Wednesday, November 30, 2016

The Road From True-Believer to Pragmatism

I registered as a Democrat in 2001, largely for two reasons- one was that everyone in my family was, so it was just a matter of habit, but the second reason was the stolen 2000 Election. I was so disgusted by Kathleen Harris, the Butterfly Ballots, the purging of voters on the rolls, and all the other shenanigans that Jeb Bush pulled to deliver Florida to his brother that I actually had a reason to join the Democratic Party, as opposed to many generational members who do so, and find later they don't like it.

I quickly got involved in the political process though, and stayed in the process, after 9/11. My reaction to the horrible events, not far from home, was not like most of the country's- I went anti-war left. I got out my peace sign shirts, I went to protests, and I joined the campaign of an anti-war, union leader candidate for Congress by my college. He didn't win, which was disappointing, but it did teach me a lot. I was at an age where very often passions control the actions of politically minded people, but also was truly motivated by the well-being of my friends- friends who went to Iraq and lost limbs, and sometimes their minds. The entire war was built on a series of lies and half-truths, and the fact that our nation's leaders had made peace with that still bothers me to this day.

Admittedly, professional politics changes a person. You learn to accept certain things that you wouldn't otherwise, and you give more room for candidates to stray from liberal or conservative orthodoxy than activists do. That is often times portrayed as a bad thing, a sell-out, by people who stay "outside" of the process. "Political maturity" as they say, is the point when you sell out your values. They are incorrect though, in a major way. The "political maturity" of which they speak, the point when you allow for compromise with the other side and political leaders to not always do what you want, is the point at which you move from complainer to do'er in politics.

Not a single major political achievement in our history was done perfectly. The Civil Rights movements' early victories in the 1960's were not perfect legislatively, but they were vast improvements that were made better over time. The Affordable Care Act is indeed imperfect, but is a vast improvement over the previous health care system. The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 should have provided paid leave for all workers, but the legislation has helped millions. In the case of any major legislative victory, from the 2009 Stimulus to the passage of Social Security into law, compromises are made. Congress used to horse trade votes, and we pretend that's an awful thing now, but that's how bridges get built, workers get hired, and problems get solved. You don't have the Civil Rights victories of 1964 without MLK's "I Have a Dream Speech" at the Lincoln Memorial, but you also don't have it without LBJ's deal-making in Congress.

In short, politics and governing require that sometimes you have to take one step back to take two steps forward. Purity is not a virtue. Purity is something that leads to gridlock- because if both parties are pure in their ideology, then neither can make the kinds of deals you have to in order to get things done. The Republican Party decided after 2008 to become purely ideological. They invited in the Tea Party protesters. They raged against the norms, they refused to work with this President, they committed to his destruction. Yes, it won them elections, and on matters from education reform to ending Medicare, they will have the chance to do what they want in 2017. On the other hand, it has completely changed the identity of their party, and given rise to Donald Trump. Sure, they can win elections, but only by embracing walls on our Southern border and bans on Muslim travel. The Republican Party is now an unbridled conservative party, one that has no adults to insist on the norms being respected. As a result, they saw all of their elected candidates overtaken by a demagogue. It is victory, but the party that won is not even the extreme right-wing party that left the White House in 2009- it is something far louder, angrier, and unchecked than before.

For me, the road from anti-war warrior to pragmatic liberal began during the 2008 election, and accelerated with the 2008 economic crash and inauguration of President Obama. President Obama did a lot of things as President that I would never have accepted in early 2007- a surge in Afghanistan, bailing out the banks and automakers, not re-instituting Glass-Steagall, a more measured withdrawing from Iraq, acceptance of almost all of the Bush tax cuts, not getting rid of No Child Left Behind, not repealing the Patriot Act in full- to name a few. Today though, I admire President Obama as one of the greatest leaders of my lifetime, and in American history. It is a huge leap politically for me, but it's a leap based on achievement- the Iran Deal, the ACA, Dodd-Frank, normalizing relations with Cuba, unprecedented investment in renewable energies and infrastructure- to name a few things. Yes, Barack Obama had to accept limitations to his ability to govern and lead, but the reward of that is that he improved America as President, greatly.

Making change is hard, much harder than complaining. I guess it's frustrating to reach this point in my political being at a time when the anti-establishment forces on the left and right are selling people the idea that change is easy, and we just need to want it more. I started to actually understand politics around 1994, the Gingrich Revolution, and I've seen how hard progress is. I saw that marching in the street in 2002 didn't get rid of George W. Bush or his war in 2004, and that the harsh compromise of giving up the "Public Option" was part of President Obama passing the ACA in 2010. I've seen movements for minimal gun controls and a living wage have met fierce federal resistance, despite popular support and massive demonstrations in the streets. The idea that any one candidate and their movement will sweep into power and cause a "revolution" that changes Washington, and sweeps their ideals into office, is ridiculous to me. If that were possible, we'd have saved the world by now.

Being a pragmatist isn't always fun. It's certainly not the cool thing to be right now. There are times where it can be a trap- for instance, we shouldn't give President Obama room right now for not intervening in the Dakota Access Pipeline situation. On the other hand, we should not have been tough on him for taking the version of the ACA that he got to his desk- while not perfect, that was clearly a good bill, as industry insiders wanted to roll back it's regulations immediately. The point is that part of it means knowing the difference, and knowing when to say when. It's been a long road to get here, but I'm glad that I did.

Tuesday, November 29, 2016

Drain the Swamp? Yeah, About That...

Donald Trump ran for President as a real outsider, a developer from New York (no, really), not an every day, career elected politician. He promised to change Washington by "draining the swamp." How's he doing?

Today he named Elaine Chao as his Secretary of Transportation, wife of Mitch McConnell and former Labor Secretary. Yesterday it leaked out that he was naming Rep. Tom Price to lead HHS. When he's not naming people with extensive Washington resumes, he's naming Wilbur Ross to lead Commerce, Betsy Devos to lead Education, and Ben Carson to lead HUD, all very rich Republicans with decidedly traditional Republican ideological views. When he's not naming DC insiders or millionaires and billionaires, he's naming Nikki Haley, South Carolina's Governor, to lead the UN. It is entirely a team of people deeply engrossed in right-wing politics, and typically with decidedly right-wing, traditional views. Price wants to end Obamacare and Medicaid as we know it. Ross used to run a mining company that had plenty of unsafe conditions for their workers. Devos opposes public schools and wants to enact vouchers. Carson ran for President as a Christian Conservative favorite. Haley was a class of 2010 governor, and governed in the spirit of the Tea Party. I could go on. There's nothing new or different here.

It's not just the picks he's made either. People like Rudy Giuliani, a total has-been Mayor of New York, and Mitt Romney, the 2012 GOP Nominee for President, are still out there, not to mention the ultimate swamp-creature, Newt Gingrich. He could still go with Chris Christie for something too, presuming he's not putting him in prison for angering his son-in-law.

While Donald Trump distracts America with bizarre tweets alleging voter fraud, threatening to take away the citizenship of people, and attacking reporters, he's basically putting together a standard Republican Administration, with all the normal characters. Donald Trump isn't going to "Make America Great Again," or even really break from the stated and enacted policies of George W. Bush.

Congratulations America- you've been had.

Happy Tuesday

Monday, November 28, 2016

Re-Counts Aren't Going to Change the Result, But....

Donald Trump is going to be inaugurated as the 45th President at noon on January 20th, 2017. I don't believe anything other than his own health can prevent that now, for what it's worth. You're not going to make up 70,000 votes in Pennsylvania with a standard re-count. You're probably not going to make up the 10,000 vote margin in Michigan, for that matter. What i'm basically saying in short is that the election results aren't going to change because of Jill Stein's publicity stunt.

This is by no means a good reason to stop doing it though. If you follow Donald Trump on Twitter, or just go to his page like I do, you will see how this recount is making the man completely unhinged. He is lashing out, making up outlandish conspiracies, and undermining the very election that elected him. If you don't want Trump re-elected, or future versions of Trump to be elected, then having him meltdown pretty regularly is a good strategy. If having a re-count bothers the guy who is putting a white supremacist in his White House, then I say have re-counts everywhere.

