet pilots seem a little incompetent, while Godzilla appears ill-equipped to deal with fake avalanches, so why is he on an icy island, rather than his usual stomping grounds of Tokyo some South Pacific island where the living’s good? The romantic subplot is sort of nice, but I’m not sure how it ties into Godzilla’s activities, so it was a little distracting.

In sum, it’s disappointing. The terror of Gojira is lost, replaced by a puzzled frown.

Word Of The Day

Pyrogeography:

Pyrogeography is the study of the past, present, and projected distribution of wildfire. Wildland fire occurs under certain conditions of climate, vegetation, topography, and sources of ignition, such that it has its own biogeography, or pattern in space and time. [Wikipedia]

Pyrogeographer is used in an unlinkable article in Discover (May/June 2022), and it was just too cool to pass up.

Job Of Courier

Horizontal gene transfer refers to the physical movement of genes from one organism to another. I had always assumed it was a unicellular trait, because … well, because. So this surprised me:

Many snakes make meals of frogs, but some appear to be transferring their DNA into the amphibians as well. A genetic analysis suggests that parasites shared between snakes and frogs may facilitate the movement of genetic material from one species to another.

The “horizontal” transfer of DNA between species was long considered a rare event that took place only between microbes, but there is growing evidence that the process has been going on all over the tree of life. [“Frogs have acquired DNA from snakes with the help of parasites,” Jake Buehler, NewScientist (30 April 2022, paywall)]

So parasites not only suck on your resources, but they gift you with genes you may not want.

Nifty.

Belated Movie Reviews

“What would be completely unexpected, yet organic, at this point?” “I can’t think of a thing.”

Late Night (2019) is a fairly conventional take on the stresses of putting on a talk show, ranging from the writers responsible for the jokes, right to the pinnacle – the talking head. It sails through the expected elements: stale jokes, lack of diversity, complacency and jealousy of position, and what happens when the show’s personnel are suddenly slated for replacement.

Sprightly, it has some laughs and some good acting, and is … unmemorable. For me. I suspect other audiences might love it.

But not me.

Be Careful Of Your Desired Image

I noticed yesterday, via an Erick Erickson’s post, a prospective split in the GOP, but didn’t have time to address it because the lawn needed mowing. This involves the Georgia GOP primary battle for nomination to the governor’s seat involving incumbent Brian Kemp and former Senator David Perdue (R-GA), who was defeated in his reelection bid by now-Senator Jon Ossoff (D-GA). Because Governor Kemp didn’t arbitrarily, and no doubt futilely, refuse to validate the 2020 election results in Georgia, Trump is determined to run Kemp out of the GOP, using the vehicle of the aforementioned Perdue. But:

I’ve confirmed with both sides, Vice President Mike Pence is himself formally endorsing Brian Kemp and will be in Georgia the day before the May 24th primary election. on May 23, Pence will campaign in Georgia for Kemp. …

With Pence for Kemp, it puts him directly at odds with President Trump. We probably will not see Perdue attacking Pence for the endorsement, though perhaps Trump will say something.

Via Professor Richardson, I learn from Greg Bluestein of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution of others on the Pence side of the split:

But many of Trump’s fiercest Republican critics have rallied to Kemp’s side. That includes former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who plans to soon stump for Kemp in Georgia, and former President George W. Bush, who recently donated to his campaign.​

Both of whom qualify as old-line Republicans, but while the endorsement of a former President usually carries some weight, Bush is little more than a footnote to most Republican voters these days. It’s not just his Administration ending on the low note of the Great Recession, but his failure to convert into yet another MAGA-ite.

Erickson notes Kemp’s commanding lead in the primary:

Kemp has never been behind in the polls. Initial polling in the race had Kemp under 50%, but for the last three months, every public and all the private polling I’m aware of has had Kemp above 50%, meaning he will escape a runoff. Likewise, President Trump has largely downplayed the race and set expectations for a Kemp victory.

And that last line is a doozy. This is Trump’s conception of loyalty, noted time after time by many observers, and it’s not surprising, given Perdue’s debate performance in his Senatorial reelection bid in 2020 – staring vacantly while Ossoff verbally dumped his sins on his head. A former businessman, he doesn’t really understand being a politician, and shouldn’t have permitted Trump to persuade him to challenge Kemp. Perdue supposedly had prestige as a former Senator, even if he lost to political novice Ossoff, but his utter loyalty to Trump was the key for Trump to endorse him. That uncompromising loyalty marks the amateur, the unwillingness to think for oneself. Perdue never had a chance.

