A team of energy researchers led by the University of Minnesota Twin Cities have invented a groundbreaking device that electronically converts one metal into behaving like another to use as a catalyst for speeding chemical reactions. The fabricated device, called a “catalytic condenser,” is the first to demonstrate that alternative materials that are electronically modified to provide new properties can yield faster, more efficient chemical processing. …
The catalytic condenser device uses a combination of nanometer films to move and stabilize electrons at the surface of the catalyst. This design has the unique mechanism of combining metals and metal oxides with graphene to enable fast electron flow with surfaces that are tunable for chemistry.
“Using various thin film technologies, we combined a nano-scale film of alumina made from low-cost abundant aluminum metal with graphene, which we were then able to tune to take on the properties of other materials,” said Tzia Ming Onn, a post-doctoral researcher at the University of Minnesota who fabricated and tested the catalytic condensers. “The substantial ability to tune the catalytic and electronic properties of the catalyst exceeded our expectations.”
It seems to be a programmable device to make one metal look like another, rather like Field Programmable Gate Arrays can be used to simulate a CPU or other device. OK, that’s a bit of a stretch, but it’s still cool.
Unless you’re a catalytic converter thief. But with electric vehicles being the future, they already knew their future is limited.
Mr. Greitens is running for the GOP nomination for the soon-to-be empty Senate seat in Missouri. In this ad, which may or may not also be on television, Greitens alienates all the moderate Republicans who might otherwise vote for him, and probably horrifies most of the independents.
No doubt, Greitens is trying to close the deal with the Missouri GOP base, but this could be a costly mistake, depending on who wins the Democratic primary, and how much support they get from the national Democrats.
Lefty Coaster on Daily Kos has put together a collection of tweets from the Texas GOP Convention that documents, among other issues, that Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) is the latest victim of the frantic rightward slide of the GOP, at least in Texas. Here’s one tweet:
Ted Cruz gets heckled and harassed by a right winger at TX State GOP Convention, who calls him a coward and a globalist, asks him how he can like Trump after he called his wife ugly, then finished with Cancun. pic.twitter.com/L1hEvN8nV5
— Ron Filipkowski 🇺🇦 (@RonFilipkowski) June 19, 2022
My long time readers will be unsurprised that Cruz is no longer a favorite of the far right of the GOP, but instead probably could not get nominated for the Presidency because he’s too … liberal.
But the other element of interest is the use of globalist as an epithet. While there’s certainly some legitimate concerns for unskilled and semi-skilled labor in a global market, and these should be addressed, it’s a bit ironic in a state that, because of its oil industry, has become as rich as any due to the global economy.
Isolationism connotes control, because one cannot control what’s happening on the other side of the world, and this increasingly jibes with the GOP, from its stance on abortion to the attempts of the GOP to punish those companies that don’t toe the Party line, to even their stance on guns – so long as they see guns as effective personal protection.
Which is mighty odd for a Party that is otherwise supposedly based on faith.
BIG SUNSPOT ALERT: Yesterday, sunspot AR3038 was big. Today, it’s enormous. The fast-growing sunspot has doubled in size in only 24 hours: movie. AR3038 has an unstable ‘beta-gamma’ magnetic field that habors energy for M-class solar flares, and it is directly facing Earth. [Spaceweather.com]
Costs are apparently quite high for cryptocurrencies – especially the human costs:
People are already losing their savings after buying into misguided hype. In Argentina, where inflation reached 61% this year, some hoped to protect their money by placing it in TerraUSD, a stablecoin pegged to the dollar. Then, when Terra entered a death spiral last month, they lost nearly all of it. “I invested in a stablecoin that today is worth $0.08,” one woman in Buenos Aires told Rest of World. “I feel sickened and helpless.” [“Crypto Crash Dashes Dreams In Latin America,” Alex Kantrowitz, Big Technology]
Quite disheartening. Will any of the crypto-community ride to the rescue of those discovering the risks of the cryptocurrency world the hard way?
I doubt it.
But …
If there’s a saving grace in the current meltdown, it’s that cryptocurrency proponents in Latin America haven’t yet convinced a critical mass of people to join them. So the crash has spared many. In Ecuador — where the switch to the dollar worked out well enough after the initial pain — it’s currently illegal to buy goods with Bitcoin, though you can buy Bitcoin as an investment. In El Salvador, where Bitcoin is legal tender, most people still don’t use it for transactions. “People don’t ask to pay with it,” said Nelson Rauda Zablah, an El Salvadorian journalist at El Faro. “There’s a lot of micro speculation going on there.”