There is a second reason though to be more interested in this though, and that is the oddity of Trump's victory. David Wasserman at Redistrict and the folks at the Cook Political Report have been maintaining a popular vote tracker, both at the national level, and in all 50 states plus DC. There results show some interesting stuff. They defined "swing" states as those that changed hands from 2012 to 2016, or those that were within 5% in the final results. In those 13 swing states, Donald Trump won by about 830,000 votes, a 48.4-46.6% margin. In the other 37 states and DC, Clinton won by over 3,000,000 votes, a 48.9-45.5% margin. The overall national vote gives Clinton a 2.23 million vote lead, a 48.2-46.5% lead right now. Turnout was up in Pennsylvania, Florida, North Carolina, Arizona, and Colorado, to name a few. Turnout was down in Iowa, Ohio, and Wisconsin. Turnout on the national level was higher than in 2012. The results are peculiar in only that the "swing" voters in the "swing" states seemed to move exactly opposite to the other 37 states. There is nothing in the tracker that screams "RE-COUNT!"

So, should we do it? Yes, of course there should be a re-count. Donald Trump's victory is among the most odd victories in American history. You have to go back more than a century to find someone lose as badly as he did in the popular vote, but still win the electoral college. Beyond that, his electoral college victory gave him over 300 electoral votes, something that seems almost statistically impossible for having lost the popular vote that bad (I said almost- it's not impossible). His distribution of votes was perfectly placed in places like Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. It's pretty amazing, and given the level of disbelief over it, a second count won't hurt if the disbelievers are willing to pay for it.

Is it odd that he won with his voters being in exactly the right places? Sure. Re-counts won't change that though. If you were to believe that this election were stolen, and if you were to believe that this result were illegitimate, you'd need to prove a mass problem with machines in a state (malware infecting the machines and changing votes type of stuff), which isn't going to be proven in a count. If it were true, it would also really undermine our entire system of voting and force a real look at our democracy. I personally don't think it's 100% impossible, but I think it's extremely unlikely.

Even so, I think it's worth going through. If it makes people feel better about the results, count twice. If it makes Donald Trump act like the crazy man he is, re-count a third time. Nothing will change, but it will make life a little better in America for a few people, so go with it.

No, I'm Not Getting Your Stupid Text Messages

Ok, this is getting out of hand- so I might as well blog about it, right?

In October, I made the somewhat conscious (as much as anything was conscious then) decision to change my notifications settings on my cell phone. I turned off my notifications for Facebook and for text messages. I already have my phone set to vibrate, so essentially I took away the three most common "alerts" I would get on my phone. The decision has had mixed implications, but I prefer it overall. I have many more notifications when I go into the Facebook app (the norm now is 12-15), and the same is true for text messages (I had 107 texts in my phone tonight when I looked), both of which suck. Here's the other side of that coin though- That's about 200 times a day my phone would buzz, or i'd have to go through and pick which messages I wanted notifications for, which is a pain. Now? I get none of them. It's still there when I want to read them, but that's it.

The main reason I did this was productivity. I wanted to spend less time flipping my phone around, trying to read the latest notification, and more time working. That may seem like a novel concept, but things were out of hand. Group texts with 64 messages, Facebook threads with 10 replies, and really none of this was pertaining to my day-to-day needs. It was a lot of discussion about things that weren't integral to doing work. It was stuff I need to be saving for when I have down time, not occupying my most important times in the day.

There is a down side- i'm responding to people much slower, and with much less frequency. I'm forgetting things that don't pertain to work or potential work, and sometimes neglecting people who I usually haven't neglected in the past. I've had a few complaints, some on the absurd side, and some not. I had one person go crazy last night that I hadn't responded to her about hanging out this week- oops. I realize that other people don't like this at all, and why should they? I'm less responsive than I was.

I guess the only response I have is this- too bad. I need to get my face out of my cell phone, and stop worrying about every buzz I get. Some need to be responded to, and I'll get better at that. I'm not living for my phone though, even if that causes me some temporary pains. It sucks, but the only other option is eventually needing to turn it off for a week or something so I can unplug, and I have no interest in doing that right now. So, this will have to do.

So, no, I didn't read that text. I'll get back to you sometime soon though.

Congratulations America- You Elected an Idiot Man-Child

Seriously, can we have a chat for a second. This is the status of the next President of the United States:
Last week, the Washington Post reported that President-elect Donald Trump had only received two classified intelligence briefings since election day — a number they said was “notably lower” than the amount received by his predecessors at this point in the transition period.
In an interview on CNN’s State of the Union Sunday, host Dana Bash asked Trump spokeswoman Kellyanne Conway about the allegation.
Conway did not deny the Post’s report, but instead stressed that in addition to the (limited) intelligence briefings he has received, the President-elect is “receiving information through his personal and on-the-phone meetings with over what’s now 41 world leaders.”
Ok, so the President-elect of the United States isn't taking his intelligence briefings from our national security experts, he's "receiving information" from foreign leaders, some of which I presume are business leaders, and not heads of state. Great, wonderful, outstanding! Never mind that we have a massive, expensive, and actually fairly good national security community in the United States, let's just work off of whatever Vladimir Putin says.

Then, of course, there's this madness...


So now, the President-elect of the United States is baselessly asserting that the election he won had massive fraud, in his efforts to discredit a recount of his victories in three specific states, and calls to audit the vote. First off, logically his argument is one you'd make if you were calling for a national recount and audit of the vote. Second off, no one associated with the Clinton campaign is out there saying the results have any chance of being overturned. Third- this is the President-elect of the United States, throwing a temper-tantrum on Twitter because people are hurting his feelings. Seriously. He has absolutely no evidence of millions of voters voting illegally, he has no evidence that those states cheated, and he has no real reason to be throwing around crazy accusations like this- he's going to be sworn into office on January 20th. For him to throw dirt on our electoral system is idiotic, and frankly makes no sense to a normal President-elect who just won under this system. But, this is not normal times, and the Lord only knows what this man is thinking.

Then.... there's this:


Can we start with the obvious here- she's not just talking out her rear here. Kellyanne Conway is either speaking under instructions, or she is the most rogue actor we've all ever seen in politics. So, let's be honest, she's speaking under instruction. This appears to be an open effort to have suckered Romney into the mistake of visiting Trump during the transition, acting like he was in play for Secretary of State, and now setting him up for complete and total public humiliation, which is the M.O. of this crew so far. All the talk about how Trump "won't prosecute" Hillary Clinton for crimes she's already cleared of is semi-ridiculous, given that Presidents don't prosecute people, but it succeeds in making her look guilty, and making Trump look like a man of clemency. Same here, where Trump gets to invite Romney to see him, act like he's really considering him, and then they put him through the public humiliation of either apologizing in public, being "shot down" by Trump's base, or worse yet, both. They will systemically make Trump appear to be showing mercy to his fierce rivals from 2016, while also making them look weak, corrupt, criminal, or just like losers in general. This is also not normal at all. George W. Bush didn't even do this to Al Gore or John Kerry, for what that's worth.

We are about to enter into the governance of an ignorant man-child, born with a silver-spoon in his mouth, who ran and won on the "uneducated" white voter, and now is going to subject us to his ego. He attacks comedians for making fun of him, news stations for showing unflattering pictures of him, and reporters who publish critical stories about him. He is deeply bothered by questions of his legitimacy over the popular vote, despite having questioned the citizenship of his predecessor. He's an egomaniac, and he can't control himself on Twitter. Of course though, he will be the Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. military. You should have known that though, when you elected a man who has made his money by putting his name on things.

Congratulations America- you elected the junior high bully as your new President.

Sunday, November 27, 2016

Playoffs? You Talkin' 'Bout Playoffs?

Penn State won the East Division Championship in the Big Ten yesterday. That's remarkable to me. I thought James Franklin was as good as fired after losing to Pitt, and certainly around halftime of the Temple game. Instead, he's got Penn State on the cusp of a playoff berth in college football, and a return to glory that was supposed to take a very, very long time.