But Bluestein’s comment concerning MAGAites in Georgia reminded me of something important:

The event announced Friday illustrates a growing proxy fight in Georgia between establishment forces backing Kemp and the Trump loyalists who want to remake the state Republican Party in the former president’s mold.

This is really the issue that distinguishes the Trump cult from the traditional American parties and politics, isn’t it? Rather than rallying to a collection of principles and goals, the Trump base rallies to … Trump. Whoever he is, whatever he does, that’s where the loyalties lay.

If he leads them over the cliff of treason, as on January 6, 2021, then that’s where they go. They have no external guideposts, not even their religious beliefs, to stop most of them.

This situation really discourages fruitful discussion, doesn’t it? I mean, you can’t really talk with someone about conservative principles and fossil fuels when it’s all about Trump, and all he does it make up fake statistics about cancer and wind power. We saw him in office, as is common with all mendacious politicians whose focus is gaining and holding power, and his positions shifting and uttering supposed plans – it’s Infrastructure Week again! – as he perceived them to be best oriented to attract his base.

And without discussion, without honest criticism – or praise, are you listening to me you professional pundits? – how is anything supposed to improve?

But that’s the autocratic form of government, isn’t it? All about some self-centered person for whom the metric is How much attention am I getting? rather than Is the nation improving? And while admitting that the second question is far harder to answer than the first, that doesn’t make it invalid. It only makes it far more challenging – and interesting.

Bluestein’s description is an insight into the importance that Kemp – himself saddled with a dubious ethics illustrated by his failure to recuse or even resign as Secretary of State for Georgia when he chose to run for the governor’s seat in 2018, thus tainting the voting system – win, and win with a commanding margin, in the primary over Perdue.

And then we’ll see how Stacey Abrams, former member of the Georgia Legislature, does in the gubernatorial race rematch.

He Happened To Stumble Into The Right Field

Steve Benen provides a useful summation of what I’ve been predicting over the years, continuing to occur:

Nearly a decade later, however, Toomey is no longer seen as a conservative stalwart. On the contrary, in some GOP circles, he’s actually a boogeyman. The Hill reported the other day on Donald Trump’s rally in Pennsylvania, where the former president tried to generate support for celebrity doctor Mehmet Oz, who’s running to succeed Toomey.

Trump … took aim at former hedge fund CEO Dave McCormick, Oz’s primary challenger in the Senate race, saying he is similar to Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), who is retiring from the upper chamber after his current term and was one of the seven Republican senators to vote to convict Trump last year.

To drive home the point, consider how much company Toomey has. The Texas Tribune reports today, for example, that the Bush name has lost its political clout in the Lone Star State as the GOP moves further and further to the right. In North Carolina, Pat McCrory was a deeply conservative governor, who’s now seen as a “RINO” Senate candidate.

A decade ago, Mitt Romney was his party’s “severely conservative“ presidential nominee, and now he’s persona non grata for much of the right. Even John McCain’s name in Arizona is now “invoked as an insult“ by conservative Republicans.

And Romney’s partner in that race, Rep Paul Ryan (R-WI), hard right zealot, future Speaker of the House, and boy wonder of wonkhood (since expelled for not being actually wonky enough), has been virtually run out of the Party. If he has any influence, I have not heard of it. He joins a horde of Republicans who’ve left the Party, ostensibly over Trump, but really over what he represents. The Party has been sprinting right, as I’ve been expecting.

But I don’t like Benen’s conclusion:

To fully appreciate Trump’s impact on GOP politics, look no further than the conservative Republicans who’ve been deemed too liberal by the party’s base.

The key question here is to ask, Could only Trump have pushed the Party that far right?

I contend the answer is No.

The Republican Party combination of toxic team politics, in which straight ticket voting is de rigeur, single issue voting, the disappearance of the Party gatekeepers, and the emphasis on winning elections, while scanting the question of competent governance and moderate politics, made the soil fertile for anyone with the wit to realize the party was vulnerable.

But then add in the catalyst of religious zealotry, and the poison of all the previously mentioned features is augmented: God wants you to to vote only Republican, God hates abortion / gun control / business regs / taxes, God favors extremists over those damn compromising moderates – the last seen long ago in the phrase,

Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue.