Speculation in currency isn’t unknown, but when it’s the only thing happening, it suggests a real failure to meet the putative function.
Comments Off on The 2022 Senate Campaign: Pennsylvania
In Pennsylvania, it appears the Democrats have some hopes of flipping retiring Senator Toomey’s (R-PA) seat:
According to the poll, 46% of likely Pennsylvania voters said they would support Fetterman to represent the state in the Senate, while 37% said they would vote for Oz. Thirteen percent of respondents said they were undecided, while the rest said they would support other candidates. [Fox News]
There’s still time for Fetterman to stumble, but I suspect the guy is too canny. I rate this a likely Democratic pickup.
And then there’s this lady, who did most of her acting through her eyes. My Arts Editor called her “goat’s eyes.”
Pilot X (1937, aka Death In The Air) is a bit of an odd bird. On the one hand, it’s a clumsily constructed murder mystery in which all the killings take place via World War I style planes attacking their victims, also in World War I planes. The group of suspects, except for the tallish dude, are all World War I vets and practically visually indistinguishable from each other, even with two European pilots among them. Nor are they permitted to build sympathetic bonds with the audience, which means we are neither shocked when X’s identity is revealed, nor tragically affected by his murder of his victims. And this idiot doctor telephones someone to tell him he knows the identity of the murder, come quick! Yeah, he didn’t come quick enough. An irritating trope of the genre.
Yet, there are some positive elements. The special effects were surprisingly good for the era, in particular the guy who dies from his cockpit catching fire, an almost upsetting scene. The “stock footage” (according to Wikipedia) is actually fantastically well photographed for the era, including the planes fated to enter their terminal dives. And there was a scene in which time passing and alcohol being consumed was implied by just a few seconds of scene cutaways. However, that nice bit of cinematography was wasted, as I didn’t know who was drinking heavily, and why it mattered.
Most importantly, though, was the acknowledgment of PTSD (not so-named, of course, in a film of this age) being suffered by several of the suspect pilots. While the portrayal was perhaps a trifle hysterical – I recommended to my Arts Editor that one actor get dental work done after all the scenery chewing in response to PTSD – it was a note of reality that the military was, at the time, resistant to embracing.
All that said, I don’t recommend this unless you’re a big fan of those old planes and their crazy looking dogfights. I found the movie more than a little irritating.
The term fast fashion refers to a large sector of the fashion industry whose business model relies on cheap and speedy production of low quality clothing, which gets pumped quickly through stores in order to meet the latest and newest trends.
The term was first coined by the New York Times in the early 1990s when Spanish apparel giant Zara arrived in New York, to describe the brand’s mission to take only 15 days for a garment to go from the design stage to being sold in stores. Some of the biggest and most notable fast fashion brands in the world include the likes of UNIQLO, Forever 21 and H&M.
The fast fashion business model involves rapid design, production, distribution and marketing, allowing brands and retailers to pull large quantities of greater product variety and allow consumers to get more style and product differentiation at a low price.
However, a system that relies on such cheap and rapid production only encourages excessive consumption as people are inherently attracted to low priced goods, many of which are slaves to the latest trends. For individual consumers, it is also easier and more economic to snatch up cheap clothing that have short life spans compared to splurging on high quality, long lasting items that will very shortly fall out of popularity. [Earth.org]
A FRIEND of mine runs a vintage clothes shop in north London. Every few weeks, she visits a vast warehouse on the edge of the city to rummage through piles of discarded clothing. Most of it is worthless, but if you know what you are looking for, there are diamonds in the rough.
The warehouse has a long history. It was once a clearing house for the low-quality wool scraps called shoddy that were used to make cheap clothing for the masses in Victorian Britain. A century on, little has changed. Nowadays, it is full of modern-day shoddy: low-quality cotton, polyester, viscose and nylon, all in the form of cheap clothing made for the masses around the world. Except that this stuff is going to landfill and incinerators, not being reused.
The items are the products of an industry that, in the past 30 years, has become one of the most successful and also most destructive on the planet. Known as fast fashion, it has filled our wardrobes with cheap and cheerful clothes. But after three decades of remorseless growth, the model is butting up against fundamental environmental limits and there is widespread agreement – even from within the industry – that it is time to hit the brakes.
