March 30, 2020--TRUMP Care

It is obvious that Trump hates everything associated with Barack Obama. Especially Obamacare.

Not because Trump has problems with what's included in the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare's actual name)--I am certain he has no clue about what's in it. But the one thing he does know is that it will always be thought of as Obamacare. 

Ironically, Republicans who hoped it would turn out to be a disaster mockingly labeled it "Obamacare" so the public would forever associate it with Obama's legacy.

Well, they will turn out to be right--the millions covered by Obamacare will always think of it as connected with Obama, the compassionate president who willed it into being.

On the subject of social and political policies named for people, think about the postwar Marshall Plan, named for Truman's secretary of state, George Marshall; think about the Fulbright Fellowship program named for its lead congressional sponsor, Arkansas senator William Fulbright; think about the Nixon Doctrine which articulated a strategy to contain the Soviet Union in Eastern Europe. And of course there is the granddaddy of all doctrines, the Monroe Doctrine, named for president James Monroe, who sought to limit European involvement in the Americas. 

And then there is the aforementioned Obamacare. Different than the generic Medicare and Medicaid. Both could have been named for President Lyndon Johnson--Johnson Care--who was able to get them approved by a reluctant Congress.

On the other hand, in New York City alone there are numerous buildings named for Trump--TRUMP Tower, TRUMP Parc, and TRUMP Plaza. I could go on. And on. 

On all of these properties in huge gilded letters, visible from miles away, we can see the TRUMP name blazoned on the facades. 

(An interesting sidebar--residents of many of these properties have successfully petitioned to have the TRUMP name removed.)

Further, Trump gets malicious pleasure coming up with nasty nicknames for those he opposes or dislikes.

So, among many others, we have Sleepy Joe Biden, Howdy Doody for Pete Buttigieg, and Pocahontas for Elizabeth Warren.

The latest nasty name is the "China Virus." Excoriated for this as racist, Trump has sort of backed off. But he knows his base loves this sort of xenophobia.

But before moving on, I have a suggestion--let's name the COVID-19 virus the TRUMP Virus. 

He's so obsessed with himself that he might actually like this.

March 27, 2020--Jack: The Epicenter

On the phone Jack said, "Just checking to see how you're doing down there at the epicenter."

"I appreciate that. All things considered, we're as good as can be expected. Though it's scary and a little boring."

"That's why I called--to perk you up."

"That would be a first," I said, half under my breath.

"No need to get your pants in a bunch. I consider myself one of your best friends."

I wondered if that were true and, if it was, wasn't entirely sure I liked the idea of it. I have to think more about that. But not right now. Too much going on. "So tell me," I said, "what's on your mind?"

"You."

"Me? Meaning?"

"Meaning you're in the high risk category and . . ."

I cut in, "I don't have diabetes or lung disease or a heart condition."

"But you're elderly. That puts you at high risk."

"I don't think about myself that way. Age is just a number. And a state of mind."

"But in your case that number is quite a number. And about state of mind, you've got problems with that too." I could hear him stifling a laugh.

"Get on with it," I said to one of my self-declared best friends.

"But then there's the Trump factor."

I knew we'd get there. 

"He's doing a great job, don't you agree?"

"Of course you're kidding. His delaying for well over a month to even acknowledge there was an impending problem makes him rsponsible for thousands of unnecessary deaths. Not that he ever takes responsibility for anything. And then when he did reluctantly admit it was more than a hoax, fake news, he lied about its being under control and that soon it would just disappear as a 'miracle'--he literally said that--which only made matters worse. His people believed him and carried on with their lives as if everything was normal."

I paused to calm down. Jack had me all agitated.

"To him," I continued, "it's been about two things, just two--neither one in the public interest--the state of the economy (really more how the Dow Jones average is doing) and, related, his own personal politics--how the economy and the pandemic would affect his reelection chances."

"In the meantime he's doing pretty good," Jack said, "Since he began those daily press briefing his approval rating has gone up at least five points. Almost to 50 percent."

