You'll have to excuse the bad camera work on that video. I couldn't find the link to the one I wanted. But it is the words that matter. I think it his best speech.
I'm afraid I find it hard to get past Obama's delivery style :(
In other news, I see Lufthansa has suspended flights to Venezuela. Apart from the fall in demand, currency controls instigated by Chavez mean that revenue has to be kept in Venezuela in bolívars, which have fallen 40% against the euro this year.
I'm afraid I find it hard to get past Obama's delivery style :(
I understand. He has kind of a flat "lawyerly" way of speaking. But I thought he handled the history involved in the moment and current events very well, showing that we can be our own worst enemy if we don't think things through carefully. I had not seen the speech in its entirety until I saw a video on YouTube and thought there might be others out there in the same boat. I thought it important for people to listen, especially on Memorial Day weekend.
In other news, I see Lufthansa has suspended flights to Venezuela.
One thing people like Chavez and his successor don't seem to realize is that the world doesn't function under the system they are espousing. Business doesn't have to accommodate them. Given little change in their policies I think Venezuela will become more isolated making things even more difficult for its people. They only have so much in reserve and obviously that isn't enough even now.
I originally skipped the speech because it's youtubed and I don't often bother with youtube. (Been much quicker if they'd written it down and let me read it--woulda taken a lot less time for me to get through it.) But, the controversy compelled me to sit through it.
I find it neither one of Obama's best speechs nor a ‘weak’ speech. It was a good speech, but Obama sometimes soars, and this didn't soar.
Compared to Trump it soared. ;) I've listened to bits and pieces of Trump on the news and this Obama speech was so nice and refreshing. It was intelligent. I shudder to think of what I may have to listen to after the election.
Obama's job approval ratings went back up over 50% this spring as the voters got a prolonged look at crew the Republicans fielded as a potential replacement, and that was before they settled on Trump even.
Depressing. But he did have a very good point about how each candidate is proceeding with their campaign. What Trump has done is plug into a discontent in America that politicians seem to have underestimated. Trump's "branding himself" as an outsider has appealed to people because of that. But while he may be an outsider when it comes to politics he is certainly not an outsider when it comes to business. And business practices in America are part of the problem. I agree that Obama seems to have a better take on how to respond to Trump's strategy. Hillary would do well to emulate him.
"I haven't always agreed with his handling of things."
I'd go further and say some of his policies are just flat wrong. But, given the alternatives, I'd still vote for him a third time over either of the other two. Obama has said publicly that he believes he could win a third term if he were constitutionally allowed to run for a third term; I think he's right.
Obama has said publicly that he believes he could win a third term if he were constitutionally allowed to run for a third term; I think he's right.
Given the choices out there he may very well be right. It's hard to imagine with people out there who are so anti-Obama, though.
I would probably vote for him again, but I don't think that Hillary would be as bad as people think. At least she does have some experience. And even if I were able to get past Trump's obnoxious "shake 'em up" campaign strategy I think he is more part of the problem here than is Hillary. Although that NAFTA thingy her husband ushered in hasn't been all wine and roses for us.
It appears that the leveling of Fallujah is well under way. They pretty much leveled Rhamadi to the ground to get about 6-8 hundred Da’esh fighters, and it appears they're well into the process of repeating that success on Fallujah.
I wonder what the Americans here think of violent protests at Trump rallies? Over here, the media report it with euphemisms such as "Trump rally sparks clashes". Is it not rather the case that these are likely Democrat supporters with a tenuous grasp of democracy? Don't they realise that they get to express their opinion at the ballot box? (Ok, maybe not all of them).
Extremely low in my opinion. Although the opposing campaigns are muddying the waters so much that anything could happen. Both sides are treating the populace like morons, and I see a rising level of frustration about it.
Pete: "Extremely low in my opinion. Although the opposing campaigns are muddying the waters so much that anything could happen. Both sides are treating the populace like morons, and I see a rising level of frustration about it."
OK, I asked because I saw that some polls just recently had the leave-side in the lead.