Should Penn State get in? My answer right now, despite my bias towards them, is no. My top four going into next week is:

  1. Alabama
  2. Clemson
  3. Ohio State
  4. Washington
Now, if any of them do lose, I would absolutely put the winner of Penn State-Wisconsin into the playoffs. With that said, none of this is a reflection of who I think should get in if we just wanted the best teams- Alabama, Ohio State, Michigan, and whoever wins the Big Ten title game. I just don't think you can jump two loss Penn State over one loss Clemson or Washington, just because their conference is better. None of this is fair by the way, since Ohio State both lost to Penn State and won't win their conference. Even so though, with one loss, they have a better argument against the out-of-conference teams.

What if two teams lose though? This would bring Michigan, Oklahoma, and Colorado back into the conversation, right? Not really. I could take Colorado or Michigan, but Oklahoma really has no business escaping bad early losses to Houston and Ohio State, both of which were convincing. If Washington or Clemson loses, Penn State and Wisconsin should be a play-in game. If both lose, I'd give Colorado the nod for beating Washington to get in, over Michigan. If Alabama loses though, it gets really fun. Hopefully that won't happen. 

My Favorite Social Media Account? The U.S. Department of the Interior

I've been looking for a "non-political" or non-sports topic to post more about on social media. I've sort of found it. While the Department of the Interior is a government entity, it is not an overly "political" account. They show pictures of national parks, and generally very cool places. The pictures are sometimes inspiring, sometimes soothing, and often times a reminder of some of the amazing things we possess as Americans. I recommend you follow their Facebook too. Here's some of their amazing content.




Normalcy? We're Not Getting That.

A white nationalist, which should be read racist. An Education Secretary who doesn't believe in public education. A HUD Secretary who's actually a surgeon. People arguing that Rudy Giuliani is qualified to be Secretary of State. A Commerce Secretary who's coal mines were a virtual death trap for his workers.

And Donald Trump hasn't even named his HHS Secretary yet.

He's tweeted angrily at SNL for making fun of him. He's tweeted angrily at the world for bringing up that he lost the popular vote. He's tweeted angrily at NBC for posting a picture of him with a double-chin. He'st tweeted angrily about people wanting a re-count of his win. He's attacked the New York Times on Twitter, then met with them and told them they are great. His response to Fidel Castro dying was to excitedly tweet that Castro was dead.

Just wait until someone criticizes his inauguration speech.

These are not normal times. Kellyanne Conway can talk all she wants about unity out of one side of her mouth, as long as she's slamming Mitt Romney out the other, we all know it's BS. These are not normal times, and normal unity is not in play. Not with Bannon in the White House. Not with a "Muslim registry" under discussion. Not when we have open debates going on over "whether Jews are people" and "is Islam actually a religion" on CNN. Not when the Japanese internment camps are being cited by people who want to specifically target specific groups. Not when our next President is being friendly with a Russian dictator. These are not normal times.

So you're going to have to excuse the majority of us, by over two-million by the way, who aren't planning to unify. You're going to have to excuse the majority of us who don't want to join hands with those of you who voted for Trump. Sorry, elections do have consequences. You are getting the President you want, and he's completely unacceptable to the rest of us. He's not normal. We're not going to wish him well. It's bad enough that the electoral college holds California, Chicago, and New York City hostage to Alabama, Wyoming, and Oklahoma, or that the blue-states in America basically produce the wealth here. Now we have to accept Donald Trump, a man who's main qualifications are Howard Stern, Wrestlemania, and a porno. Yeah, I'll pass. He'll take office on January 20th, and he'll be the President of the United States, but he won't be my President. That implies a level of respect he's not capable of.

Sore losers? You just refused to give a hearing to President Obama's Supreme Court nominee for a year. You just spent the first three years of President Obama's term in office screaming for his birth certificate, because you thought he was born in Kenya, because he had a "Muslim sounding name" or something. You called President Obama a Muslim, even though he wasn't one, as though that was insulting anyway. The Republican Party took no part in governing the nation with President Obama, voting nearly unanimously against the Affordable Care Act, Dodd-Frank, the Stimulus, and every other initiative he had, while even shutting down the government in 2013 after he was re-elected. Republicans wouldn't give background checks on all gun sales a vote, even though 90% of the country wanted that.

You disrespected President Obama at every turn. You disrespected his wife, calling her an ape and attacking her appearance. You attacked a family who didn't have scandals, a family man with one wife. You disrespected a constitutional law professor, and now expect us to respect the guy who bankrupted casinos. You disrespect the man who won a majority of American votes, twice, and now want us to respect the guy who's going to lose by close to 2,500,000 votes. You want us to respect the minority-election of a man who called the electoral process rigged, and once attacked the electoral college as ruining America.

This is not Bill Clinton handing power to George W. Bush, this is not Jimmy Carter handing it off to Ronald Reagan, this is not even Lyndon Johnson handing the office off to Richard Nixon. You're not going to get nice pictures like the one above, where Presidents Ford and Carter talk together and pretend they are great after a tough election. It's not going to happen.

He attacked Hillary Clinton for her husband's foundation's fundraising, while his own foundation is under investigation. He attacked Bill Clinton's infidelity, when he said he can "grab 'em by the pussy" in regards to women for himself. He attacked Hillary for giving paid speeches, and he did it himself. He said the election was rigged against him, and at least some people are believing it was rigged for him. Donald Trump will be afforded no pleasantries, no honeymoon, and no unity.

I'm sorry, but i'm not, to all of the Trump fans out there, and Donald himself. This is the new normal. You created it. Now you have to live in it. That's how life works. Voting has consequences.

Donald Trump has consequences.

Saturday, November 26, 2016

Thanksgiving 2016

Well, that's over. A few basic takeaways from the biggest holiday of the year in Easton:

  1. Easton beat Phillipsburg 24-14. Well Phillipsburg, you had a shot. It was 14-3 early in the 2nd quarter of Thursday's game, but you need more than 4 yards passing in a football game to win, usually. The Phillipsburg QB, I think his name was Fisher, played like a warrior, hats off to him for going both ways and leading his team in rushing. Easton just wore them out.
  2. I don't love turkey as much as I thought. Ok, this one might start some fights, but I didn't pig out like I used to. In fact, I might have ate more turkey cold yesterday than I did on Thursday, hot. I can't stand stuffing at all. I ate a lot of green beans though, I go to town on them.
  3. Captain Morgan is bad for me and should be avoided at all costs, because I drink it with Coke. So, I hate drinking water. I drink a lot more than I used to, which is why I got my weight down to a much nicer number. I still don't drink enough of it though. On Wednesday, I drank none of it, and really didn't eat a ton either. I should have definitely skipped that Captain and Coke on Wednesday night, all however many of them I made. Fortunately I was at a private house party and most of the people in that place have been my friends for 25 years or more, but being drunk and dehydrated gets me acting a fool. I'll stick to beer in the future.
  4. Facebook is awful on Thanksgiving. If you're in the wing of humanity who has put off domestic life (mostly because it's unappealing), stay off of Facebook around Thanksgiving, unless you want to see pictures of children and couples in every other post. Look, I love my friends, I love their kids, but I could do without. Seriously. I know it's your Facebook, but we kinda want to see you.
  5.  Where were the Easton students? Real life question here- they didn't sell out the student section? Why? I'd sell to the junior high kids before i'd let that happen. I realize two sections at Lafayette is a lot more than any other game of the year, but that's still not the point.
  6. I did well at avoiding political conversations. I really don't want to hear everyone's opinion on the election, particularly when almost the entire room agrees with me, or stayed home. I'd probably rather discuss HGTV than the election on a holiday. I found my room and hid in it, and it worked.
  7. Nothing beats College Hill on Thanksgiving. No, really. Thousands of people tailgating before a local high school football game is actually awesome. College Hill Tavern is awesome. Fisher Field is awesome. Everything about it is awesome.