"So you too only care about those two things. People are dying and all that's on your mind is his approval rating."

I took a deep breath  "You mentioned our so-called friendship. Your seeing things this way makes it very difficult for me to consider you as anything resembling a friend. I think I'm about to hang up."

In fact I did hang up. I was only sorry, to make it more dramatic, I didn't have one of those old-fashioned phones that you could slam into its cradle.

Before I could get a glass of water the phone was ringing. Jack's name came up on the caller ID. I let it ring and ring until it was picked up by the answering machine.

It rang two more times before I picked it up and, not saying a word, I held the phone a good two inches from my ear, as if I did not want to acknowledge or touch Jack.

Jack said, "I get your point. I replayed the tape in my head and I did sound stupid." Still, I did not respond.

"Of course it's not about his reelection chances or the economy. Not when so many Americans are hurting and worse. Please," I had never heard him this contrite, "Let me try again."

I finally grunted, "OK," but continued to hold the phone well away from my ear.

"At times he can be a jerk. Worse than a jerk. At those times I admit I have my problems with him."

"'Problems?'" I shouted. "He has blood on his hands and so do you if you continue to be an apologist for him. You and your kind are enablers of the worst sort. This is not about day-to-day politics but about life and death. Of Americans." 

I was soaking wet and trembling. Afraid for my health. To quote Jack, I am elderly, and, if I can avoid them, shouldn't allow myself to be put in such stressful situations.

Still with my heart pounding, I said, "Do you remember about three weeks ago there was that cruise liner, the Grand Princess I think it was called? There were people on board who had the virus and American authorities didn't allow it to dock on the west coast until there were facilities on shore to put them in quarantine. 

"When Trump was asked why it wasn't allowed to dock he said, 'I'd rather have the people stay to board. I'd rather that,' and I'm quoting him, 'Because I like the numbers being where they are.'" 

"In other word," I said, "not included in the total number of American's infected. That summed him up and how he was handling this--as PR. Not as a health emergency."

"Again," Jack said, "I'm don't disagree with you."

"So?"

"So I still think he'll be reelected."

For the second time, I slammed the phone down. This time on the table top.

March 26, 2020--Jack: Spoiler Alert

Check here tomorrow. I hope to have a report then about my recent phone call with Jack.

It ended with him . . .

March 24, 2020--I HopeThis Gives You A Smile

One last jokey thing about toilet paper and it will be out of my system.

March 30, 2020--Growing Toilet Paper

I admit to being fascinated by the run on toilet paper during this stressful time. 

I suspect it has little to do with things gastric. It feels similar to how during impoverished time, often during wars, when one's currency had collapsed, people turned cigarettes into currency. 

But toilet paper?

If I'm right about this, see below for how you can avoid desperately wandering from supermarket to supermarket in search of TP as the shelves of paper goods empty.

Grow your own! 

For those of a younger generation who do not remember how people used avocado pits to start avocado plants and trees, here is how that was done--

The bulbous pit was dipped gently into a glass of water, suspended there on a nest of toothpicks stuck in the soft parts of the pit. Roots would emerge and soon there was a plant spike and a web of leaves. It was ready for transplanting and, who knows, maybe in 50 years there would be a few avocados.

Give it a try.

March 20, 2020--Coronavirus

I've been wanting to write about COVID-19 but thus far have been unsuccessful.

Everything meaningful seems to have been explored, even what we might learn from Daniel Defoe's 1722 novel, Journal of the Plague Year, which is about the 1665 Bubonic Plague. Quit a bit, actually.

But when reading about the current flu season (as distinguished from COVID-19) I have a few questions. 

I am hesitant to pose them, concerned that I will be viewed as being insensitive or, minimally, not yet ready to go along with the conventional wisdom.

Let me begin by citing a few statistics from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC)--

As of yesterday morning in the U.S. there were between 36 and 51 million cases of the 2020 flu.

They have led to between 17 and 24 million medical visits.

In turn, there have been 37,000 to 67,000 hospitalizations.