Yeah, I just saw that too Marcus. That's down from a comfortable 15 point lead just a few weeks back. As I said, both sides are doing their best to infantilise the population with "Project Fear". A tad worrying -- I think if Brexit occurs it will be the beginning of the end for the EU.
"As I said, both sides are doing their best to infantilise the population with "Project Fear."
Fear seems a big part of it. Cant help from wondering how a terrorist attack on the Euro Football Championship in France would play into that. My guess is it might help the leave side more. It might also give ammo to Trump in the US.
Of course you could argue that EU coherence and experience in the White House would be a better way to go in stopping future attacks but I doubt voters are all that rational and that theres a greater win for anti immigration (and anti muslim) sentiments. especially initially when feelings are upset. Which would aid Brexit and Trump.
"A tad worrying -- I think if Brexit occurs it will be the beginning of the end for the EU."
It might very well lead in that direction even if I doubt the EU would crumble anytime soon.
Lee: "If Fallujah is successfully razed to the ground I think we can look forward to Baghdad repeating that process in Mosul in the foreseeable future."
Not saying no but it's a much bigger deal. Fallujah is right on the outskirts of Baghdad. Mosul is in a whole other place geographically and much harder to get to. Not to mention way bigger. Check out zeyads map:
Yep. But, if the Shia government gets away with leveling Rhamadi and Fallujah both, then there's no reason to suspect they'll balk at leveling Mosul. They got the firepower to do it, and all the time it takes.
Just saying it's a lot of hostile territory to pass in order to get that firepower in place. Plus I'm not sure neither the "international allies" and especially not the Kurds would stand for the levelling of Mosul in the way those other cities went.
Fallujah's not entirely gone yet. But, I see no sign of ‘international allies’ sayin’ squat over the razing of Rhamadi, nor the impending razing of Fallujah. No reason to think Mosul will be any different, and long as the Shia leave the east bank (‘Left Coast’) alone the Kurds are likely to let them level the Sunni Arab parts of the city on the west side of the Tigris without much in the way of a fuss.
You may be right. I just think there would be greater outrage, well at least some outrage, against that. Plus what would all the sunni states say about it? And the refugee situation would be real bad too. You may be right but I am sceptical.
Why? (And, you can add Raqqa to the list of Sunni Arab strongholds going to rubble without anybody bitchin’ ‘cept the Sunni Arabs, and nobody's listening to them on account of they're hosting Da’esh and their ‘Islamic State’.)
It looks like Omar from Iraq the Model is blogging again. Although it looks like the most recent post was an article written for an online publication which you need to register to read.
"…for an online publication which you need to register to read."
I'm already registered there. (I used to post links to Foreign Affairs until I realized I was the only one registered there. Still, I missed Omar's article.)
That's all they ever got from me, but I signed up long time ago. I recall (I think I recall) that I had to cancel off of their mailing list after they got my e-mail address--but they accepted that first time, been no nuisance since. You should have a trash e-mail address just for such things; I certainly do. Get a free one and give ‘em that and then never visit it.
I looked and you only get to read one article a month when you do the free registration(I haven't registered yet). Did you check out Omar's article? Was there anything new?
I saved the page as a txt file and have e-mailed it to you. (They don't seem to enforce the 1 article a month restriction; don't enforce it against me anyway.)
Did you see the latest on Trump? He's apparently going after the judge who is presiding over the court case on Trump University. He's talking about his being of Mexican heritage as if it in some way would color his ruling in the case, saying he should recuse himself. At least Hillary called him on it making the point that the judge was born in Indiana and his heritage should in no way factor in on his ability to do his job. I wonder if the American people will actually wake up in time to what a poorly qualified candidate for president Trump is.