Wednesday, November 23, 2016

Last Night in Easton

15 years ago last night, I slept out in a field next to US-22 in Palmer Township. It might be charitable to say "slept," as we barely did that, but we were there "protecting" our pile of wood that we would light on fire, 15 years ago today. The Bonfire sleepout, a staple of being a senior at Easton Area High School is a right of passage that any resident of Easton, Palmer Township, or Forks Township looks forward to, and plans for. Mine was no exception to that rule.

If I told the actual story of my night, I'm not sure most would believe it. I was a "wood collecting captain" within my class, not that I took that job any more seriously than I took any other role at that time, and I did manage to collect a bunch of wood with my friend Erika before we even went there that night. I managed to completely act a fool at the sleepout itself, and still narrowly avoid major trouble, which of course I'm grateful for now. I guess my decision to carry around a large branch on fire and scream and yell was a bit frowned upon that night.

The tradition of the sleepout is something that bonds together people across generations, and creates memories among your friends forever. Is the whole thing a little ridiculous? Sure, it's a pile of wood. The memories of Thanksgiving week during one's senior year at Easton though are something that you just never lose, and that you can never make up for if you miss. When I saw the kids' small fires going as I drove by last night, I had to pull across the highway to take a picture of the whole spectacle, if only to satisfy my own sense of nostalgia. I guess you really can't take the town out of you, even when you do age out.

The New Bucket List

With the 2016 election over, and literally whatever rest of my life there is to plan out in front of me, I guess it's time to figure out some things I want to do. I guess it's time for a new bucket list. Here it is:

  1. The top of the Freedom Tower
  2. Hong Kong
  3. Yellowstone
  4. Wrigley Field
  5. Jerusalem
  6. Hollywood/Los Angeles
  7. Moscow
  8. Tehran
  9. Return to Cooperstown
  10. The top of the Empire State Building
  11. Montreal
  12. Rome/Vatican City
  13. Christmas/Easter Mass at St. Patrick's Cathedral
  14. Las Vegas
  15. Seattle
  16. London
  17. Udol, Slovakia
  18. A Notre Dame Game
  19. Nashville
  20. Athens, Greece
  21. The Hamptons
  22. A Japanese Baseball Game
  23. The Rockies
  24. A trip around the Carribean
  25. Oktoberfest in Germany

How Long it Will Take to Make the Phillies Great Again?

The Phillies last made the playoffs in 2011. They last won 81 games in 2012. Since then, they have lost 89, 89, 99, and 91 games. This past season, they improved by 8 games, and if they improve by the same amount next season, they would reach 79 games. If they stay on this pace, they would become a playoff contender in 2018. That actually seems pretty close to accurate.

The good news for the cash-rich Phillies is that they have virtually no long-term guaranteed payroll and the winningest (and fairly universally a top five/ten) minor league system from 2016. Multi-billionaire owner John Middleton is now considered to be the "controlling" partner in the ownership, and he seems willing to spend out of his endless supply of cash. The future is pretty bright, if they make the right baseball decisions with all of that cash.

The Phillies should be able to pitch. Jerad Eickhoff and Jeremy Hellickson were both really solid last year, and if they repeat that performance, the Phillies have a good base. How good the Phillies are, or not, probably rides right now on how Aaron Nola and Vince Velasquez do, if both are back. The depth in behind them- Jake Thompson, Alec Asher, Zach Eflin, and Adam Morgan- all had their moments this season. I still believe the Phillies need an ace, and that they will trade out of this group, but if they went in with this group, there would be good reason to believe that the pitching should see a marked improvement. Add on potential help from prospects Ben Lively, Mark Appel, Nick Pivetta, and Ricardo Pinto, and there is more than enough depth here. The Phillies should look to move some of the depth for a major upgrade.

Can the Phillies hit much though? They recently added Nick Williams, Dylan Cozens, Andrew Knapp, and Jesmuel Valentin, but none of them should be expected to come up and immediately carry this offense. The recently added Howie Kendrick could be a help in left-field, but the outfield looks pretty bare with Odubel Herrera being the lone strength. The offense needs a big bounce back from Maikel Franco to be at all competitive, and needs continued progress from Tommy Joseph and Cesar Hernandez. Perhaps the most intriguing character though is Freddy Galvis- who we want to see repeat his power numbers, but needs to improve his OBP by a country mile.

I expect the Phillies to spend some money to try and get a closer, to probably spend some money on one more bat, and to at least kick the tires on trading for a front-end starting pitcher. If they do that much, this team will improve fast. Fast enough to cross the 81 game mark in 2017? Frankly, that probably rides on improved performances from Nola and Franco, though it's strongly possible. Even so, we're probably still looking at 2018 before we contend.

Tuesday, November 22, 2016

No, Not Bernie.

There is a belief among Bernie Sanders' supporters that his vision, and maybe even 75 year old him, will be the future of the Democratic Party. There's a feeling that those in the Democratic Party who don't support him are either corrupted or too invested in the Democratic Party, that they couldn't possibly actually not like him. His political purity and "honesty," to hear them tell it, is what the Democratic Party should be.

I have to say, at one time Bernie Sanders was one of my favorite members of Congress- but that time was when I was in college, and most of you reading this had no idea he existed. Even at the start of this process though, I still really liked Bernie, the ideals I had projected on him, and his political brand. My original thought was that Bernie was simply not realistic, but I was thrilled that he was running to move the Democratic race to the left. His Brooklyn accent, his fired-up appeals on the stump, and his brutal honesty made him kind of awesome. At one point, I flirted with parting ways with my long-standing support of Hillary, and becoming a Berner. I didn't though, for a lot of reasons.

First, I just can't quite square myself with Bernie's positions. I agree with him on stopping TPP, raising the minimum wage, legalizing marijuana, closing private prisons, and a host of other issues. I have substantive policy differences with him on major issues though. No, I don't want college to be free, and to reduce the value of a bachelors degree to a high school diploma. No, I don't agree with giving gun manufacturers immunity from lawsuits. No, I don't want to scrap the ACA in favor of "Medicare for All." No, I don't oppose all trade deals, just the bad ones. No, I don't support bringing back the outdated Glass-Steagall law. No, I don't oppose any and all military actions. I have serious substantive issues with Bernie.

Beyond that, I don't find Bernie's platform to be reasonable. We had to back-door pass the ACA, but he thinks Congress will expand Medicare for everybody? He's going to get free college for everybody, while Congress won't even lower the interest rates for students? His entire platform was based on some sort of "pie in the sky" theory of politics, where an activist "revolution" would swamp Washington and either convince all the members of Congress to change, or would replace them all. The truth of American politics is that we don't even all agree on what we want, much less on the solutions, and anyone who thinks there is some "common sense" politics that will sweep the nation and change everything is unrealistic. I believe had Bernie won the White House, the disillusionment that would have followed that victory would have destroyed the left for at least a generation.

It got worse with Bernie though, particularly as the primaries raged on. His supporter, Tulsi Gabbard, resigned from the DNC and gave credence to the ridiculous argument that Bernie was losing a "rigged" primary. Look, i've read the emails- yes, the DNC staff didn't like Bernie. What state did they rig in action though? Please don't tell me New York, where people simply didn't follow the rules to register in time, and where the places "purging" voters were actually boroughs that Hillary won, and would have seen benefits from more turnout in. Please don't tell me Arizona, where the Republican Administration in that state got rid of polling places, hurting everyone. Beyond that, yes, some staff made inappropriate comments about Bernie's religion, but that was not something that ever went public. Should Debbie Wasserman-Schultz have stepped aside? She shouldn't have been chair after 2014, but yes. The debates should have been put in prime-time spots, I totally agree, but the actual viewership was well in line with past primary debates, and there were more of them than we've seen in the past. Of course, their final ridiculous argument was the super-delegates one- who Bernie both wanted to flip to his side, but also to not exist anymore. If super-delegates were bound by primary results, Hillary would have still won comfortably, and there would be no point to their existence. If you don't like their existence, fine, say that. Don't also ask for them to overrule the votes though. As he fell further and further behind in the delegate count, he continued to claim he had a shot to achieve victory, continued to ask his supporters for their hard-earned donations, and most importantly, continued to attack both the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton as corrupt institutions, part of the problem in Washington. The truth is that Bernie had no shot after Super Tuesday, and certainly after he didn't win in New York, and he continued to run a very tough primary campaign against Hillary and the party. He helped the GOP learn how to run against her, and how to fracture the Democratic base more.