How about if we just get rid of fast fashion? Just have a negative, noticeable reaction everytime you sight someone wearing fast fashion. You’ll be punched only two or three times, I’m sure.
Cherisse Villanueva, 34, a pharmacy technician in Honolulu, said she knows more than 10 transgender people and believes society should be accepting of them. “Everybody’s human regardless of how they feel or what they were born with,” she said.
But Villanueva said she does not believe that transgender girls and women should compete against cisgender ones. “Not to be mean, but biologically they’re built like a male, even though they identify as female … so of course they would have the advantage of winning.” Villanueva, a tennis player, added that she is “already intimidated when we play co-ed tennis and there’s a male on the other side.”
Villanueva said she didn’t know how to resolve the question of mental health repercussions for transgender female athletes who are not allowed to compete against other women and girls. “This issue is such a dilemma,” she said. “It’s hard to make it equal.”
That seems both typical and acceptable to me. Resolving such questions is why we have debate and discussion, rather than people running around screaming “bigot!”
Steve Benen is upset that Jim Marchant has won the GOP nomination for Nevada Secretary of State, which is responsible for state elections:
As unhinged conspiracy theorists go, Marchant is not a casual advocate of ridiculous ideas. On the contrary, the Nevadan has been an enthusiastic proponent of discredited nonsense. The report added:
Marchant told NBC News then he would not have certified the 2020 election if he had been the secretary of state. He also said that he wouldn’t rule out, if he was to hold the office in 2024, advocating for an alternate slate of Trump electors if Trump were on the ballot. (Marchant pushed for an alternate slate in 2020.)
If elected, the Republican also intends to eliminate early voting, voting by mail, and all electronic voting machines — not because Nevada has a history of problems in any of these areas, but because Marchant is fully committed to a Trump-inspired vision.
At one point during his statewide primary campaign, Marchant went so far as to argue, “Your vote hasn’t counted for decades. You haven’t elected anybody. The people that are in office have been selected.”
Here’s the thing: if Marchant is elected to his sought-after position, he’ll be under the spotlight. He wants to eliminate voting machines and early voting? Fine. Count the votes by hand, and Nevada can look bad when their results are the last in.
And if the results are in line with polls and previous elections, he gets a stronger reputation as a breathless, hair-on-fire conspiracy theorist.
That’s where things get interesting. These folks come with their own dollop of ego, and in order to protect his ego, Marchant may decide to indulge in what he’s claiming is happening – a bit of corruption.
Of course, this is a tricky business. Corruption is a well-studied phenomenon, and its detection is not an impossible task. Add in the fact that Marchant, through his campaign tactics thus far, has a less-than-stellar reputation. The most successful corrupt people are those with great reputations, typically, with a charismatic – or so I’m told – like Trump a standout exception. Depending on how you define that a nation recognizes a corrupt personality, of course.
So Marchant would then enhance the reputation of Trumpists as a pack of disreputable grifters.
And maybe Marchant discovers “something.” I personally give that a 1% chance of happening, given the surveillance that many institutions apply, but I’ll give it a 1% chance. Then that’ll be interesting, and good for the nation, too.
There’s certainly risk if Marchant wins election, but generally this seems more win-win to me. Especially since he’ll discredit the Trumpists even more.
Comments Off on Third Televised Meeting Of The Jan 6th Panel
I just finished reviewing the third televised meeting of the January 6th panel. It’s becoming clear that the Republicans divide into two camps: those who are old-line, intellectual, loyal to the Constitution, and the new Republicans, loyal to the guy who gave them their positions, perhaps believing their own propaganda concerning the ‘evil’ Democrats, and … not particularly bright. Given the statements of and critiquing Professor Eastman, whoever awarded him that doctorate should be ashamed and reverse the conferral, and that appears to be Claremont Graduate School.
But long-term readers should not be unsurprised.
I also observed, in the montage clip of the actual violence at the Capitol, that I think the rioters were quite earnest in their beliefs concerning the theft of the election.
A Baptisia of Hope.
But, and this is important, sincerity is not an excuse. Just as easily resolvable ignorance is generally not considered to be an excuse for committing crimes, an inability to understand and think rationally about the political and legal system we use to keep ourselves in a relatively peaceful and prosperous ways is not optional. It is a duty for Americans. Understanding the philosophical concerns of corruption and its negative impacts on society, the competing concerns of government of Law vs Man, the importance of specialization, and recognizing that ‘common sense’ is rarely applicable when it comes to technical issues concerning, say voting, is, or should be, necessary to an American’s informal education. That is, they should go and seek it out.