Memorable, but a dark omen of the future for the Republicans, as this was written for Senator Goldwater (R-AZ) sometime in the 1960s. Returning to my point, Trump reportedly didn’t even want to win, but use the campaign to suck money out of the conservative movement.

The Get Out Of Jail Free card of the Biblical figure of Cyrus, to which anyone who caught the imagination of the evangelical base could be connected, simply made Trump, who allegedly was fabulously rich, which is an important point for the prosperity church segment of the evangelicals, the focal point of a movement that needed a believable leader and had been discarding potential leaders for decades, names such as Falwell, Gingrich, Romney, Ryan, Bush, Allen West (R-TX) – all had a flaw, whether they were too honorable to break the rules and bring the evangelicals their desperately desired power, or too inept at communications, or were the wrong sect, or the wrong color, or couldn’t be extreme enough.

Trump, despite being a master of communication with his base, may be slipping. His crowds are reportedly shrinking, and sometimes he gets booed.

So Benen may blame Trump, but I blame a Party that self-destructed over a couple of decades, following Gingrich’s advice to put victory at the polls over everything else, be it ideological rigor or electoral cheating. Trump was just the lucky guy – if being the most disgraced President in US history can be considered to be lucky – to benefit from Gingrich’s cursed advice.

The question that leaps to mind is whether there’s a politician waiting in the wings who can outdo Trump. Names such as DeSantis, Hawley, Cruz, and a number of others come to mind, but they all have flaws. Meanwhile, the younger generations seem to view the evangelicals and Republicans with great doubt, although the Democrats are not without their own potentially fatal missteps.

Where will it end?

Cool Astro Pics

A technical artifact or an example of pareidolia:

A friend sent it to me, and it’s from NASA’s raw image collection:

This image was taken by Mast Camera (Mastcam) onboard NASA’s Mars rover Curiosity on Sol 3466 (2022-05-07 07:58:16 UTC).

Fun! How long would it take to get the helicopter Ingenuity there to fly down that hole?

Currency Always Has Costs, Ctd

It appears Bitcoin is struggling a bit since the last time I checked in:

1 Year chart of Bitcoin value in US$ from CoinMarketCap.

Yeah, that’s down more than 50% from the year’s high. That cannot be comforting to the speculators who went big on Bitcon Bitcoin a few months ago. Michelle Singletary, a financial columnist for WaPo, is not a fan of holding large amounts of 401K money in cryptocurrencies.

But perhaps the best part of Singletary’s column was the reader “ArlingMay” who wrote, in part:

Call them “cryptoassets” or “cryptobets” but please don’t’ [sic] call them currencies. That label misleads the gullible.

The reader remarks were dominated by cryptocurrency haters, but I did like ArlingMay’s thought. I’m a skeptic myself, but I keep feelers out for attempts to dominate a forum in order to induce false estimations of an issue, but that one struck me as both earnest and true.

In any case, the volatility over a year of Bitcoin’s value is a strong indicator that Bitcoin does not qualify as a ‘currency,’ in my estimation. I still cannot figure the unique utility of Bitcoin, and I lean towards Erick Erickson’s view on the matter.

That Cloudy Crystal Ball, Ctd

Convenient news about yesterday’s supposition that at least some conservative voters, this time in Nebraska, won’t put up with candidates with dubious sexual reputations:

Donald Trump failed to deliver a victory Tuesday in a Nebraska GOP primary for a gubernatorial candidate accused of groping multiple women, NBC News projects, handing the former president his first loss of this year’s election season.

University of Nebraska Regent Jim Pillen won the party’s nomination after a heated contest, defeating a state senator and self-funding businessman Charles Herbster, whom Trump campaigned for last week even after eight women — including a Republican state senator — accused Trump’s favored candidate of inappropriately touching or kissing them against their will. [NBC News]

Certainly, I’m speculating that it was the allegations, made plausible by volume and source, that repelled Nebraska conservative voters – or maybe the independents and Democrats flooded the primary as well, although the lack of other primary surprises makes this unlikely.

But that may be the limit at the moment. In West Virginia, the number of seats in the House was reduced by one due to the recent Census, pitting two GOP House members against each other in a primary. Who lost?