Tragically, there have been 22,000 to 55,000 deaths.

In regard to the coronavirus, as of yesterday morning there were 10,691 confirmed cases in the U.S.

Of these, 10,424 were so-called "active cases" and 64 (or 1 percent) "serious or critical."

There have thus far been 160 deaths nationwide.

I am not good with numbers and even less adept at statistics. For example, in regard to the 2020 flu data, I do not know why there is such a wide disparity in regard to hospitalizations and deaths. But the comparative numbers between COVID and the basic 2020 flu are stunning enough to cause me to be skeptical about what we have thus far faced and what is ahead of us.

I know I am comparing apples and oranges--the 2020 flu has by now nearly run its course whereas COVID-19 is in its early or mid stages. And the viruses that do the infecting emerged from two very different kinds of pathogens.

But again, in spite of this they are both viruses and the huge difference in the numbers suggests that we should be talking publicly about this as it might contribute to refining our approach to data collecting and reporting and double-check to make sure our health policy is as effectively targeted as possible.

With that said, we should take every precaution that is recommended. It would be irresponsible to behave in any other way.

Still, can those of you who know how to run and understand numbers straighten me out? 

Or is it possible that we as a nation are doing a little overreacting? 

March 17, 2020--George Lindberg's Straw Dog

George Lindberg, a very good friend from Maine sent me this and I thought you might like to see it--

There are a few more coronavirus cases here in Maine.  Folks hunkering down, staying at home. Schools preparing for homeschooling on line.  As you know all the kids in Maine have PCs.  Sure. But they all don’t have wi-fi at home.   

Our kids calling to shop for us and whatever else we need.  I asked for $$$ but they won’t . . .

Stores are having a run on toilet paper and paper towels.   

What?

Crazy stuff this pandemic. 

I’m wondering if all this money earmarked for coronavirus relief will eventually be tapped for wall building.  I’m surprised Honduras hasn’t been blamed for it.  

Well, stay safe down there. We’ll get through it.  Our supreme leader is at the helm.  

Oh crap!  I just realized that must be the reason for the run on toilet paper.  

March 16, 2020--Exhausted

Attempting to keep up with the pandemic, the stock market, and the Democratic presidential primaries (somehow all connected) has exhausted me and so I will not have anything to post today but will be back with something interesting on Tuesday. 

Stay safe. Wash, wash your hands.

March 12, 2020--18-to 44-Year-Old Voters

For decades I have been deeply disappointed while waiting for young people to show up to vote. 

This time around it looks as if a majority will again sit out the election. Even with the inspiring Bernie Sanders in the race the number of youngish people not voting is increasing.

I don't get it. The future belongs to them and all they need to do to shape policies that would improve their lives is reach out and take charge. The sooner the better many feel. I do. We have made a mess of the world and if young people want a better life it's in their hands to bring that about.

It won't be easy. Not everyone will welcome them, not everyone is eager to stand aside and let them take the lead. But if they do not, if they leave it to old men, things are likely to continue to deteriorate.

From the Washington Post look at the numbers from this week's series of primaries--

Sanders’s campaign has argued that he can win in the general election because of his appeal to young people. But that hasn’t been true in the early contests. On Tuesday he again fared poorly, including with young voters

Voters aged 18 to 44 were 40 percent of the vote in Mississippi in 2016, but just 32 percent on Tuesday. 

In Missouri, they were 41 percent in 2016 and 32 percent on Tuesday. 

In Michigan, youth turnout was the reason Bernie pulled an upset in 2016, but 18-to-44-year-olds’ share of the vote dropped from 45 percent then to 38 percent earlier this week. 

For years I've attempted to understand this. Without success. So I turned to guest blogger Sharon, who wrote--

On why young people don't turn out? I heard one say they go to Bernie’s rallies to post pictures on Instagram and to say they were there.

I guess voting doesn’t give them the same cred. 

In 2016 I overheard kids in Denver saying they would vote for the marijuana initiative on the ballot but would not vote for president.

