Unsightly Mental Blemishes

I took these pictures before we cut most of the ornamental grass for the season on Saturday.

Hey, don’t look to me for some fabulous, fantastical answer.

But it’s the most important question in the world.

The whole thing is premised on faith. On a belief about how the world works.
— David Stockman, businessman, Republican U.S. Represenative, Director of the Office of Management and Budget (1981–1985) on supply side economics.

But “thing” can represent any proposed social plan, from how to organize your church to how to run a baseball stadium.

Anything.

It’s the most important unspoken question in the world.

Nootropic:

The term “nootropics” first referred to chemicals that met very specific criteria. But now it’s used to refer to any natural or synthetic substance that may have a positive impact on mental skills. In general, nootropics fall into three general categories: dietary supplements, synthetic compounds, and prescription drugs. [WebMD]

Ah. Noted in “The Science Behind Nootropics – Do They Actually Work?” Gabe Allen, Discover:

Nootropic supplement companies pitch an attractive solution. What if you could take a pill (or powder or gummy candy) that would make your brain function better in our technology-mediated world? Something that would help you focus on what is important, remember the right details and block out the noise. The nootropic industry is already worth more than $2 billion and is expected to double in size in the next decade, according to one report.

But, unlike prescription nootropics like Adderall or Ritalin, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration doesn’t highly regulate nootropic supplements. In many cases, American consumers must rely on the companies they buy from for information.

Rep MT Greene (R-GA) puts out an apparently outrageous tweet:

Yes they can control the weather.

It’s ridiculous for anyone to lie and say it can’t be done.

— Marjorie Taylor Greene 🇺🇸 (@mtgreenee) October 4, 2024

Yes they can control the weather.

It’s ridiculous for anyone to lie and say it can’t be done.

Yes, very silly. But her own Party’s response helps reveal an unspoken nuance:

Florida Rep. Carlos Gimenez, for example, issued a statement online this week, suggesting that Greene and those who agree with her need “to have their head examined.”

He’s not alone. Axios spoke to several other GOP lawmakers, one of whom said Greene’s beliefs on the subject are “loony tunes.” The same member told the outlet that “disgust with her recent comments is widespread among House Republicans.” [Maddowblog]

Both sides are taking her seriously, without realizing that neither is the intended audience. That audience is … the electorate.

An electorate that should terrify the GOP. They and their allies have spent decades denying that anthropogenic climate change can occur, and that capitalism is a prime contributor. If that message fails, they, at a minimum, may lose to regulation an economic system at the core of their beings; and it’s not impossible that angry mobs might toss them into the ocean, or worse.

So what’s going on here?

Greene is simply finding a new way to deny it. Much like talking to the Divine, she’s pointing at a mysterious “them” who are controlling the weather, a hypothesis that, much like the Divine, cannot easily be falsified.

In other words, Greene is fighting for her political survival. Unlike her colleagues, she’s willing to go to any length, and play it as strong as necessary, to save that career.

This could get more intriguing, not to mention silly, before the election.

The Colossus
Francisco de Goya

As the giants strolled by, Francisco de Goya frantically painted them, but he painted so quickly the friction of his brushes caused almost all the paintings to catch fire and burn up.

This is why oil painting is dangerous.

The Polling Frightens Me, Help!

Yes, depending on who you are and, inversely, how little you know about poll accuracy and trustability, polls can be frightening. A writer using the dubious handle (I’ve been in social media since the early ’80s, so’s I gets to say “dubious handle”) gingytheelephantboy has an article out on Daily Kos that, again, is either reassuring or even more terrifying. Important points:

A special election was held to fill George Santos’ seat. The polls showed a toss-up. The Democrat won by 8 points. The last special election of the season was held in New Jersey last month. The seat was safely Blue and turnout was very small. The Democrat took 80 percent as compared to 75 the last time around. Yesterday in Fairbanks, a +14 Trump city, the Democrat won the mayoral election by 15 percent [sic]. Are we seeing a pattern here?

So why do I continue this series? I’m trying, as a non-specialist, to convey how to evaluate a campaign in terms of anticipating winners and losers during a campaign. I dare to say that my qualifications are the qualifications of most of the electorate, except I’m now (sigh) 60+ years old, and having 40 years in social media suggests I’ve had more experience watching and participating in arguments about politics and how the world works than most. I’ve seen a lot of weirdness, from the current absurdly blasphemous surrealism of Christian Nationalism to the assertion that America was about to experience a revolution because, at the time, the homeless in Denver were upset.

But to get back to the point, I try to share my thinking and evaluation methods so readers can get a leg up on not being 60+ years. I report polls, but I do not necessarily buy into them. Pollsters will tell you data collection has become more and more difficult. Progressives claim the youth vote, leaning Democratic, is undercounted. I’ve nearly been incessant in insisting the Dobbs decision is the most important factor in this election, and I do not expect to see that fade until the existential edge of reproductive health is once again dealt with in an adult manner – and not religious zealots screaming and running in circles.