Rep. David B. McKinley (R-W.Va.) lost his bid for a seventh term on Tuesday because he voted for the bipartisan infrastructure bill. His double-digit defeat in West Virginia’s GOP primary, which largely turned on infrastructure spending, best illustrates why President Biden’s governing theory has failed. [WaPo]

This despite McKinley’s TrumpScore was better than his opponent’s! Perhaps West Virginians are behind Nebraska and Michigan in separating from Trump. Or perhaps conservative voters cannot tolerate a particular defect of character, having to do with sexual attitudes, to reject a Trump endorsee.

Time will tell.

Lust For Power Excuses

The acceleration to the right keeps increasing:

Mr. Kelley, meet Mr. Stalin. Give ‘im a hug. Bedmates should always get a hug.

That Cloudy Crystal Ball

Forecasting the future is a favorite past time of political professionals and pundits. One possible approach is to use the results of special elections at the state level, which occur with fair regularity as elected officials die unexpectedly, win other seats, retire due to illness, and other such life events.

Of course, using special election results can be a minefield. Turnout is commonly light and filled with ideological zealots, rather than casual citizens. The weather and even traffic conditions can skew votes, as can the quality of the candidates and their fund-raising abilities.

In the end, it’s those seats that change hands that attract my attention. Oh, there goes one now!

In this case, this is probably due to the quality of the Republican candidate, a deduction which does not necessarily exempt this special election, necessitated by the movement of the former seat holder to the Michigan State Senate, from use by the crystal ball.

First, why I suggest this is a candidate-quality result. The Republican is Robert Regan, whose advice to his daughters if they find themselves being raped went national:

... panelist Amber Harris, a Republican strategist, told the group that it is “too late” to continue challenging the results of the 2020 election, suggesting Republicans should instead move on and focus on future races, to which Regan replied: “I tell my daughters, ‘Well, if rape is inevitable, you should just lie back and enjoy it.’ ” [WaPo]

And if that seems ambiguous, this is not:

One of Regan’s daughters urged voters not to elect him to office in a viral tweet during his 2020 bid for the state House.

“If you’re in Michigan and 18+ pls for the love of god do not vote for my dad for state rep. Tell everyone,” Stephanie Regan wrote on Twitter.

Turnout in this special election vs the last normal election? The Democrat, who did not run in 2020 and whose name is Carol Glanville, saw slightly less than 50% (19897 vs 7288).

Regan, the Republican? Disaster. Regan did not run in 2020, either, and the comparison is 34,068 vs 7,288, or in other words Regan received little more than 21% of the former holder of the seat's totals.

So what? And that's a great question.

First, I don't think that Regan is the outlier that many might assume. The Republican Party has rapidly slid into fourth- and fifth- rater land over the last twenty years. Names like Greene, Gaetz, Boebert, Gosar, Biggs, Trump, Jordan, and maybe another two dozen members of the House and Senate at the national level serve as encouragement to the far-right and the amateur to try their hand at being representatives of the people, untrained by a Republican Party that lost its capability to sieve out the unsuitable and train the suitable at about the time Newt Gingrich declared total war on the Democrats after the end of the Soviet Union. Their views resemble that of a stubborn bar-room denizen, certain beyond rationality of the rightness of their views, unperturbed by logic or sentiment.

I fully expect to see more and more of these wretched candidates popping up in elective contests.

Second, I think and hope that non-MAGA Republicans, former Republicans, and conservative independents who voted Republican in 2020, but sat out this special election, are, at heart, decent people. Fallible, sometimes mistaken, and stubborn - not just like liberals, but like all Americans. Their disgust with Regan, handing Glanville the seat in a landslide, speaks to this thought.

And that leads to my third point. Glanville, in the short amount of time between now and the 2022 elections, has an opportunity to convert these voters. The sitouts may be willing to reconsider the Democrat in races if Glanville can leave a positive impression on the district. In short, she has a chance to make Republicans respect herself and the Democrats - a small chance, given her short time in office, but a chance.

This is what the Republicans need to worry about. I don't know what they can do beyond spreading rumors and lies about Glanville, because I don't know that they'll have a decent candidate who can win primaries in Michigan. By comparison, the Tennessee GOP is being very mindful of this problem, removing Trump-endorsed candidate for the Tennessee 5th Congressional District Morgan Ortagus, who had worked for Trump in the State Department as a spokesperson, from the Republican primary ballot. Maybe it was just politics, but I suspect a lot of it was an evaluation of Ortagus, and finding her to be too extreme.

Maybe the Michigan GOP has lost that capacity.