"Did you see the latest on Trump? *** At least Hillary called him on it…"
Heard ‘bout that, yeah. PBS's Newshour had a discussion on it (Shields and Brooks) and the both of them agreed that Hillary's take down of Trump on the subject (as well as her assault on him day before yesterday, during a speech that had been publicized by the Clinton campaign as ‘a major foreign policy address’) were quite effective. I didn't catch either one of Hillary's appearances, but I had noticed that Sean Hannity was in a tizzy ‘bout it, doing his dead-level best to convince his listeners that Hillary's speech had bombed (an indication that he felt threatened by it, or so I thought at the time). Brooks is the Newshours' resident ‘conservative’ Republican but he's no teabagger and is decidedly anti-Trump, but, even so…
Surprised to hear Ali had died already, last night's news was that the family was gathering and was preparing for his passing, but I figured it'd take longer to get everybody together before they turned off the life support. He had a fairly large family; nine kids I think. I echo the sentiments. RIP Muhammed Ali; he was a credit to the nation.
...both of them agreed that Hillary's take down of Trump on the subject (as well as her assault on him day before yesterday, during a speech that had been publicized by the Clinton campaign as ‘a major foreign policy address’) were quite effective.
I thought her take regarding Trump's remarks on the judge were quite eloquent and spot on. But then, I to, am anti-Trump, so perhaps I am biased. But at least she sounded like an adult with her reasoning, unlike Trump.
"But at least she sounded like an adult with her reasoning…"
That seems to be the general consensus. She managed to match his attacks (Crooked Hillary) without bringing herself down to his level. Most people haven't taken notice of this, but Trump's macho, alpha-male act doesn't work against women. Carly Fiorina gutted him on stage during the debates, and he couldn't figure out how deal with it. His performance against Megyn Kelly of FoxNews wasn't a whole lot better. Hillary's gonna make him look like what he is; she's gonna expose him for what he is, ‘cause he's a one-trick pony, and that trick don't work against women who're not inclined to play that game.
(I've said it before; ya'll ain't seen nothin’ yet; Hillary's only now just beginnin’ to do her number on Trump. He's been takin’ free shots at her whilst she had to deal with Bernie. That free ride's apparently over.)
And, just for good measure, Elizabeth Warren (whom Trump cannot abide) was out there today takin’ more shots at The Donald. Politico.com Repeat performance for her; she's gotten under his skin before.
If only Warren was the Dem candidate instead of Crooked Hillary. Just my wishful thinking.
Flicked on the news. I think I'll have to have a news moratorium for a couple of days. First two minutes was Obama, Bill Clinton and Jesse Jackson in a melee of Ali sycophancy. I suppose some people are bound to be hijacked after death by the "great and good". I'm gonna stick to my own memories of the singular person that he was. (Mind you, Ali's Ireland is as dead as he is ;-/
Trump's making a visit here in the next few days to survey one of his golf courses. A couple of our leftie eejit politicians will be staging a protest. These "Americanophiles" will be the same sort of people that took hatchets to American troop transports at Shannon en route to Afghanistan and Iraq. Probably not the people who mourned outside the US embassy on 9/11.
How in hell do you continentals stick the heat? We've been saved from the western European floods by a bit of a polar high ramming the confluence of Saharan air and continental warmth to the south. I appreciate the wall to wall sunshine, but 20 (C) overnight is stretching my temperate limits. Sixteen at midday would be perfect. Anything into double digits at nighttime is oppressive.
Ok, enough rambling. Just met a few people for Guinness that I've known since Ali was in his prime ;-)
It looks like Bernie is fighting tooth and nail till the end, vowing there will be a contested convention. No wonder Hillary hasn't been concentrating on Trump yet. Although there have been others who have been giving her a helping hand.
I appreciate the wall to wall sunshine, but 20 (C) overnight is stretching my temperate limits.
Okay, I googled that. Wait, I can't believe I saw that right, I'm going to go do it again...yup, it equals 68 F. That is just about perfect weather, especially if there's a breeze. Hmmm...
Hasn't anyone else been getting a message lately about the blog and comments section becoming unresponsive? It goes away if you click on the "wait" button, but it is annoying, as it comes back.
"Hasn't anyone else been getting a message lately about the blog and comments section becoming unresponsive? It goes away if you click on the "wait" button, but it is annoying, as it comes back."