Sadly, this sounds about right. 

March 11, 2020--Germaphobe In Chief

Isn't it ironic that the world's best-known germaphobe, Donald Trump, may be in the process of being brought down by a whopper of a germ, the coronavirus.

I knew Trump was serious about running for president when he mingled in crowds and shook hands with people along the rope line without wearing gloves.

Years before that, occasionally in Manhattan, we would run into him and he always wore gloves, even in the middle of summer.

Even now, he is desperate to pretend everything is normal, claiming without evidence that the virus, like a "miracle" will soon just "disappear," the stock market will come roaring back, and in a romp he will win reelection.

Thinking about this and how Trump is behaving, a number of friends have been saying that the virus doesn't have to disappear to keep his supporters in line because, like his claim that he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and get away with it, he could bungle the response to the pandemic (as is currently happening) and none of his people would care.

They would go along with the talking points which assert there is no public health problem. Like Ukraine, like with North Korea, like behaving as an apologist for Vladimir Putin, it's all a media-generated "witch hunt." The coronavirus is a "hoax" intended to bring Trump down.

But what is unfolding is categorically different than "lock her up" or calling the press the "enemy of the people." By comparison they are benign.

What we are seeing now is hitting much, much closer to home. It is literally a matter of life and death. Not some insipid chant at a feel-good Trump rally.

For example, many of his followers have aging parents or are elderly themselves. They have underlying medical issues such as COPD or heart disease and they know if they contract the virus there is a good chance they will die.

This is not an example of a Trump-inspired cost-free political frolic but a deeply feared threat. So lying about this is very different than lying about Benghazi. Deception will not make the virus go away.

In crises like the Bay of Pigs or 9/11presidents are supposed to remain calm and help people get through the trauma, not make matters worse by being flippant or incompetent. They need to feel our fear and pain, not exploit it for their own political benefit.

There is one good thing--Trump has made such an obvious and blatant mess of this existential crisis that people are finally coming to realize he is a fraud and cannot be depended upon to make us feel safe. Even some of his own people. Making citizens feel protected is a president's most important responsibility.

The current situation then represents a huge political disaster for him from which there is no easy recovery. Even members of cults (or Congress) have on occasion broken away from their charismatic leaders. I expect that something similar will soon change the narrative for some of Trump's most fervent acolytes. 

The fun for them is over.

March 10, 2020--So Tired

From a friend writing about Joe Biden--

"I just want some quiet, dignified experienced leadership. I'm so tired."

March 9, 2020--Bernie: Likable Enough?

Famously, in 2008, during the run up to the Democratic primary in New Hampshire, at the debate that featured Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, when the moderator asked Clinton whether she had the personal appeal to defeat her opponent, before she could answer, Obama interjected, "You're likable enough, Hillary."

The audience moaned and during the next few days Obama was widely criticized for his insensitivity and, as some claimed, his sexism. For interrupting her, for discussing her personality rather than her ideas and qualifications. They next thing, some speculated, he'd be talking about her clothes.

It was more than implied that he would not have behaved this way if he had been debating a male opponent.

Ultimately and ironically the bottom line was that Hillary lost the nomination because, among other things, the postmortems found, many potential voters didn't vote for her because they found her not to be likable. 

It could be that this time around Elizabeth Warren suffered the same fate. She too may have lost because many felt she too was not likable enough.

Sexism was again surely an issue. To smooth some of her rough edges she should have appeared on Saturday Night Live earlier in the primary season and done a little campaigning with her burrito-snatching dog, Bailey.

There is president for that. Remeember, Bill Clinton appeared on the Arsenio Hall Show and, donning shades, played a little sax. Even the dour Richard Nixon tried to demonstrate he had a sense of humor (he didn't) and showed up on Laugh-In, where he called for them to "Sock it to me." He was that desperate.

Speaking about likability, how likable is Bernie Sanders? 

To his followers, likability doesn't begin to characterize their fervor.  But to many, including voters who he has to appeal to now to defeat Joe Biden, his anger and grumpiness are turnoffs. After Trump they are looking for someone who can win but also calm things down.