These are so important that now people are going to jail because they didn’t pay attention, and did not learn to be rational. They are non-rational actors who allowed themselves to be used, and are now paying, or going to pay, the price: punishment of various and unpleasant sorts.
We can call it a failure of education, but, really, this may be deliberate malpractice by portions of society. We need to find a solution.
In zoology, a folivore is a herbivore that specializes in eating leaves. Mature leaves contain a high proportion of hard-to-digest cellulose, less energy than other types of foods, and often toxic compounds. For this reason, folivorous animals tend to have long digestive tracts and slow metabolisms. Many enlist the help of symbiotic bacteria to release the nutrients in their diet. Additionally, as has been observed in folivorous primates, they exhibit a strong preference for immature leaves, which tend to be easier to masticate, tend to be higher in energy and protein, and lower in fibre and poisons than more mature fibrous leaves. [Wikipedia]
Noted in “The Bizarre Beast with Claws on Its Wings,” Bizarre Beasts:
I love what its chicks do when danger appears, too.
I meant to get to this yesterday, but it appears crypto is beginning to encounter headwinds. Remember my mention of Coinbase’s volume now being dominated by institutional players? They may be entering a time of difficulty:
Crypto exchange Coinbase is laying off 18% of its employees as the digital currency market continues to crumble.
CEO Brian Armstrong said in an open letter Tuesday that the “difficult decision” to lay off about 1,000 employees was made to ensure “we stay healthy during this economic downturn.” The exchange has more than 4,900 employees, according to its website.
Armstrong warned of a looming economic downturn that could extend the latest bear market for crypto.
“We appear to be entering a recession after a 10-plus year economic boom,” Armstrong wrote. “A recession could lead to another crypto winter, and could last for an extended period.” [CNN/Business]
If Coinbase goes under, what does that do to the institutional players? Who gets really hurt?
Speaking of value, has Bitcoin recovered from our last check?
That would be “No“. While it’s not a mad rush to get out of bitcoin, the leading cryptocurrency, there’s also a decided lack of recovery.
And I have to wonder how much of a cascade of damage happens if cryptocurrencies crash badly. Remember NFTs? Their doesn’t seem to be much of an alternative to trading them in crypto, unless you’re going old-fashioned barter.
Which seems quite silly when it comes to computer digital artifacts, doesn’t it?
First, if you’re going to put an age of 28 or so as a minimum to exercise a constitutional right, you’re going to have to make that the age of majority. Personally I agree with you that common sense doesn’t really start to kick in for many people until that age. Ain’t gonna fly though. We probably were wrong to drop it from 21 to 18, but unless you’re willing to undo that, this is a non starter.
I absolutely agree that it’s almost certainly a non-starter. But I do think it’s good to have discussions about “impossible proposals,” as they can lead to important insights, and sometimes “impossible” isn’t.
As to “that the universe of accessible guns to these minors will decrease if the general proposal were to be enacted” that’s also foolish. There are far more firearms in the US than people, and that universe is expanding all the time. Approximately 40 million firearms were purchased in 2020 alone, 28 million in 2019.
But these are fluid facts. Say we pass such a proposal. Tomorrow, yeah, no real effect on the universe of accessible guns. Day after? Day after that? The universe is shrinking. Maybe we cut off the supply of ammunition, too. All of a sudden the universe’s visible edge isn’t 12 billion light years, but just Mars’ orbit.
The point is that saying the problem is just too hard to solve doesn’t make it so. We’e a clever people, aren’t we? The first step, maybe, is to pass the appropriate laws, and then find ways to fulfill the goal.
Riddle me this: If the proliferation of firearms is the root of firearm violence, how come that peaked fully 30 years ago despite there being far more firearms in the US today? We focus on isolated incidents and let emotions rule our decisions rather than intellect. What we are seeing now is the typical knee jerk reaction with myriad proposals that will make no difference in crime or violence, but will impact ordinary citizens with neither criminal history nor criminal intent.
I have a better riddle: why does banning private ownership of automatic weapons work in Europe but won’t work here?