Here’s the money quote from gingytheelephantboy:

Here is what I see. Democrats and pro-choice have been outperforming the polls by 5% or more in election after election for two years. And that is where we are today. By the way this doesn’t bother me a bit. If it motivates our voters to turn out like their lives depend upon it, then it is all good.

So the big question is why is this happening. My answer is that the polls are missing something important and it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see what it is. They are just not polling enough women, particularly young women, a group notorious for not voting. And they are the very people who have been registering in droves. Of course they are not being polled, they don’t fit the old models.

Keep the above points in mind when evaluating campaigns, stay a bit skeptical of even top rank pollsters – and when choosing for whom to vote. You weren’t going to skip for despair, were you?

What’s this The Washington Post poll, And Why Is It Unrated?

Looking at one of the polls, WaPo doesn’t call out someone else doing, or sharing, the work, and all of FiveThirtyEight’s ratings of WaPo involved its partnering with someone else. Therefore, in the absence of a partner, they are unrated. Fortunately, they only appear once.

Biff! Pop! Pow! Aw, Adam West Escaped — Again!

• CNN/Politics has an article on Pennsylvania Senate challenger David McCormick’s (R-PA) former life as a hedge-fund manager. The article’s headline?
  

  Senate candidate Dave McCormick led hedge fund that bet against some of Pennsylvania’s most iconic companies

  The first couple of paragraphs are all that is necessary.

  In the years that Pennsylvania Senate candidate Dave McCormick led one of the world’s largest hedge funds, the firm bet millions of dollars against some of the state’s biggest and most iconic companies, financial filings show.

  Under McCormick’s leadership, Bridgewater Associates shorted the stocks of nearly 50 companies headquartered in Pennsylvania, including The Hershey Company and US Steel, a CNN review of records from the US Department of Labor found.

  I don’t think most voters will care. Shorting is not an option generally known to the non-investing public, but it’s not an exotic or illicit investment strategy, no matter how much some amateur investors hop up and down in outrage. I have never used it, as gains are limited to roughly 100%, while potential for loss is unlimited; it’s a tool of the confident professionals. Who sometimes go broke using it, just like us long investors.

  This strikes me as a scare article.

  ---

  On the other hand, this article on a ham-handed visit by Mr McCormick to Philadelphia is not in the least surprising.

  ---

  In other, more numerical news, highly respected Quinnipiac University (2.8) gives Senator Casey (R-PA) a 51%-43% lead over McCormick, a thoroughly reasonable lead, with a margin of error of ±2.6 points. Emerson College (2.9) gives the Senator a 48%-46% lead, which is within Emerson College’s ±3 point credibility interval. As with many Emerson College polls, it seems sometimes more rightward-leaning than many pollsters are measuring. TIPP Insights (1.8), working for Republican-aligned American Greatness, gives the Senator a 47%-43% lead with likely voters and a 48%-40% lead with registered voters. The big gap between likely and registered voters seems unlikely, but I’m not sure what it implies.

• In Maryland the University of Maryland Baltimore County Institute of Politics, an unknown pollster, gives Democrat Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD) a 48%-39% lead over former Governor Hogan (R-MD). This is in the neighborhood of a poll from a reputable pollster in the last report. Additionally, I know Maryland is a bastion of the Democratic Party, and the weight of an unknown pollster is difficult to measure, but this observation reinforces a point I made above:
  

  Maryland voters are poised to enshrine the right to abortion access in the state constitution, with 69% of voters saying they will support it and just 21% opposed, according to a poll released Wednesday.

  It’s certainly possible that abortion amendments on the ballot of conservative States may sway many voters to favor not only the amendment, but the liberal minority who put it on the ballot.

• Highly respected Quinnipiac University (2.8) has somehow found the Michigan Senate race to be even at 48%. This is certainly mysterious, as other respected pollsters have had Rep Slotkin (D-MI) up by ten or more points. Every pollster can have a blunder, I suppose. For comparison, Emerson College (2.9) has Rep Slotkin leading former Rep Mike Rogers (R-MI) 49%-44%. Emerson College has something called a ... credibility interval, similar to a poll’s margin of error, of ±3.1 points, which I take to mean Slotkin’s lead could be two points, or eight points. Then again, InsiderAdvantage (2.0) has more of a QU result of Rep Slotkin leading only 46%-45% – a statistical dead heat. However, InsiderAdvantage seems to lean to the conservatives – see that link for some right-wing speculation.
• Quinnipiac University (2.8) has Wisconsin’s Senator Baldwin (D-WI) up by four points, 50%-46%, over challenger Eric Hovde (R-WI), which feels a bit small. Still, the margin of error is ±3.0 points. Emerson College (2.9) has the Senator’s lead also at 50%-46%, with a credibility interval of ±3.0 points. Coincidence? Two converging pollsters? But InsiderAdvantage (2.0) has Baldwin’s advantage at only 48%-47%, or a statistical dead heat. But if InsiderAdvantage is right-leaning?
• In Florida we see discord between two prominent pollsters. The New York Times/Siena College (3.0) sees the Florida race as solidly Senator Scott’s (R-FL) at 49%-40%. Marist College (2.9) also sees the lead as the Senator’s, but only two points at 50%-48%., which is probably within the margin of error, but that is not listed. The former has had some other questionable results, while the latter’s result is more congruent with other recent results.The Marist College poll also notes:
  