In truth, I don't actually know if I blame Bernie as much for his behavior during the primary process. He's not a Democrat. His entire career was based on being a left-wing critique of the Democratic Party. I realized during this process what Bernie was really all about. He would take major Democratic achievements of the past 30 years- The Family and Medical Leave Act, The Affordable Care Act, The 1993 Clinton Budget, The Dodd-Frank Bill- and basically decimate them as "not good enough." He would slam Democratic politicians for playing within the Congressional process, which is not "pure" and clean by his standards, making deals in order to get things done. He would key on buzz words like "lobbyists," and make them the evil, doing so knowingly that lots of people lobby for lots of things. Bernie did all of this while having only a few legislative achievements of his own, over a long career in Congress. Because he never joined the Democratic Party, he never had to take ownership of getting things done. He was an independent, a party of one. I don't agree with that, but I can't fault him for that now. I just won't vote for it. If anything though, I blame the party leadership for going along with letting him bring that criticism into the party.

All of that was enough for me to distance myself from a Congressman who I used to really admire. I don't really need to dive into all the things the GOP would have said about him, beyond this. Yes, they would have said the obvious, he's a socialist. Yes, they would have brought up that he had no job until he was 35. Yes, they would have brought up his wife running a for-profit college that went bankrupt right after she left. Yes, they would have brought up his stealing electric from the neighbor. Yes, they would have brought up his honeymoon in Moscow, during the Soviet Union. There are even worse things, but none of them really are material to me. The point is that the build-up of "Saint Bernie" became very, very annoying, and frankly was flat out false. He was as flawed as the rest of us, if not more, and it became tiring hearing otherwise. I can perfectly accept this, it's not an issue to me, provided that you don't hold him up as something he isn't.

Of course, Bernie never called himself a saint. His supporters did. His supporters not only held up Bernie as the standard for being progressive, but did so without any problem calling Hillary and her supporters some pretty bad things. To be clear, there were many different types of Bernie supporters, and not all agreed on this part, but there was a large chunk who created a "false equivalency" between Hillary (and her supporters) and Trump (and his supporters). For the first time in my lifetime, an actual portion of the runner-up's supporters formed a "Bernie or Bust" type of group, that refused to support the eventual nominee, and actually carried through on it in significant numbers. I had people who showed up for the first time in 2016 telling me how I "wasn't a progressive" in their eyes, because I didn't agree with Bernie on his pet issues. I suppose I wasn't in the streets protesting the Iraq War while some of them were playing with children's toys, but I digress there. His supporters became terrors on Facebook and Twitter, as any critique of Bernie on policy or character was met by a tweet-storm of attacks, sometimes attacks that had nothing to do with the point being made. I had people i'm not friends with on Facebook commenting on pro-Hillary posts to call her a "war criminal," "crony capitalist," "bitch" and other negative things, and sometimes just to attack me for supporting her. I suppose it's only fine to attack a candidate for President when it's not your's though, based on their actions. I helped Bernie delegates get on the primary ballot, only to have some of those delegates attack me personally when I didn't back their candidate- no mas on that one, folks. His supporters, and their aggressive posture, made me less and less likely to be okay with Bernie.

All of this leads me to now, the point we're at, when many of the Bernie backers are saying "I told you so." Even knowing what I know today, I would vote for Hillary in the Democratic primary over Bernie, without any reservations in fact. I heard his comment about ditching identity politics to talk to the working class, and yes I know that it's being taken out of context- as things so often are in politics- and frankly I still find it largely offensive. The Democratic Party, beginning with 1960's, decided to stand up for those marginalized in our society, vocally and in policy, and to suggest we should talk less about their plight is not okay. This is why Bernie never caught on with voters outside of his white, liberal backing. It's why he probably would have also lost to Trump, as every group besides white male Democrats would have shown up at lower frequencies for him- there's just no reason to assume otherwise. Beyond all of that, if your simplistic takeaway from Donald Trump's victory is that populism elected him, and not racism, I don't really agree with you. If that was the case, Russ Feingold would have won Wisconsin, even as Hillary lost it.

By the way, after all of that, I have to say that I agree- Bernie is right that we should have talked more about jobs, while talking to people outside of our own base. I agree that we should have new leadership in Congress, and I'm even fine that Bernie is being added to the Senate leadership by Chuck Schumer. If the idea here is that we should adopt some of Bernie's issues and rhetoric, I'm actually all good with that. I'm just not fine with handing the party over to Bernie, I didn't vote for that. No, I don't want open primaries, join my party if you want to pick my nominee. No, I don't want us to become the anti-engagement with the globe party, be that in trade or in defending liberty around the world. No, I don't want us to turn on President Obama, and act as though he did an inadequate job. In short, I'm not ready to tear up the party we have, in favor of his revolution. I've seen us fight for nursing homes to stay open locally, to fund schools at the state level, and to protect consumers from predatory banks, nationally. I've seen us be the defenders of human services at the county government level, defend good wages and union jobs at the state level, and fight for foreign aid that helped feed children around the globe. The Democratic Party is a damn good institution, the institution that gave you the Violence Against Women Act, the Voting Rights Act, and the Family and Medical Leave Act. It needs some changes, not a replacement.

I'm not against Bernie's ideals being a part of our future, but I am not ready to give his proxy, Keith Ellison, the keys to the DNC yet. I'm not against Bernie like candidates, like Elizabeth Warren, being our next nominee for President, but i'm not going to nominate a 79 year old Bernie to be our next President. I hope Bernie does run again in 2018, and doesn't face a primary, and continues to push for some of his policies. I'm just not ever going to come around to the idea of President Bernie.

These Sixers are Becoming Fun to Watch

Last night was a lot of fun. For the first time this season, I got to see the Sixers play live. They won, again. Suddenly the team is really not all that bad, having won three times in the course of a week. Not only did they win last night, but they did it the way every Sixers fan wants to see- with Joel Embiid and Jahlil Okafor dominating the 4th quarter.

The Sixers are not good yet, but they are far from a finished product. Embiid and Okafor don't play together on the court yet, or for more than 25 minutes in a game yet. Eventually both will play without minutes restrictions, and hopefully on the court at the same time. Dario Saric is coming off the bench as he learns how to play in the NBA, and he will improve in time. Ben Simmons hasn't stepped foot on the court yet, but he will after the New Year. I expect some more growing pains, especially when Simmons returns and has to be introduced to the offense, or when Embiid and Okafor first play on the court together. This team still doesn't have much of a back-court, as I'd feel much more comfortable if they added some more talent.

Even so, the Eastern Conference stinks, and this team has a lot of talent to introduce to the court yet. While they have just four wins so far this year, that doesn't totally rule them out of the playoff picture yet. Even so, we have to hope that this team doesn't make the playoffs too fast, as they aren't really contenders yet in 2016-2017. A first round loss to Cleveland isn't worth losing a lottery shot at another top pick.

But who cares about that for now, this is really fun to watch grow.

Chasing Kennedy

Today, 53 years ago, President John F. Kennedy was killed in Dallas, TX. His murder remains a subject of great debate, with conspiracy theories of all types rising from the events of that day. If you ask people of that generation, they can all tell you where they were that day.

Jack Kennedy has served as a ghost to chase for Democrats for over a generation. He was inspirational, and aspirational. He called for a nation to reach for the Moon, but also to right it's wrongs in regards to Civil Rights. He asked what we could do for the country, and created the Peace Corps to give an opportunity to do it. He was absolutely a mixed bag- he screwed up royally on the Bay of Pigs, but showed resolve in the Cuban Missile Crisis; He didn't achieve his Civil Rights aspirations, but he certainly was a catalyst in making things happen; He did put more advisors in Vietnam, but he also clearly wasn't willing to go fully into the Southeast Asian war. JFK was complicated, and yet he is the inspirational light that unites a lot of Americans in their hopes for our politics.