I see my reader’s riddle as a bit of a non-sequitur. Why? Because automatic weapons in the hands of one, or a few, homicidal people are an example of a non-linearsystem. Put an automatic weapon in the hands of a maniac and do they kill one other person? No. They kill a dozen. Two dozen. Sixty in Las Vegas. Give the Las Vegas dude a .38, or even a few, and let him pepper the crowd, and maybe he gets a half dozen before the cops break the door down and stops him.
Recognizing that one person with an automatic can kill dozens in an hour isn’t being knee-jerk, it’s recognizing a reality and coming up with a response. A debate like this is part of the process. My rejoinder is this: why should a very dangerous weapon, with which tragic mishaps are not unknown, and which has no plausible, appropriate function beyond novelty for the private citizen, be owned by a species of creature known to lose its temper – or worse. There are many things we can and do own that are dangerous, yes, but they also have legitimate functions. For example, the herbicide RoundUp, which I cite because farmers who use it are, or at least were 25 years ago, required to register with BATF. Or get licensed. I’m too lazy to look it up, but I do remember chatting with a farmer about it, and he wasn’t happy. We’re more careful, societally speaking, with RoundUp, a potential ingredient for bombs, than with automatic weapons. And given the Oklahoma City bombing, maybe that’s appropriate. Maybe.
My reader continues:
Also, this piqued my interest: ” … madness of permitting private ownership of weapons of war…” What weapons of war would those be? I’ve thought about it but can’t figure it out. Usually I’m pretty good with puzzles but this one has me stumped.
I cite Admiral James Stavridis (US Navy, Retired):
Comments Off on The 2022 Senate Campaign: South Dakota’s A Competition
Just as Bedrock Press was about to close the books on South Dakota’s Senate Race, a member of the Democrats has stepped forth to challenge incumbent Senator Thune (R):
It’s official! I am the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate in South Dakota!
One person is not entitled to a U.S. Senate seat for a quarter-century. I will hold Thune accountable for his votes that hurt the middle class.
Can you Like, RT, & Follow to help me get 25k this week?
— Brian Bengs for U.S. Senate (@BrianBengs) June 13, 2022
I can’t say much good about announcing one’s candidacy on one of the crappiest social platforms on the Web, but Ballotpediaconfirms the nomination.
And, you know what? There’s one serious question that comes to mind here:
Would former President Trump, who reportedly hates Senator Thune, endorse Bengs? What would the South Dakota GOP base make of that?
Comments Off on Second Televised Meeting Of The Jan 6th Panel
I finished viewing yesterday’s second meeting of the January 6th panel earlier today (here’s my reaction to the first). I’ll skip a summary, because my readers should really be watching it themselves, but I will say that the strategy of using the testimony of Republicans, in person and on tape, is effective – if you’re already inclined to agree that the former President was trying to pull a coup.
If you don’t, then it’s more than easy enough to use the RINO approach to rationalize your continued support for the former President. Simply label those testifying as former Republicans and/or traitors to the Republican cause, consign them to the oblivion already containing those lyin’ Democrats, and, there, your feelings are safe from abuse.
The panel is using a very straightforward and almost hammer like approach, putting forward facts, supporting them, and then moving to the next supposition. Again, if you’re not a Trump adherent, it’s very effective and filled with gravitas. But, because it’s testimony and not, say, chunks of undeniable quartz, those who predicate their self-respect on Trump won’t believe it.
The Panel might have used a different approach, although I don’t know what that might be. The problem is that this isn’t an interactive presentation in which the Trumpists can be drawn into a discussion and have their reasoning dissected – and asked how it feels to be a mark.
But I worry that, while this may result in indictments by the DoJ, and maybe even imprisonment, it’ll just leave the Trumpists feeling disenfranchised – rather than more properly taken advantage of by Trump and his cronies.
Reading Erick Erickson’s latest non-subscription post carefully, it’s hard not to see the right-wing pundit camp getting a little desperate, trying to persuade the base to not pay any attention to the big show happening in Washington this week, all while Cheney buries the hatchet right between Trump’s eyes. Erickson’s particular schtick is to appear reasonable, right-wing, and reassuring.
So he says …
Don’t use “groomers” for school teachers, but … Follow LibsofTikTok and you’ll see how many young teachers really are trying to groom and indoctrinate kids.