  37% have a positive impression of Mucarsel-Powell. 23% have a negative view of her. A notable 40% have either never heard of her or are unsure how to rate Mucarsel-Powell.

  Much like Democratic challenger Rep Allred (D-TX) in Texas, Mucarsel-Powell making herself known to Florida voters may reap big benefits.

• Texas, like Florida, has been polled by The New York Times/Siena College (3.0) and Marist College (2.9), but in this case their results appear to be close, as the former gives Senator Cruz (R-TX) a 48%-44% lead over Rep Allred (D-TX), while the latter gives the Senator a 51%-46% lead. Allred’s chronic problem/opportunity continues, according to Marist:
  

  39% have a favorable opinion of Allred. 36% have an unfavorable impression of him, and 25% have either never heard of Allred or are unsure how to rate him.

  Allred must reach those 25% who don’t know he exists.

• Ohio gets its own paired of polls, but this time Marist College (2.9) is paired with WaPo Poll (unknown), and they both believe the race is within the margin of error, whatever that might be, with the former having Senator Brown (D-OH) leading challenger Bernie Moreno (R-OH), 50%-48%, while the latter has the Senator leading by 48%-47%.
• While I didn’t plan to mention Arizona again, Emerson College (2.9) is giving Rep Gallego (D-AZ) a small seven point lead over election denier Kari Lake (R-AZ), 50%-43%. The pollster comments,
  

  Since last month, Gallego’s support increased two points while Lake’s support held at 43%.

  So perhaps momentum is with Gallego. David Weigel has an interesting differential analysis of Mr. Gallego and Vice President Harris in Semafor here.

• In the shock of the day, The New York Times/Siena College (3.0) sees Montana Republican challenger Tim Sheehy (R-MT) leading Senator Tester (D-MT), 52%-44%. Public Opinion Strategies (1.6), sponsored by the Montana Republican Party, gives Sheehy the lead as well, 51%-45%, but the combination of a weak pollster and a partisan sponsor casts a pall over the credibility of that result.
• Envision two Vikings, whacking away at each other with foam light sabers: Nebraska Senator Fischer (R-NE) and challenger Dan Osborn (I-NE) each hired a pollster, ran a poll, and are advertising their results, thus the whacking reference. Senator Fischer’s pick is hardly that of the litter, as for reasons unknown and mysterious she selected unknown pollster Torchlight Strategies, a repeated action on her campaign’s part, and they’ve obligingly found her having the lead over Mr Osborn, 48%-42%.
  

  ---

  Mr Osborn’s pollster is Change Research, which at least has a rating, but it’s a deeply unimpressive 1.4. Nor do they do much published work. They are giving Mr Osborn the lead, 46%-43%. Of course.

  ---

  So how to evaluate this? It’s almost impossible to say, except maybe Don’t evaluate it. I’m going to recognize this as dueling propaganda. Both sides are trying to convince their partisans that the race is still winnable, so come on out and vote. The implied message is entirely honorable.

  ---

  But if I were Nebraskan, I might be irritable. I dislike manipulation, and that’s the essence of this, to my mind.

• In case you wonder about Virginia, Republican challenger Hung Cao (R-VA), who seems to be a Democratic plant, is profiled here by Marc Fisher. If Cao is not a plant, then his approach to winning the seat is puzzling. Does he think a revolution will happen and put him in the seat? That a Trump victory is imminent and he’ll ride the coattails? Or is this a more devious strategy of gaining an objective by losing the race? I am puzzled.

Roll The Credits!

Nyah, too tired. Crank broke. Wife needs attention. Cat needs food.

Have a good weekend, folks.

In The Dash

Toxic narcissism is true not only for Mr Trump, but many of his followers as well:

The latest national NBC News poll found Donald Trump trailing Kamala Harris by 21 points among women voters. The good news for Republicans is that the former president is well aware of the gender gap. The bad news for Republicans is that he doesn’t know what to do about it. [Steve Benen, Maddowblog]

A twenty one point gap for the women voters – and that may be an underestimate. And it should be a red-light message to all the conservatives who still consider themselves good people and plan to vote Republican – a lot of people look at Trump and his associates and are repelled.