I've always found Blogger page load times to be pretty dismal. Never tried to get to the bottom of it before. Your front page is only 140 KB, which should not be a burden. The background image is large but should be cached. There are some scripts but I haven't delved into what they do. You do have 20+ links to youtube vids, perhaps the downloading of the relevant stills is a drag.
Not at all sure that changing the number of posts on the front page will improve anything, but you could try. If you go to the blogger dashboard, go to "Settings"/"Posts, comments and sharing" ... there is a setting for "show at most x posts". Check that number. The default is 7, but yours is showing 12 posts on the front page. Try reducing the number. Might or might not help. (I'd do it for you but can't since I committed admin hara-kiri ;-)
It seems that Gary Johnson has declared his candidacy for the Libertarian Party. I was thinking it was kind of late in the day for a third party candidate? But, in any case, how will this affect each of the other parties candidates? Who do you think he will draw from? He says he is fiscally conservative (doesn't want to go to war willy nilly) and is socially liberal (wants to legalize marijuana).
"Gary Johnson has declared his candidacy for the Libertarian Party."
Yeah, months ago in fact. He was their nominee last time, 2012; got 1% of the vote. He has some competition for the position, neither of which stand a chance in hell of getting the nomination; Johnson's got that sewn up already. The Libertarian Party is a perennial contender in almost all 50 states in that they're already on the ballot in most states. There's some states where they'll have to qualify again this year, but they've either done it already or are virtually certain of qualifying again before the time limit. Who will he draw from? May not matter; he got 1% last time.
ISIS is targeting civilians attempting to leave the militant-held city of Falluja, as Iraqi forces and militia attempt to wrest back control of the city, a European non-profit operating in Iraq says.
Republicans interested in the long-term viability of their party may be wise to change radio stations. Turn off the conservative talking heads who can’t get past their intense dislike of Hillary Clinton. Turn on sports radio. There, they might learn the value of “tanking” and how it could save the future of the Republican Party.
I saw another piece with a somewhat similar subject matter in Politico (I think it was Politico) over the weekend. Yeah, it was Politico; it's more specifically about how Republican folks are maneuvering to not go down with the Republican ship with Trump at the helm--maybe even save the ship.
Word is Hillary's got enough delegates; the major media are calling it for her. Bernie disagrees. It's really rather odd that he's now trying to get the Superdelegates to give it to him after Hillary's got some 3 million more votes than he does and more earned delegates (Bernie did manage to out-organize her and pick up more caucus delegates than she has grabbed, but not at nearly the pace at which Obama ran up the totals on her back in ‘08, and not enough to overcome her lead in voted primary delegates). Meantime The Donald is gettin’ bunches of flack from Republican officeholders and Republican talking heads and pundits of all stripes for bashing the judge in his fraud trial for being a ‘Mexican’ (judge is an American, born in Indiana, and, while he does have some Mexican roots, his family's been here in the States longer than Trump's family, who came from Germany).
It looks like some Republicans are waffling on their endorsement of Trump after his remarks about the judge presiding over the court case involving Trump U.
Whether or not Trump is a racist his remarks about the judge do amount to bullying, in an attempt to influence a decision in a legal matter.
Word is Hillary's got enough delegates; the major media are calling it for her. Bernie disagrees.
Bernie has stayed in long enough, he should concede. Right now he is only shooting the Democratic party in the foot. They should be unified in opposition to Trump, not divided fighting each other.
Meantime The Donald is gettin’ bunches of flack from Republican officeholders...
Ahh, I see you already mentioned that. Well, it an important point, as there are a lot of people out here whose families originated from other countries.
You know, I have to wonder if Bernie isn't fighting so hard because he knows there are people out there who are willing to vote for anybody but Trump. People who might not choose Bernie in the normal course of events...like me.
"I have to wonder if Bernie isn't fighting so hard because…"
Bernie did not expect to be able to mount a serious challenge to Hillary when he started. This was a ‘cause’ campaign designed to drive the Democratic Party further to the left. (And he's been remarkable successful at that.) He was as astounded as anybody else that his campaign caught fire. Now he's fighting ‘so hard’ because lightning never strikes twice in the same place. This is his one and only shot--he won't get another one.