Yes, January 6th was a terrible thing. People believed lies and did some terrible things and threatened other terrible things, like hanging VP Pence. BUT … his own base is angry at him. He claims Georgia proves this – with no mention of Herschel Walker. I’ll talk about Pennsylvania later. Implication: they, meaning his readers, must be good for doing better than Trump, who can’t move on from his loss. Because he knows the base is moving on?
In fact, the poor quality of Trump’s advisors is sinking him. Don’t mention Trump picks his advisors.
But … “only people in the press and Democrats truly do care passionately and obsessively about January 6th.” An undercount, and a handwave – he wants his audience to believe there was never any danger. None! And thus the Republicans are absolved of any sin. Nevermind the irrational decisions coming out of the Republican-controlled SCOTUS of late, of obsessive gerrymandering that’s left the Republicans in charge of 26 of the 50 State legislatures, meaning a disputed Presidential election thrown to the House would be decided in favor of the Republican candidate. Sure, maybe the military steps in, as he claims – and that leaves US, the leading light of democracy, as just another banana republic, the military playing a reluctant political role. We’re down the path of instability … but it’s the Democrats who are hysterical! Really! Because they’re, ah, obsessive! Oh, let’s not talk about guns here, they must be irrelevant as well. Should I be mailing Erickson a flak jacket?
A vague claim that Democratic state AGs are refusing to defend lawfully passed acts. What are they? Was it really lawful, or are they blatantly un-constitutional? But it’s those bad old Democrats and liberals, not obeying the law. Surely those conservatives who rushed the Capitol were law-abiding, eh?
Yes, it’s sad that “… a man showed up to kill Justice Bret Kavanaugh and most of the major press ignored or buried it.” Except, sadderr to say, that sentence is wrong. He showed up, realized his meds weren’t working, walked away from Kavanaugh’s home and his own weapons, and called for help. The cops came and arrested him without a fuss. How is this an assassination attempt? “A mentally ill man showed up at Justice Bret Kavanaugh’s residence, realized he, the man, was ill, called for help, which was rendered, and nothing happened.” What, you want that splashed across the headlines? I’d be more impressed if he condemned the demonstrations in front of Kavanaugh’s home, which I think is beyond the pale.
Along with this is a complaint about “pregnancy centers,” an unfortunate visual no matter how you parse it, being vandalized. I’d sure like to know if right wing press carries reports on Planned Parenthood attacks and protests, or bombings of Islamic community centers, which happened right here in MN – bombing, investigation, arrest, trial, and imprisonment. I’d sure hope the perpetrators of all these get arrested and jailed.
Climate change is a hoax or something! Frack! Drill, baby, drill – but don’t mention Biden releasing supplies from the strategic oil reserves, because that’d let the bad guys off the hook. No fair being balanced and fair, or some such slop like that. Biden’s responsible for all of this – not, say, reduced demand due to the pandemic, some plants shutting down for repairs & maintenance, and, uh, what’s that other thing? OH YEAH – P U T I N ‘ S WAR. With Putin backed by so many Republicans, too! Must be fun! But it’s all about Erickson’s conviction that he knows more about climate science than those goofy scientists, because, oh, look another hand wave.
That hand wave is inflation! It’ll be just like Wiemar because it’s just gotta be! Soon we’ll be using wheelbarrows to cart our money to the gas stations to buy that gas!! Yeah?
The sad part is that, yeah, the Democrats do have problems. But just reading Erickson’s responsibility-ducking, keep the audience happy screed reminds me that the Republicans are still doing worse than the liberals, neither side is paying a lot of attention to the liberal democracy model of politics, anything any extremist on either side is thrust aside in the name of racism or God, depending on the make of extremist.
Oh, and that Pennsylvania mention? It’s so good of you to remember:
In Pennsylvania, Trump voters are increasingly angry that Trump endorsed the fringe GOP candidate who is now the GOP gubernatorial nominee when a long-time, loyal Trump congressman was preferable. But that guy, Congressman Barletta, was unwilling to bitterly cling to the stolen election fantasy and chose to campaign about Pennsylvania’s future, not Trump’s past.
I think the rope just broke. Oz was selected as the nominee by the GOP, aka Trump voters. They’re also angry? Now, maybe the McCormick voters are mad, but that’d be at Oz and, perhaps, Barnette, for taking away the votes that might have let the possibly more-electable McCormick win. I actually am not sure if he is more electable.
But I think Erickson’s analysis of the PA GOP is wish fulfillment to distract his audience.