Oh, And This …

YouGov Oct. 6-7

49% Harris
45% Trump
1% Stein
0% West

Redfield & Wilton Strategies Oct. 6

48% Harris
46% Trump
1% Oliver
1% Stein

Pew Research Center Sept. 30-Oct. 6

48% Harris
47% Trump
2% Kennedy
1% Oliver
1% Stein
0% West

West is Independent Cornel West, Stein is Jill Stein of the Green Party, Oliver is Chase Oliver of the Libertarians. It doesn’t appear the et al will impact this election much. Data from here.

Proroguing:

Prorogation in the Westminster system of government is the action of proroguing, or interrupting, a parliament, or the discontinuance of meetings for a given period of time, without a dissolution of parliament. The term is also used for the period of such a discontinuance between two legislative sessions of a legislative body. [Wikipedia]

Or maybe suspension? Noted in “Boris Johnson just published his political memoir. It’s unbelievable.” William Booth, WaPo:

Given how Mr Trump dribbles out lies at every opportunity, I’ve come up with this:

Mendacity Machine.

“Tell me, do you really want me to vote for the Mendacity Machine? Will you be voting for the Mendacity Machine? Do your parents approve of voting for the Mendacity Machine.”

Playwrights are coached to use the name of a character thrice in order to implant it in the consciousness of the audience, and I’m pleased to note that three was easily achieved in the above passage.

Feel free to use it, folks.

Following along in the wake of Republican governors thanking President Biden for Federal assistance with Hurricane Helene is Rep Chuck Edwards (R-NC) and a praiseworthy press release, from which I extract the following (and mess up the numbering, apologies):

1. FEMA is NOT going to run out of money.
   1. FEMA officials have repeatedly affirmed that the agency has enough money for immediate response and recovery needs over the next few months.
      1. Secretary Mayorkas’ statement indicating otherwise was an irresponsible attempt to politicize a tragedy for personal gain.
   2. In the coming months, Western North Carolina is going to need more disaster relief funding than is currently available to assist with recovery efforts.
      1. I’m confident that supplemental disaster relief funding, which I am already involved in the process of creating, will be considered in the House once we return to session in mid-November.

There’s a lot of other good stuff. No, I do not know the story about any statement by Secretary Mayorkas, and how it’d be for personal gain. Frankly, the Republicans have tried to victimize the Secretary for his entire term, for no honest reason I can discern, and this may simply be another go at it.

But I could be wrong.

I went to bed last night with that feeling of a relentless tragedy about to happen, that everything is changing, as it does when close relatives pass away. Still got it this morning.

Is this what every hurricane season will be like in the future? Savage storms, the like of which have been unseen by humanity until now?

Maybe Milton will turn out to be a dud. I’d go with that.

From Julie Szego:

Hence, a fascinating, irreconcilable dispute, impossibly named Tickle v Giggle.

I wonder if we’re about to see a tidal wave of case names where the litigant names have been carefully chosen to be amusing.

Sounds totally frivolous.

My, the silt has accumulated quickly.

“I Didn’t Mean It When I Said …”

WaPo has a report on an unsurprising, but risky, change in Republican strategy for some House members, a change that can be anticipated to appear in Senate races, and in fact already has …

If I’m to believe Ryan Hall, Hurricane Milton, now a Category 5 hurricane forecast to impact the Tampa Bay, FL area on Wednesday, went from a disorganized mess in the Gulf of Mexico to a tightly organized, laser-like monster of a storm in just a couple of days, not forecast until then, when most hurricanes can be foreseen a couple of weeks out.

This is following Hurricane Helene, which devastated the Carolinas and provoked Erick Erickson into a barking madness. That was just last week.

This following days, months, and years of heat records for the entire world, during which Australia burned and heat waves affected most of the planet, and polar ice noticeably thinned and decreased.

Can this be considered convincing evidence that climate change is real, is human-originated, will not be resolved by any Divinity, and the cost of doing so just keeps going up the more we screw around arguing the matter?

Or is this how humanity exits stage left, screaming, pointing fingers, and inelegantly proclaiming innocence, as if there’ll be something to receive such self-important proclamations?

The reality of being a content-generator.