Bernie did not expect to be able to mount a serious challenge to Hillary when he started.
I think that what we are seeing with both Trump and Bernie is a symptom of the polarized state of America at the moment. We are seeing extreme candidates doing well because people are more unhappy than is understood. People with well paying jobs and lives that are going well don't always notice what is happening with the rest of the electorate who are not as fortunate. The stabilizing effect of the middle class is shrinking, just as the middle class itself is shrinking. Even if Hillary does succeed in becoming president she will find herself with some huge problems to try to fix, especially if she can't get cooperation from Congress.
"…Trump and Bernie…symptom of the polarized state of America at the moment."
I believe you're on to something there.
"The stabilizing effect of the middle class is shrinking, just as the middle class itself is shrinking."
Yep, definitely on to something there.
"…she will find herself with some huge problems to try to fix…"
Obama faced worse; he was looking The Second Great Depression straight in the eye. He will get credit for putting a stop to that (shared with Bernaki who may deserve more credit than Obama). And he had a Republican minority strong enough to block him in the Senate and religiously dedicated to that very task, at all costs. He managed to get some things done in spite of them. Hillary won't face worse.
I just finished listening to Hillary speak. She came out with both barrels aimed at Trump. Very strong. I loved it. Say what you will about Hillary, but she really sounded presidential and deserving of the office, unlike Trump.
Obama faced worse; he was looking The Second Great Depression straight in the eye.
This is true. And how quickly I forget. We were very fortunate to have capable people in place to face that challenge.
Hillary won't face worse.
After her speech tonight I am more confident that she would be up to the task of dealing with whatever comes along. For the first time I actually feel I might be voting for her on her own merits, rather than as the lesser of two evils.
Yeah, from here on in the kid-glove treatment for Trump is over.
It's kinda complicated explaining why the Republicans couldn't actually go after him in a big time way; that story is a good thirty plus years long; goes clear back to Ronald Reagan; and thirty plus years makes for a complicated story. But, Hillary suffers no such impediment; she doesn't have to pretend that Reagan was anything other than a major, but slowly evolving, disaster. And so Trump has lost the relatively free ride he enjoyed in the race for the Republican nomination. Truth time now--she doesn't think the Republican faerie tale histories must be maintained.
"For the first time I actually feel I might be voting for her on her own merits"
Hillary's got a lot of flaws, but one thing she is good at is backroom politicking. (Not one of Obama's strong points.) She might actually get shit done that Obama failed to get done. (And, I'm still damn leery of her foreign policy.) I can only hope she goes in there thinking of her national legacy from day one.
"Say what you will about Hillary, but she really sounded presidential and deserving of the office, unlike Trump."
Surely you jest! :-0 What I heard was a pile of vacuous buzzwords and soundbites. Not a single mention of policy, unlike Trump's speech shortly before. Of course, his policies are nuts, but Hillary doesn't have any plans to change the status quo. None that she's willing to give voice to, at any rate. Which brings me to ...
"Obama faced worse; he was looking The Second Great Depression straight in the eye. He will get credit for putting a stop to that"
Another jester. We're still looking a Great Depression in the eye. The only credit Obama will get is for extending it another decade. All he's got to show for it is ballooning debt and a lot of very happy corporate bandits. You think the middle class (the ones that Hillary didn't devote two words to in her speech) is shrinking for no reason? Obama has presided over the greatest growth in inequality in modern times. And Hillary can be depended upon to do zilch about it.
"Obama has presided over the greatest growth in inequality in modern times."
I'm not sure that's true, but it may be. I'd have to check the stats on that for myself; your word is hardly credible, you being you. But, it might be true in spite of you having said it. However, that's not a trend that started with Obama--that was baked into the cake before he ever thought about running for Prez. (That he spent his political capital on other things and didn't even try to fix that is one of the things that make him such a disappointment to me.)
"And Hillary can be depended upon to do zilch about it."