Perhaps because of the absence of likability Bernie's mien is becoming aggravating and his numbers in the polls are sliding. Sexism for him is. not an issue.

Biden is clearly not a policy machine equalling Warren or Sanders, but an increasing number of Democrats are finding him . . . likable. Someone with whom they would like to have coffee or a beer.

This may not be the best way to pick a president, but there you are.

March 6, 2020--Elizabeth Warren

Elizabeth Warren's announcement yesterday that she is no longer a candidate for the Democratic nomination for the presidency was a class act. 

There was just the right combination of self-insight, a vision for the future, and understandable emotion.

Unlike her colleague candidates, she did not rush to endorse Joe Biden or, for that mater, Bernie Sanders. She indicated she needs to give it some thought. Who to back for the presidency deserves that.

In he meantime, Biden and Bernie Sanders are pursuing her, seeking her support. 

I have a suggestion--Joe Biden should see if she is interested in being his running mate if, which now seems likely, he defeats Bernie and becomes the nominee. And that he and she consider announcing it even this week which would help him win the Michigan primary next week. If he were to win that most savvy political observers feel it would in effect win him the nomination. It would suggest that over the next few weeks Biden would run the Midwest primary table.

And wouldn't Warren be an excellent running mate and, ultimately, vice president.

Biden was a deeply involved vice president to Barak Obama and from that experience would likely be an excellent president to partner with. He could, in effect, mentor her, assisting her get ready, while burnishing her resumé, to run again for the presidency four years hence. 

In the meantime, Warren would help draw progressives, women especially, to support him.

With Joe already 77 it feels likely that he would opt to be a one-term president. 

So this scenario for each of them could be politically advantages and responsible. It would also help breech the divide within the Democratic Party between progressives and moderates. Breeching divides will be Biden's agenda for the remained of the campaign and, if he succeeds, his presidency.

March 5, 2020--The Youth Vote

Interviewed last night on the Rachel Maddow Show, Bernie Sanders spoke with pride about how his political "movement" was attracting increasing numbers of young voters.

When Rachel pointed out that this is untrue, he blanched and insisted that it is. She pressed him, noting the evidence does not support that conclusion.

He disagreed, saying he "believes" it to be true. 

It was as if he said, if the facts aren't corroboratable, turn to believes to make your case.

Here, from USA Today are the facts. They support Rachel Maddow:

Exit polls for five southern states that Biden won – Alabama, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia – found that young voters did not show up at the polls in the numbers they did in 2016.

• In Alabama, only 7% of the voters were in the 17-29 range compared to 14% in 2016. Sanders won six of every 10 of those voters Tuesday compared to four of 10 in 2016.
• In North Carolina, 13% of Tuesday’s electorate were young voters, compared to 16% four years ago. Of those, 57% went for Sanders in 2020 compared to 69% in 2016.
• In South Carolina, young voters made up 11% of the electorate Tuesday compared to 15% in 2016. Sanders won 43% of those voters Tuesday compared to 54% four years ago.

• n Alabama, only 7% of the voters were in the 17-29 range compared to 14% in 2016. Sanders won six of every 10 of those voters Tuesday compared to four of 10 in 2016.
• In North Carolina, 13% of Tuesday’s electorate were young voters, compared to 16% four years ago. Of those, 57% went for Sanders in 2020 compared to 69% in 2016.
• In South Carolina, young voters made up 11% of the electorate Tuesday compared to 15% in 2016. Sanders won 43% of those voters Tuesday compared to 54% four years ago.

Anecdotally, it does appear that many college-age students turn out for Sanders' rallies, but this is never quantified. How many register to vote and then actually do is. And as one can see from the actual Super Tuesday vote, Rachel Maddow had it right.

I am reminded of 19-year-old James Kunen's Strawberry Statement: Notes of A College Revolutionary, a 1970 book about the student protests that roiled Columbia University's campus in 1968.