As a very long-time user of social media, it’s a necessity, in my opinion, to stop and think about any hidden agendas those writers – let’s not call them content-generators, eh? – you’re reading, that you don’t know on a personal level, may hold. Why? Let Senator Kelly (D-AZ), retired American astronaut, and retired American Navy Captain, tell you:

Senate Intelligence Committee member Mark Kelly warns of a “huge” misinformation campaign by foreign actors. After hearing from the FBI, DNI, and NSA, Kelly estimates that 20%-30% of the political content and comments on social media are generated by Russia, Iran, and China. pic.twitter.com/98Vwb44TWI

— Keith Boykin (@keithboykin) October 6, 2024

Senate Intelligence Committee member Mark Kelly warns of a “huge” misinformation campaign by foreign actors. After hearing from the FBI, DNI, and NSA, Kelly estimates that 20%-30% of the political content and comments on social media are generated by Russia, Iran, and China.

20-30% of political comment and contents is generated by our international adversaries? People who are not making honest arguments, providing factual information, discussing in proper American spirit – instead, poisoning the spirit of old-fashioned American discussion.

My readers, do you pause to consider this possibility before stepping into a discussion?

The Bob’s Burgers Movie (2022) is, essentially, and perhaps inevitably, a longer version of a Bob’s Burgers episode, but with better art and, if you pay attention to the characters, deeper character development.

And that’s about all I have to say, really. If you like the TV series, you’ll enjoy the movie, and if you don’t like nor watch the series, then the movie will make some sense, but quite a few references won’t.

And that’s OK. Enjoy.

But not by me.

We’ve taken to watching Ryan Hall, via YouTube, to get a view on the national weather scene, which can be important for anyone east of the Rockies.

Today, prior to his discussion of Milton, a Tropical Storm Cat 1 Hurricane that came together far more quickly than anyone predicted and is menacing Tampa, maybe, Hall did a nice PSA on the dangers of the Internet, and I rather liked it.

If you’ve not heard of Hall, give him a look.

Patagium:

The patagium (pl.: patagia) is a membranous body part that assists an animal in obtaining lift when gliding or flying. The structure is found in extant and extinct groups of flying and gliding animals including bats, birds, some dromaeosaurs, pterosaurs, gliding mammals, some flying lizards, and flying frogs. The patagium that stretches between an animal’s hind limbs is called the uropatagium (especially in bats) or the interfemoral membrane. [Wikipedia]

Goodness. That’s new. Noted in “The Colugo Looks Like a Cross Between a Bat and a Monkey, But Is Neither,” Joshua Rapp Learn, Discover:

Colugos can’t fly. Instead, they glide through the forest using a thin gliding membrane that covers their bodies – also known as a patagium. This membrane stretches from their neck down to the two sides of their tail, looking a little like a human in a wingsuit when they stretch it out and set sail on the winds.

If I were a Christian myself, I’d have to ask if Erick Erickson really thinks he’s a Christian after reading this:

A lot of people who think the government is a mess are upset that it has been slow to respond to Helene. Of course it has. What did you expect?

In fact, it was FIVE DAYS after the storm struck that Joe Biden really mobilized the government. The Southern Baptist Convention was already on the ground while the flood waters were still raging.

The government is not going to help you.

You think FEMA is a mess? You’re damn right it is.

After all, he’s not in a position to really evaluate. Indeed, it seems like he’s repeating the propaganda he’s been instructed to disseminate. Meanwhile, from CNN/Politics,

Republican South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster said at a Tuesday press conference that federal assistance had “been superb,” noting that Biden and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg had both called and told him to let them know whatever the state needed. McMaster added that the administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Deanne Criswell, had also called. He said, “So we’re getting assistance, and we’re asking for everything we need.”

Republican Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin said at a Monday press conference, “I’m incredibly appreciative of the rapid response and the cooperation from the federal team at FEMA.” He specifically thanked Biden, among others, in a press release the day prior.

Republican Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee said at a Wednesday press conference that the response to his emergency declaration “was quick from the federal government,” adding there was “a fast turnaround, frankly,” in making the state eligible for some federal reimbursements.

At a Tuesday press conference, Lee spoke of a “rush” of officials “from the federal to the state to the local, the local emergency management agencies, local county mayors with tears in their eyes out there serving their people. There is a great deal of hope when you see what is behind the effort, the coordinated effort, in this community to begin to rebuild.”

Once again, the people up against the wall vociferously disagree with the guy relaxing in his radio studio.

But there’s a bit more to this than just pointing out Republican mendacity and misrepresentations, again. Erickson’s penultimate paragraph:

The government will not save us. FEMA will not save us. We will save each other.

A simple deconstruction highlights an important, unspoken facet of the Republican mindset which is misaligned with our best ideals, and that’s this, which I’ll state through its negative: The government is not alien, it is not the other, it is not the enemy. Despite the literal decades of anti-government propaganda, often by those who wish to take illegal advantage of their fellow Americans, it is none of those things.

In a democracy, in a republic, the government is us. Us, as in we can run for office and help manage and direct the government. Us, as in, with proper qualifications, we can work for the government, from DOT to DOD. When Erickson says, We will save each other, he’s quite right. We will save each other through the agency of the government, as well as through volunteers.