I personally draw more inspiration from JFK's brother Bobby than from him, but that is not because I don't see the appeal of JFK and his short Presidency. I was born 20 years after John F. Kennedy's assassination, and it has always been part of the history books for me. Even so, it's important today to remember him, and what he stands for to many others. RIP JFK, the nation could use just about any leader of your capability at this time.

Lessons From Election 2016

The 2016 Election is over, thank God. With the election now two weeks in the past, we can begin to take a look back, and see what actually happened. What are some things that we can learn from this election:

  1. Candidates matter. I must admit, I had begun to buy into the idea that candidates didn't matter much. In an era of demographics telling us more about a voter than anything else, we found out that voters are still people, and computers don't make the votes for us. Hillary Clinton's extremely high negatives among the electorate were a disqualifier, even among some Democrats.
  2. The Polling Actually Wasn't Bad. So, all we've heard since election night was how bad the polling was, how we got "Brexit'ed." We didn't. Hillary Clinton lead in the final RCP average by 3.3% in the polls. Her current popular vote lead is a little shy of two-million votes, and she will probably end up with 2-2.5 million votes in her popular vote margin, or roughly a 2% win. Remember, her 3.3% lead was in national polling, not in state polling, and her victory of 2% nationally is right in line with that, comfortably within margin of error. If you look at the state polling, it showed a very tight race in many of the swing states, and that was backed up by the results. Trump could add up his margin of victory in Florida, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Ohio, and not have near two million votes to spare. Again though, they are swing states, they are closer by nature, and the polling showed that would be the result.
  3. Demographics aren't the destiny that Democrats thought. Well, Hillary Clinton got waxed among white voters, perhaps even worse than expected. The other dirty little truth is that President Obama's vote share among Latinos and African-Americans was not sustained by Hillary Clinton, despite every effort to do so. Donald Trump improved the Republicans' share among both of those groups, and that was a huge part of why he won.
  4. Republicans have won the popular vote once since the Cold War. This is kind of amazing, and not really debatable. From the 1992 Election forward, the GOP has won the popular vote exactly once, 2004. This obviously begs many other questions, but the reality here is that California and New York are really disenfranchised by this system.
  5. Voters don't care about issues and plans. Hillary Clinton put out plans and issue papers all the time. Donald Trump just told us his plans "would be great." It didn't matter a bit. Voters don't understand policy, and they don't care about it. Voters vote thematically, and we'd be smart to learn that.
  6. Donald Trump did drown out his negative coverage. Donald Trump figured something out- more noise is good. He would drown out one scandal with another, he'd start a new fight when he was in danger, and eventually the public couldn't follow any more. The man is a brilliant marketer.
  7. Our media is broken. E-Mails. No, really, e-mails. We heard a year and a half of e-mail talk, which amounted to what? Not even a charge against Hillary Clinton. We heard "questions" about the Clinton Foundation, a highly rated non-profit by the watchdogs too. Any charges there? No. Meanwhile, Donald Trump actually was working with the Kremlin, actually won't step down as the head of his company, actually had to settle his fraud case from Trump University, and actually has a foundation that is under investigation. "Balance" has drowned out truth in our media. 
  8. You don't get to pick your swing states. Remember how Georgia was the new battleground? Yeah, me too. I also remember Hillary not visiting Wisconsin in the final week. Yes, Democrats usually win Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, but taking them for granted is stupid. I bet the 2020 nominee won't skip out on visiting them lots. The truth is that while there's much to malign about white working-class voters, they are still people, with votes, and insulting them is not a strategy that will win the White House.
  9. Both sides will learn the wrong lessons from this. Go the Bernie route? No thanks, Democrats. Trump won because he didn't have a ground game? Yeah, not quite. When Democrats won in 2012, they wrote the post-mortem in the way they wanted, not the way it actually went. The truth is that President Obama's tough attacks on Mitt Romney's business record and taxes prevented the working class voters from falling in love with him like they did Trump, and kept many of them with President Obama. The way the story was written, it was every other group of voters that drove him to victory. I'm going to bet that the GOP will convince themselves of the story they want out of 2016, not the one that happened.
  10. No, Bernie wouldn't have "absolutely" won. Ok, Bernie Sanders did win white working-class voters in the primary. Does that mean he would have pulled more of those voters away from Trump in the general election? Not much more. If he had done that, there's still the issue of minority turnout, which dropped in 2016, and within which Trump made progress. Bernie lost those voters in the primary by wide margins. There's no reason to believe he would have held onto these votes, even as well as Hillary did. Beyond all of that, Bernie was not hit very hard in the primaries, and he would have been hit quite hard by Donald Trump. That would have changed things, a lot.

Monday, November 21, 2016

Ranking My Favorite Bars, Crappy Politics and All

My favorite beer is Yuengling and my favorite bar in Washington is Russia House. Bad combo for a Democrat, right? I mean, honestly, it doesn't bode well for you when you know that your favorite beer hates unions and Democrats, and when the owner actually put his money behind our second-place President. It almost makes me want to boycott, even though I generally don't believe in boycotts over politics (unless the situation is very serious). I'll definitely give Russia House a pass though- just being Russian isn't bad.

It's about the time of year where I should do my annual favorite bar's list. It's not scientific, and it's frankly not even claiming to be all-inclusive- I do most of my drinking here in Easton. Even so, I have a list in mind, and I'm going to run with it. Here is my top five.
  1. College Hill Tavern- Easton, PA- So this is practically my home bar. Located a couple of blocks from Lafayette College, and a short ride from my house, it's convenient. It's not the dive it used to be, but the trade off is that the food is really good now. Of course the bar where the bartenders know my name and what i'm ordering when I walk in is going to be #1. 
  2. Russia House- Washington, DC- Ok, it's pricey. Past that, it's awesome. I had a Ukrainian lager last week, and it was really awesome. The bartenders are legitimately from the old Soviet bloc, and the food is good- but expensive. Obviously, they have an incredible array of vodkas to drink.
  3. OBT- Bethlehem, PA- This place has changed owners many times, but who doesn't love the dive bar by their college? It's hard to not love the OBT now, with it's nice outside patio in the Summer, and spacious inside, complete with Beirut (Beer Pong) tables. I do miss the days of $2 pitchers (when I was in college), or when the exterior of the bar wasn't finished, to save tax money.
  4. Cafe 210 West- State College, PA- Any bar located on College Avenue in State College is going to be awesome. This one is just my personal favorite. I love the patio, and the beer is pretty cheap. I've only ever been there on game weekends, so it's particularly awesome, and crowded. I like crowded if i'm going out to drink.
  5. Bob and Barbara's- Philadelphia, PA- There are two basic reasons this is on the list. The first is that you can find a "regular" crowd there during weekdays, in my experience, which is how you know a bar is awesome. The second reason is "the special." The shots of Jameson and PBR pounders come in threes, and they were $9. Simply put, for a place on South Street in Philadelphia to be that cheap means it's a place I need to go.

My Grandfather, the Last Time a Republican Promised Better Days Ahead, and Blue-Collar Workers

I visited my grandmother on Friday for the first time in over a month, and since the election. As I was eating a sandwich and talking to her, she said she wanted me to read something she wrote, and then she proceeded to read it to me. It was a letter about my grandfather, voting, and the impact on his life. At first I found it a bit odd, but then I found it to make perfect sense in light of the results of this election.

My grandfather was a registered independent at the end of his life, a Navy veteran, and chaired his township's planning commission, serving on the body for over 40 years. He almost always voted Democratic though, having grown up in an immigrant household where everyone backed the party of FDR and JFK. The only exception in his Democratic votes for President prior to 1980 were his votes for President Eisenhower in 1952 and 1956. As 1980 approached though, things weren't quite going as well for him at work. The boss' kids were now running the business, and many of the benefits were starting to go away. Ronald Reagan promised to bring back American greatness, and to end the sense of a downward spiral in the country. My grandfather liked what he heard. By 1982 though, he was dealing with part-time layoffs, a bleaker future, and tougher times. By 1984, he was anti-Reagan. He felt mislead.