It was serious business but had another side to it that Kunen also wrote about--the "revolution" was a great place to meet girls.

Is it too cynical of me to point this out?

March 4, 2020--Money Can't Buy You Love

The Washington Post headline this morning had it right--Biden "Romps." 

If I'm coherent enough after staying up all night to gather the results from Super Tuesday, am I right to say that the only state outstanding is California, which Sanders is likely to win? Fairly narrowly at that after losing much of his lead there to a post-South Carolina revivified Joe Biden.

Biden won big in Texas, didn't he? Yes Texas.

When all is tallied, it may look as if Biden will emerge with more actual Super Tuesday delegates than Bernie. Am I right in what I wrote Monday that Bernie's movement is not a juggernaut, not an overwhelming movement but a more conventional candidacy where he has trouble getting more than 25-30 percent of the vote? That his candidacy has a ceiling, and not  a very high one at that?

But Sanders will live to fight many days. Many. Basically saying the same thing over and over until we all collapse from boredom, exhausted by his angry one-note rant. 

Voters, it seems, want to feel good and optimistic and Bernie makes everyone as grumpy as he is. Don't we all have at least one blustering uncle like that who we hope not to get stuck sitting next to on Thanksgiving?

Isn't the biggest loser from yesterday Elisabeth Warren who came in third in Massachusetts? Third in her home state!

Actually, the biggest loser was the half-a-billion-dollar candidate Mike Bloomberg who discovered that money can't buy you love, only American Samoa. 

March 2, 2020--Bernie's Ceiling?

After each debate and primary, political pundits make lists of "winners and losers." 

The Washington Post, New York Times, and the cable news channels publish theirs even before all votes are counted and all the crosstalk and shouting subsides.

Saturday evening Biden was declared the winner of the South Carolina primary by all the networks literally seconds after the polls closed. How well he did was that obvious. There was only one winner, and quite a victory it was. Biden by a KO with Bernie the sole loser. Sanders got just 20 percent of the vote while Joe received a resounding 48 percent.

Actually, though Sanders lost in a landslide, the biggest loser of the night might have been his self-proclaimed "movement."

The Sanders' movement, Bernie reminds us many times a day, consists of millions of modest folks contributing on average about $18 to his campaign and they are said to be augmented by millions more who have volunteered to work on his campaign. 

I am certain that most of what he reports is accurate (at least the money-raising part of it is verifiable and the amount raised and the number contributing is truly remarkable), but my sense of something that claims to be a political movement needs to attract more than a fifth of the vote.  

We'll know better tomorrow when the results of the 14 Super Tuesday primaries are tallied, but at the moment I am wondering about the power of Bernie's juggernaut, including how many young people have actually turned out to support him, how many first-time voters he calls forth, and how well organized his volunteers are.

During the past year, in poll after poll, Trump consistently has been shown to be supported by 40 to 42 percent of those surveyed. I can't recall one poll where he dipped lower than 40 percent or was preferred by more than 42 percent.

Some who study these matters say this is his ceiling. Joe Scarborough calls him a "42 percent candidate."

If the ceiling metaphor works for Trump it likely works for the Democratic candidates. Warren appears unable to rise above 10 percent, Klobuchar 5 percent, Buttigieg 15 percent, and until Saturday, Biden's ceiling was about 20 percent.

Again, we will see how this heuristic works on Super Tuesday. It already appears that Sanders will do extremely well in California and that might scramble this analysis. Then again if this occurs but the other 13 primaries stay true to form (even with Mayor Pete out of the race) it may mean that California is an outlier.

One thing that seems likely is that as a result of the vote counts Tuesday night the Democratic race will be scrambled. The most likely outcome is that by the end of the day we will have a two-person race--Biden versus Sanders. Then we would learn if there is in fact a robust Bernie movement or revolution. My current sense of things is that it is considerably less than represented. Most voters appear to want calm and healing not confrontation and uncertainty.

And then there are the huge egos. That could keep everyone in the race until the convention in Milwaukee.