And the rest is just arrogant bullcrap.

The Republican-endorsed (!) candidate for North Carolina’s superintendent of public instruction, Michele Morrow, via WaPo’s Dana Milbank:

Back in February, WaPo published an opinion article by a dude by the name of Travis Meier who is a member of that informal group who hates math, particularly in its abstract form:

There should be a Roadrunner joke here, but it ran away.

How About That Vice President Debate, Hey?

I indulged in malpractice and didn’t watch.

Given Mr Trump’s age and apparent mental difficulties, the debate may be more meaningful for voters than is usual. After all, Vance might be called upon to fill an important role if Trump/Vance wins in November.

But for the Senate races? If you believe voters are more likely to practice Party-line voting, then it matters. If you think voters are willing to split their ballots, then maybe it doesn’t. And if you think independent voters are knowledgeable enough to realize Vance is way out of the mainstream on American values, then this may have not convinced them of the point – but, if Vance does have to take over, another way to foil him is for the Republicans to fall further out of control of the Senate.

But the most important group in this election is the independents, and Politico observes this:

… Walz had a commanding advantage with independents, 58 percent of whom sided with the Minnesota governor while 42 percent gave Vance the edge.

Walz’s strongest ratings came from younger people, particularly those ages 25-34, those with college degrees, and Black and Latino respondents — all key components of the Democratic coalition that powered President Joe Biden’s victory over Donald Trump in 2020.

Vance, meanwhile, performed best with people over the age of 55, white voters and those without a college degree.

Which, I think, is as one might expect. The oldsters, moi excluded, lean more towards Trump, while the youngsters lean towards Harris.

The fact that Walz managed to win what he was expected to win, but not more, suggests the debate was about average. And that may not affect Senate races at all.

Who is AtlasIntel?

I’ve not heard of them before, but FiveThirtyEight is giving them a heady rating of 2.7, so, at least historically, they’re nobody to sneeze at.

However, given the results they’ve posted over the last few days, subtract the rating, and I’d say they’re just another conservative pollster skewing their results to keep the customer happy.

How to evaluate them? Keep an eye on the divergence of their results from respectable pollsters’ average. If they drift towards other reputable pollsters, figure they are adjusting models and these are just outliers. No movement relative to other pollsters? Then a determination cannot conclusively be reached until after the election; they may be conservative and skewing, or their models and adjustments are just wrong, or the other pollsters may simply be off and AtlasIntel is ahead of the pack.

For what it’s worth, here’s their website. This sounds like Intimidate the rubes! jargon to me:

Nationally representative polls conducted by AtlasIntel using its proprietary data collection technology and post-stratification algorithms.

But maybe it means something – I am not an expert on polls, stats and probability. I’m just an obsolete software engineer casting an eye over the Senate races without wasting too much … time. Excuse me, gotta run.

And Into The Dust Storm

• Starting a run of AtlasIntel (2.7) results, they believe that Rep Gallego (D-AZ) in Arizona has only a four point lead over Republican challenger and election-denier Kari Lake (R-AZ), 50%-46%. Note the link doesn’t appear to have Senate-level data; perhaps FiveThirtyEight made a mistake. A four point lead is at serious variance with other respectable pollsters, which range from 6 to 13 point leads. Four is probably on the edge of the margin of error, which might make Arizona Republicans feel a little better about picking Lake as their nominee. InsiderAdvantage (2.0), for comparison, gives Rep Gallego a more substantial 7 point lead, 50%-43%. And very respectable Emerson College (2.9) is having none of this tightening race claim in Arizona, giving Rep Gallego a 52%-41%.
  

  ---

  In the news, Laurie Roberts of azcentral notes the Republicans’ seem frantic to get the Green Party up on the debate stage for the Arizona Senate seat, which happens soon. The strategy seems to be splitting the vote on the left. The Republicans may like Kari Lake, but just about everyone else doesn’t think she has the right stuff, or so says Roberts.

• AtlasIntel (2.7) is either measuring the wrong race or has a major insight into polling as it says former Rep Rogers (R-MI) is beating Rep Slotkin (D-MI) by a substantial margin, 49%-44%, in Michigan, and then round it up to six as well. This is at serious odds with other pollsters, some of whom give Slotkin a double digit lead.And one of those other pollsters is top-rated The New York Times/Siena College (3.0), which is according Rep Slotkin a five point lead, 47%-42%, among likely voters. This pollster has had its own divergences from the pack, not to mention from liberal commentators, but this poll seems entirely plausible. Mitchell Research & Communications (2.4), another respectable pollster, if new to me, is giving Rep Slotkin a 49%-44% lead, which is none too large, but respectable. RMG Research (2.3), which generally has been trending conservative, breaks the mold here: a 49%-43% lead for Rep Slotkin, or six points.
  