I'm afraid that may be true. However, Hillary is a clever bitch. Possible she may understand why Obama beat her last time and Bernie put up such a strong (if not credible) challenge this time, and realize the two are connected. Maybe if she wants bad enough to be though well of later…
The fact that you don't know what way income distribution is trending says a lot about why you might countenance voting for Hillary. You're right, it didn't start with Obama -- he just copperfastened it. Credit where credit is due: the bailout of the auto industry has been a great success. But QE has created asset inflation for those who need it least, while low interest rates have failed to benefit those who need them most. Income inequality has risen in two out of three metro areas in the US under Obama's watch.
You're right about Hillary -- she leeched so much cash out of corporate America for the Clinton machine that she might be able to afford to sit back and think about her legacy now. Somehow I doubt that all her benefactors expecting some quid pro quo will be thinking quite the same.
P.S. don't make me laugh -- Great Depressions in Ireland have nothing to do with what our president, prime minister, or government do. We blow whatever way the global economy is going (at least, the bits we trade with). We got hammered by the recession, and now our last four years of GDP growth has been at a level the US couldn't hold a candle to even in the boom. In fact it needs some serious hosing down if we are not to overheat.
Interesting comments here. I am curious about the Trump VS Clinton race and how that will play out. Enough of the primaries and let's go into the finals already.
As for recessions and bubbles we have had a new law imposed here in Sweden. As of June 1'st banks can't lend money without an amortization plan. Of course they couldn't go and make it an easy law like 30 or 40 year mortages. No it says that a loan must be amortized down to 75% of the house "value" (initially the purchase price) by 2% per year, then down to 50% of the "value" by 1% per year. And it's only for new loans, existing ones are not impacted.
I guess the idea was to make a law that actually did scale down the growth in private debt, but to be real careful to try to not pop the bubble. To bring about that "soft landing" that's often mentioned but that we have hardly any examples of.
As you might imagine this led to a rush to both buy and sell houses last month. Since buyers wanted to get them good ol' loans you don't pay off and sellers predicted prices might fall ones them good ol' loans were gone so they wanted to cash in before that.
By the way if you're interested in how bad the bubble is, and why I am so adamant we're in for a crash look at the following graph. From bottom up the lines mean:
Green: Real wages Blue: House prices Red: Real debt in the housing sector. Yellow: Apartment prices (insane and driven to a great degree by Stockholm inner city)
You might notice the smallish dip during the global financial crisis of -08 and how much prices and debt have risen since.
Also look at the downturn in the early 90's. That's during what used to be called our "financial crisis" and it was actually quite bad for many. Now compare that to todays situation and you might get what I mean. There will be no soft landing but a monumental crash.
And that will also efficiently and for a long, long time end any notion about Sweden being or should be a "humanitarian superpower". Any politician who speaks like that post crash will likely end up on a rope (well not really, their career will just be over).
Not so fast on the primaries, Marcus. The Bern has just announced he ain't giving up! :-) Hillary's gonna have to wage a war on two fronts for the next month and a half.
"The fact that you don't know what way income distribution is trending says a lot…"
That's not what I said, and it's not a fact, but that's par for your course…
"P.S. don't make me laugh -- "
You got nothin’ to laugh about, but I rather doubt there's any reason for me to discuss economics with the likes of you; pearls before swine and all that…
One of my neighbors claims to know Bernie Sanders, personally, doesn't claim to be good buddies with him or anything like that, just claims to know him from her days as a college professor in New England. (Bernie's wife was head of a small liberal arts college.) This piece describes the guy she describes, my neighbor that is, not Bernie's wife.
Associate Press says Clinton won California, and it wasn't even close. NYT reporting AP feed results. A quarter of California Republican primary voters voted for someone other than Trump, although there is nobody still running for the nomination, other than Trump.
Hillary's got a lot of flaws, but one thing she is good at is backroom politicking.
Yes, and she may get along better with some who had their backs up against Obama, just because. There needs to be some cooperation in Washington to get things done. The question comes with whether or not she meant the things she was saying last night. Obviously politicians say what they think the voters want to hear. People have already accused her of stealing a leaf from Bernie's book. But at least she came across as being sincere, especially when talking about her mother and the road women have had to take to get to the point of actually having a woman nominated by a major political party for the office of president.