I don't write this to compare Trump to Reagan, but I think there is some level to which the two share common messaging. America did really well from early 1950's until the late 1970's, and the quality of life for working class men was pretty darn good. Unions had secured them raises, benefits, and retirements that allowed them to raise a family in suburbia, and have a sense of pride. That started to die in the 1970's, and the death of it accelerated in the 1980's. The 1990's were a nice decade, but it was more of a pause in the downward spiral than a break. Reagan, at the start of the decline of the working class man, promised that his administration would relieve them of their crushing tax burden, and would give them room to prosper. Trump now promises an even more vague sense of greatness, in which he's going to bring back coal mines and factories, cut taxes to the bone, and somehow balance the budget. It is nothing short of magic, but magic sounds better than reality, especially when the alternative is a pride-less existence, where the good paying jobs are gone, but all the struggles are here to stay.

I am by no means discounting the influence of racism and sexism on the Trump victory- you simply can't divorce them from the outcome. You cannot pretend that they did not contribute to the result, but you can't exclusively blame them either. Here's the simple truth- while the Democratic Party has talked a lot about the plight of a lot of people who absolutely need a government that works for them, the Democratic Party has largely white-washed out any agenda that seems to address blue-collar white guys. Yes, part of that is these voters not voting for us. Part of that is also a push towards identity politics that seem to cast these folks as "privileged," even while they feel forgotten. Are they ignorant on a lot of matters? Yes, they are. They are still people and voters though, and it's hard to see them voting for a party that talked a lot less about apprenticeships and re-training people in the trades, and a lot more about social issues that speak largely to a more affluent voter in the cities and on the coasts.

Reagans' 1980s were not kind to my grandfather's hometown of Phillipsburg, an industrial place that saw many of it's top employers leave. His old workplace, Keystone Packaging, looks largely closed at this point, and definitely isn't employing a bunch of blue-collar workers today. Reagan did leave office fairly well-liked though, in no small part because he spoke directly to these blue-collar workers and convinced them that he could solve their problems. Donald Trump has gone a step further, blaming the "others" for their problems, and saying that he alone can solve these issues. Democrats would be wise to not discount the power in that message moving forward.

My guess is that Donald Trump will actually try to govern more in the tradition of pre-JFK Democrats than actually as a full-blown Reagan, or worse yet, a Hitler. He will infuse populist economics in his message, while sprinkling in some racism, sexism, and classism that his base craves. That is how he ran, and it worked well for him. He'll scapegoat groups, while sometimes not acting on his wild-eyed promises, and use that to cover up the simple truth of the matter here- Donald Trump isn't bringing back those factories, he's not bringing back those coal mines, and he's not ending global trade. Nobody is. If he actually succeeded, we'd have a Depression economically, and we'd go backwards a century. For that reason, I doubt he'll actually succeed in enacting his campaign promises, but he'll keep that rhetoric up to mask the fact that he is actually governing like any mainstream Republican of the last quarter-century would- tax cuts for the wealthy, de-regulation for corporations, and some hand-outs for supportive groups of the party. Donald Trump won't actually be a change agent at all, he'll just be a fraud that manages to enrage people on all political sides.

My grandfather was a working class boy from Phillipsburg, who served his country, and then was able to move out to the township and have a decent life. He, like many blue-collar men of today, fell for a man who promised to make American life great again, if we'd just follow him. It took him a lot less time than most to realize he had been had. Unfortunately, it's happened again in America. We can only hope this time that people come to their senses quicker.

Haves and Have Nots- College Sports Edition

Saturday night had to be pretty tough for Rutgers fans and alums. They lost 39-0, and remain winless on the season in the Big Ten. They got humiliated by the team they desperately want to call their rival. They did so on senior night, at home. They did so in terrible weather. They did so in front of a crowd that could charitably been measured in dozens at the end, rather than thousands. It was probably the most humiliating situation I've ever seen.

In case you haven't looked lately, Penn State, Michigan, Ohio State, Nebraska, and Wisconsin are the teams battling to win the Big Ten. Oklahoma is the front-runner in the Big 12. Clemson controls it's fate in the ACC. Alabama will play Florida in the SEC Championship game. Washington and Colorado are trying to hold off USC in the PAC 12. In other words, if you haven't watched a game all season, and you just started watching college football this week, you could have guessed nearly all of the contenders for the national championship. If you want to call Washington and Colorado surprises, go ahead, but they are both schools that have been very good in the past.

This is not just a football thing either in the NCAA. Duke started the men's basketball season #1, with Kansas, Kentucky, and UNC all in the top ten, as usual. Penn State's wrestling team will be heavy favorites to win another championship, with Ohio State, Iowa, and Oklahoma State giving their normally strong chase. The UCONN women's basketball team will be favored to win the championship again. I could go on, but the point is made.

College sports mirror the marketplace in America- "the haves" keep having, the "have nots" don't. If you simply guessed the regular powerhouses are good again this year, they probably are. There's not much suspense to it. In fact, there's not as much suspense as there are in professional sports, where CBAs and free agency keep teams from building dynasties. While people love the unpredictability of pro sports, they don't seem to mind the predictability of the NCAA. If I knew why that is, I'd tell you, but i'm clueless there. Very clearly though, no one will be complaining this weekend when they watch Alabama and Auburn battle in the Iron Bowl, or when they watch Michigan-Ohio State. I guess some people will be complaining though- in New Brunswick, NJ.

Sunday, November 20, 2016

The Rise of November Activism is Troubling Me

November 8th was the election. If you didn't know any better though, you might have thought it was still going on by the 9th. People took to the streets in mass. Talk of a "liberal Tea Party" began emerging from the dust. People spray painted obscene phrases (like the one above) on buildings. Internet groups, especially on Facebook, emerged.

Where was this on the 7th?

I get it, not everyone loved Hillary Clinton, so the story goes that they weren't inspired during the race. Clearly the hate for Donald Trump is real though. If you actually believe he's a fascist, if you actually believe he's a racist, if you actually believe he's a criminal, shouldn't you have worked harder to stop that? Shouldn't you have volunteered for the Democrats and the Clinton campaign, and given your all to stop him? Certainly, if you believe such terrible things about Trump, shouldn't you have not voted for Johnson or Stein?

Donald Trump very well may do terrible harm to Latinos, the LGBT community, African-Americans, the young, and even the old. I don't disagree that he may take away the health care of over twenty million people, and that's not even considering that he may end Medicare. I agree that Donald Trump is a horrible, horrible problem that may hurt America- a lot.

I reject the idea that you can divorce yourself of politics and actually care about politics though. Elections have consequences, and failure to take part in an election, to really engage beyond voting, is an impeachable offense to me. Was Hillary Clinton someone who inspired like President Obama or her husband? Absolutely not. Was she as firey as Bernie, or as likable as Joe Biden? No. She was competent though, and almost all of those in the streets would agree that she didn't have designs on deporting millions, banning religions from immigrating here, or taking away anyone's rights in America. They just weren't inspired by her. Well, sometimes we have to take our inspiration from things besides a charismatic candidate. If you really think that Donald Trump is a danger to the republic, but you aren't willing to give your energy to beating him before he gets elected, what does that say about you?

A lot of the people protesting right now were heavily engaged in the campaign this Fall, and I'm not really talking to them here. To those who didn't though, I'm speaking pretty directly. The current crop of protests are sort of without a point. Are we all mad about the results of the election? Yes. Does it matter now? No. Donald Trump will be the 45th President. If he and the Republican Congress are capable people (which they may not be), they will act on some of his campaign themes. If you are now protesting in hopes of changing those realities, I'm sorry to bring disappointing news- but it's a waste. If you are protesting now in hopes of changing the minds of Trump supporters by yelling louder, I bring bad news- it won't work. If you're protesting just to vent, that's perfectly fine- but eventually we have to face up to the reality of not winning. The time to change all of these things was November 8th, and before that day.