  ---

  Down at the other end of the scale is Trafalgar Group (0.7 – and that’s not a typo), known to be aligned with the Republican Party, giving Slotkin and Rogers a tie at 47% apiece. I think I’m mentioning them for the laughs.

• AtlasIntel (2.7) doesn’t hesitate to knock sitting Senators down to size, either. In Nevada, after a run of polls that gave Senator Rosen (D-NV) such a large average lead over Republican Sam Brown (R-NV) that I stopped reporting the Nevada polls, AtlasIntel assesses the Senator a mere two point lead at 48%-46%. That strikes me as trying to haul a rogue dragon out of its cave with a mere silk thread, but we shall see. InsiderAdvantage (2.0) is giving Senator Rosen a lead of 49%-42% for comparison.
• AtlasIntel (2.7) is giving Senator Casey (D-PA) a two point lead over David McCormick (R-PA) in Pennsylvania, 47%-45%, which is not as unbelievable as some of their results, but is still on the far right side of the spectrum. OnMessage (1.1), sponsored by Republican-aligned Sentinel Action Fund, gives the Senator a one point lead at 45%-44%, but this pollster/sponsor pairing is awful if you want plausible results. Another known Republican-partisan pollster is Trafalgar Group (a laughable 0.7 rating, but maybe they’ve gotten … better?). which is measuring the Senator’s lead at 47%-46%. I only mention them so my reader may get a feel for how much … gunk … is flooding the zone. And then there’s Patriot Polling (1.1), new to me, giving the Senator a 51%-48% lead. Let’s finish up old PA with Emerson College (2.9), even if it does seem to be running a little to the right, and its assessment of 47%-45%, which seems out of the general range of respectable ratings in Pennsylvania. About a month from now we’ll find out.
• AtlasIntel (2.7) is still conceding Wisconsin Senator Baldwin (D-WI) a two point lead, 48%-47%, over Eric Hovde (R-WI?), but only because they’ve rounded their numbers up or down. This is another far right side of the spectrum scenario. The New York Times/Siena College (3.0) sees Senator Baldwin (D-WI) leading challenger Eric Hovde by a substantial margin, 50%-43%. The gap is even larger with observed right-leaning ActiVote (unrated), 54%-46%, but the implicit conclusion (54+46=100) that there are very few undecideds left in Wisconsin does concern me, especially when The New York Times/Siena College poll suggests 7% of the electorate is undecided. Add in the margin of error of ±4.9 points, and it’s hard to take them seriously. Finally, maybe just for laughs, Republican-aligned Trafalgar Group (0.7 – why do they bother?) also gives the Senator a two point lead of 48%-46%.
  

  ---

  If you’re wondering about Mr Hovde’s dark innuendos concerning the Senator, Bill Lueders of The Bulwark has a response and some of his own innuendos regarding Mr Hovde. Take home paragraph:

  But Baldwin’s greatest advantage is that she is well liked and respected in Wisconsin and known to be a hard worker. In 2023, her campaign tallied, she “attended or hosted nearly 150 community events and meetings with constituents” in 44 of the state’s 72 counties. (It’s unclear how she was able to do this while spending as much time as possible hanging out in a pricey New York condo, all the while regulating entire industries.)

• In Florida, Victory Insights (1.3 – yes, a bit paltry) gives Senator Scott (R-FL) a lead of 45%-44%, or a statistical dead heat, with former Rep Mucarsel-Powell (D-FL). If Victory Insights was highly rated I’d say Scott was in trouble. They also report that the state constitutional amendments on the ballot supporting abortion rights and marijuana legalization are highly popular. If so, those may push Mucarsel-Powell over the top. That is, if Scott and Mucarsel-Powell are still running a close race.
  

  ---

  Public Policy Polling (1.4), working for known Democrats-aligned Clean and Prosperous America, has a similar result for the Senate race, with Senator Scott leading 44%-43%. Given the poor pollster rating and the known bias of the sponsor, it’s difficult to give it much weight.Anchoring the other side of the quality and political spectrum, RMG Research (2.3, but take that with a grain of salt) gives Senator Scott a luxurious lead, 50%-44%. And, yes, the press release includes … was conducted online by Scott Rasmussen … I hope you like salt.

• In Ohio, The New York Times/Siena College (3.0) is giving Senator Brown (D-OH) a small lead of 47%-43% over challenger Bernie Moreno (R-OH). The Senator needs to hoof it a bit more. Note that the previous Ohio update had RMG Research (2.3) giving Moreno a two point lead. A 5-6 point swing is unlikely, so I have to wonder about RMG Research. Again.
• Texas Democratic partisans can continue to hope, as Public Policy Polling (1.4), working for known Democrats-aligned Clean and Prosperous America (CPA), see Senator Cruz’ (R-TX) lead down to two points, 45%-43%. Or they can conclude CPA is skewing the results of a weak pollster, depending on their level of cynicism. On the other end of this rope is unrated ActiVote, observed leaning rightwards, giving the Senator a larger lead of five points, 52%-48% (insert a song about “rounding” to a C&W tune here).
  

  ---

  RMG Research (2.3) is giving Senator Cruz a three point, 50%-47%, over Rep Allred. If RMG Research is skewing its data analysis, this race may be tighter than advertised.

  ---

  However, before indulging your cynical side, dear reader, consider this interview with Senator Cruz on right-wing cable news source Newsmax. It smacks of panic. Cruz may be wondering if the Republican message has become stale with Texas voters, by which I mean they may have come to realize it’s the message of grifters. Larger and larger applications of money may be insufficient to his needs.

• In lightly polled Missouri there’s what I consider to be an anomalous polling result: observed right-leaning ActiVote (unrated) is giving Senator Hawley (R-MO) the lead, but it’s only 54%-46%, or 8 points. Add in the ±4.9 point margin of error (or average expected error as ActiVote calls it), and then adjust for the possible skew of an apparent Republican-aligned pollster, and this race may have suddenly tightened up tremendously, as I speculated might happen in my last entry concerning Missouri. Or it may not. We need a high quality pollster to visit Missouri, check out the restaurants, etc.
• Speaking of, I’d sure love to have a good poll of Mississippi. Just sayin’.
• Is this shock turning into farce? Last time I mentioned Nebraska’s Fischer (R-NE, incumbent) vs Osborn (I-NE) contest, I said it’s the biggest shock of this campaign. But now we’re approaching farce territory as The Bullfinch Group, which is unknown and unrated, has a poll, sponsored by The Independent Center, giving Mr Osborn a 47%-42% lead over Senator Fischer. The last respectable poll, from SurveyUSA (2.8), gave Osborn a one point lead, a shock in what Republicans should have considered a safe race. Now I’m to believe it’s a five point lead?
  

  ---

  I think it’s best to neither believe nor disbelieve, but wait for a better pollster to do a poll. The pollster is unknown, and it’s a good bet the sponsor would like to see this result. It’s best to recognize the ambiguity of the situation.

  ---

  That said, I have to say I was gobsmacked that Chris Hayes, handed the chance to comment on the race that’s surprising him the most by Stephen Colbert the night of the VP Debate, picked the Texas Senate race. Sure, it’s important. It’d be a solid blow to a Texas Republican Party riddled with corrupt, or at least weak-willed, members (see TX AG Ken Paxton). It’d suggest that Texas is wavering. But the same could be said for Senator Scott (R-FL).

  ---

  But the real surprise, if it holds together, is the Nebraska race. No one, besides Osborn and maybe his team, saw this coming. Nebraska Republicans losing their grip on one of their Nebraska seats, with an incumbency advantage on top of that, will rattle some teeth loose.

• Only to be polite: Lake Research Partners (1.2) has Senator Cramer’s (R-ND) lead over Katrina Christiansen (D-ND) in North Dakota down to nine points, 49%-40%, in a poll I must have missed – it’s a bit old (Sept. 23-26). The verbiage on that report suggests it may have been sponsored by Christiansen, too. A more recent poll by WPA Intelligence (1.7) is much less encouraging, as Senator Cramer’s lead is 22 points at 51%-29%. Don’t take this entry too seriously, as I’m unconvinced Christiansen has a chance. Maybe a big pollster needs a vacation trip on the prairie to clarify the situation.

And The Monster Goes Swimming Down The Estuary

Anything to say? Bon Voyage? North Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming remain safe for Republicans? Don’t get sunburn?

I don’t normally republish Letters to the Editor of other publications, but this one is important enough to break that guideline. This is in WaPo, from a resident of Springfield, Ohio, which is the place cited by Mr. Trump and his running mate, Senator Vance (R-OH), claiming illegal immigrants have overrun the city and are eating cats and dogs, which has been called out as foul lies by the Mayor, who is Republican, and other officials. This is a partial quote:

You may have heard about dockworkers striking on the East and Gulf Coasts. The strike is about both wages/benefits and replacement of jobs by automation. On the latter subject, I thought this was interesting:

Traduce:

to speak maliciously and falsely of; slander; defame:
to traduce someone’s character. [Dictionary.com]

I may have seen traduce once, or even twice, before, but I fear I was ignorant of its meaning until moments ago. Noted in “THE CYBER SLEUTH,” Geraldine Brooks, WaPo:

The next time a politician or a pundit traduces the IRS, or JD Vance suggests firing half the civil service and putting in “our people,” consider whether a system that filled out its ranks with a new batch of political loyalists every four years would have the expertise of these dedicated, lifelong civil servants.