Elections matter. You cannot be an activist and divorce yourself of that.

"The Rivalry"- My First Lehigh-Lafayette on the Hill

Lehigh University and Lafayette College played 149 games before I ever saw one, despite growing up in the Easton area. Even that 150th game though was played in New York City, at Yankee Stadium, and so even seeing that game didn't count to me as "seeing" one, to me. I've been to pre-game tailgates, particularly when I was in college and Goodman Stadium was just across town, but I had never went in- until yesterday. I went into Fisher Field and watched the 152nd game.

This game was a mismatch, and there wasn't really any drama to it. Lehigh won 45-21, and that looks a lot closer than it was. Lafayette has won three games in the past two years, and it showed yesterday. The game wasn't sold out, and Lehigh seemed to have a lot more people who traveled to this one than normally would go to the road stadium. While Lafayette did win that 150th battle, since then it's been Lehigh's game.

Fisher Field is a pretty cool place to see a game. As you can see above, it's a really nice venue, and it can be loud when the crowd wants it to be. Both Fisher and Kirby Field house have undergone some serious renovations in recent years, and the venues are just night and day better than they used to be. I've been going to the Easton-Phillipsburg Thanksgiving Day game at Fisher my whole life, and so it wasn't "special" to be there yesterday. With that said, I did take my time to admire the venue a bit.

Is Lehigh-Lafayette as big of a rivalry as they say? My takeaway from yesterday is yes, but this wasn't the year to watch it. Lafayette needs to make some moves to improve the program, and give their fans something to cheer for again. That might take a year or two. For now though, Lehigh is taking their playoff bound squad to the post-season on a high note, winning the game they really had to win this season.

Re-Thinking My Relationship With Washington, DC

The night was May 1st, 2011, and I had only sent my family on their way back to Easton, PA  a few hours earlier. I was all moved into my new apartment in Arlington, VA, and I was on my Twitter when rumors broke- Osama Bin Laden was dead. That night, I celebrated outside the White House with thousands of other folks around my age. It seemed as though my time in Washington, DC was going to be great.

It ended up being awful. I hated it. I hated the people, I hated the Metro, I hated the sports teams, I hated the bars, I hated life. In hindsight, much of this was my fault, and not their's. I was younger, and frankly not mature enough to want to live in a place like DC. I was flat broke. I was far less interested in my career, or politics in general, and was more interested in having a good time. I was distracted by other people, places, and things in my life at the time. By the end, I actually wanted out bad enough that I was overjoyed on the day I left.

Fast forward to Thursday, when I arrived in Arlington, to my old neighborhood, around 4 pm. I found my way to Bob and Edith's Diner, one of my old favorites in the area. I had myself a late lunch, and walked around in my old neighborhood. Everything old felt new again. Then I went over to the Southwest Waterfront neighborhood, my other "old" neighborhood, and walked around that region as well. It was like a new place to me. I was truly happy to be back in Washington.

I had begun to re-think if I wanted to be in Washington again around the moment I accepted a position on the Clinton campaign. Quite obviously, I am not going to be joining the next President in Washington now. The thought of it though was quite a leap, five years after leaving the town as fast as I could. I guess I'm a bit on the surprised side.

I will be returning to Washington, DC at the start of December to attend some holiday parties, hang out with some people, and see what is happening next. I could see myself taking a job there again, and possibly returning. I'm not quite ready to say that I want to, but I am quite ready to say i'm open to it. Maybe the Potomac isn't so bad after all.

Thursday, November 17, 2016

When a Campaign is too Big to Fail

Big fundraising totals. Big concerts. Huge call numbers. Gigantic staff. Lots of ads. Multiple Presidents on the stump. Huge metrics.

One gigantic loss.

With about two weeks left in the election, I explained to our organizers that the basic organizing principle behind the Clinton campaign was large metrics. More shifts. More organizers. More calls. More door knocks. More volunteers. Quantity was the name of the game. Even if that came at the expense of quality.

Follow up suffered. Relationships suffered. Volunteers didn't feel the connection. I didn't hear it from one person, or two, or three. I heard it from multiple people, in multiple regions, in multiple states. And I don't blame the people on the ground. In fact, I don't know that I blame any individual.

Grassroots organizing is not a quantity thing. It's not a "more" thing. It's not a "productivity" industry, but that's what it's been turned into. A "management" culture has overtaken it. It encourages organizers to cast-off or ignore the local leadership, if they aren't contributing to bigger numbers all the time.

Some of the main skills of organizing are being forgotten in the interest of "more." Relationships matter. Quality matters. We need to remember that moving forward.

Wednesday, November 16, 2016

How to Stand Up to Trump

Donald Trump will be the President of the United States on January 20th. That's not under dispute. He will also lose the popular vote. That's pretty much settled at this point. Donald Trump did say things that were pretty bigoted, from calling Mexicans "rapists and drug dealers," to calling for a Muslim ban, to his denigration of women. That's also not being disputed.

The only one of those three points that is actually going to matter on January 20th is the first one. The second point is but a foot note in history at this point, and the third point was hammered home with millions of dollars of ads- and he still won. The truth is that Trump won in no small part because the attacks on him didn't motivate anyone. It's not that they didn't work, people don't like Donald Trump who voted for him, but none of these attacks got people motivated to vote for Hillary Clinton, and so they didn't. The late movement in the polls was simply a matter of people deciding she was an unacceptable choice for President, and voting for the alternative. People believed every thing that was said about Trump. None of it mattered to their lives.

Now we can sit here and slam those people, and sometimes it's worth doing so. It does take an extremely privileged person to ignore that a candidate for President is a bigot. It does take a morally bankrupt person to accept a White Nationalist in the White House. That's all true. It's not productive to constantly beat people up though. Telling white folks they are to blame for the "Trail of Tears," slavery, and all the Neo-Nazis behind Trump doesn't move them to act, it moves them to shut down. It moves them to tune you out. Why would you vote for a movement that's calling you a racist? No one is motivated by being shamed. Frankly, the perceived (though false) dishonesty of Hillary Clinton appeared to have more of an effect on voters than Donald being mixed in with bigots.

Shouting louder won't change the behavior of people. Calling them racists louder won't make them buy into it. Telling the working class to be different is probably not going to change them from what they are. If that is the game plan moving forward, Trump's coalition will hold.

There are three steps to attack Trump. If we do all three of them, there's a chance we start to hurt him, politically.

  1. Put forward an actual economic agenda. No, it's not just trade and the minimum wage. How would we re-write the tax code? How about get more working class people into apprenticeships and other good paying jobs that anyone who wants to work can do? Let's talk community college and trade schools, how about it? Talk retirement. Talk protecting the safety net. Talk home ownership. Yes, talk trade and minimum wage too, but not just those. Oh, and for the love of God, talk inclusive, not intersectional. I'm all for intersectional politics, but that's not what sells a message to the middle class. The middle class is where elections are still won.
  2. Attack Donald Trump's failures. Donald Trump is not going to deliver the successes that he says. When he inevitably only delivers the kinds of things that any standard Republican would deliver (tax cuts, de-regulation), nail him with it. Remind people constantly of the things he promised. Remind them that they aren't getting those things. Be relentless on it.
  3. Focus on the economic, not the cultural. This doesn't mean we abandon all cultural issues or that we abandon attacking his most egregious failures. This means pick your spots. Donald Trump is going to encourage a lot of hate speech, hate crimes, and online harassment hate. You can't just slap him with all of them, people stop paying attention. Every time he passes traditional Republican orthodoxy on cutting wages, taxes, and regulation, you crush him with it. You call him an establishment Republican. You hit him on the worst of the culture war offenses, and you fight him on the fights that need fighting- like a Supreme Court justice. 
We can't just hit Donald Trump how we want and expect it to work. I know that's not what anyone wants to hear, just like we hated when our mom told us to eat our peas and carrots before ice cream. I've spent my life in a white, working class house hold. I don't want this guy around any longer than necessary either. If we want him gone, discipline will be a huge part of how we do it.