She might actually get shit done that Obama failed to get done.
Despite her seeming drawback as a Washington insider, that may actually be a plus. Because it will take real change on the inside to get things done. It's the same argument you have given for real change in the Middle East, it has to come from within. It all boils down to what she wants her legacy to be.
Not a single mention of policy, unlike Trump's speech shortly before.
I didn't feel it was the place where she needed to go into detail. It was basically a thank you speech for all of those who have supported her so far, and asking others to give her a chance. If there are those who are seriously considering voting for her in the general election (assuming she finalizes her nomination at the convention) I am sure there are various places they can go to see what her platform is. I also assume there will be some kind of debate, if not more than one, between the final candidates for president where some detail can be learned (one would hope, anyway).
Of course, his (Trump's) policies are nuts,...
Got that in one. Change is one thing, but voting for him would be like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Obama has presided over the greatest growth in inequality in modern times.
He has certainly been president during that time. But I suspect that this was longer in the making and that other presidents before him contributed something to that.
Credit where credit is due: the bailout of the auto industry has been a great success.
I'm not sure, but didn't Bush actually put in place the start of that? Obama just continued with it.
We got hammered by the recession, and now our last four years of GDP growth has been at a level the US couldn't hold a candle to even in the boom.
That actually sounds a little scary. A nice steady rise sounds a little more sustainable. It just sounds like you're mired in a high and low cycle that will eventually cause you to crash and burn again.
But QE has created asset inflation for those who need it least,...
QE may come back to bite us, yes. But another Great Depression wouldn't have felt very good either. :(
You might notice the smallish dip during the global financial crisis of -08 and how much prices and debt have risen since.
It looks like there was a smallish dip around 2011 as well. What was that?
Now compare that to todays situation and you might get what I mean.
Yeah. Those numbers look bad. How much of the apartment price increase is due to the influx of more people into the country? That could be partly why those prices are so out of sight. Supply and demand at work.
"…didn't Bush actually put in place the start of that? Obama just continued with it."
Nope that was the TARP program, the bailout of Wall Street. Bush was gonna let Detroit go down. Obama reversed that decision and actually diverted some of the unused TARP money from Wall Street to Detroit.
A quarter of California Republican primary voters voted for someone other than Trump, although there is nobody still running for the nomination, other than Trump.
That doesn't sound like they place much confidence in their parties presumptive nominee.
"Federal filings show that Daniel Petrocelli [lead defense lawyer, Donald Trump's lead lawyer, for the class-action lawsuit against Trump University] has…contributed $2,700 [,federal maximum allowable for a personal contribution, to Hillary Clinton's campaign]after Trump brought him on to the politically fraught case." Politico.com (emphasis added)
I didn't watch that speech by Hillary that came up before (Lynnette @ Tue Jun 07, 11:01:00 pm ↑↑), but the reviews seem to be all in accord, including praises from Republicans one would ordinarily expect to be hostile parties. Consensus, overwhelming consensus is that it was a very good speech. The sole voices to the contrary, to this point, appear to be Sean Hannity and Petes.
I mentioned before that Hillary was a better backroom politician than was Obama. VOX generally agrees and goes on to elaborate on that theme. I think Klein is on to something there; worth the read--not too long.
In this telling, in order to do something as hard as becoming the first female presidential nominee of a major political party, she had to do something extraordinarily difficult: She had to build a coalition, supported by a web of relationships, that dwarfed in both breadth and depth anything a non-incumbent had created before. It was a plan that played to her strengths, as opposed to her (entirely male) challengers' strengths. And she did it.
And maybe, more than anything else, that is the kind of experience and talent we need in a president today, to unite us again. That's why I was so thrilled with her speech the other night. For the first time that was what I thought I saw in Hillary.
[Lynnette]: "But I suspect that this [growth in inequality] was longer in the making and that other presidents before him contributed something to that."
Yes it was, but I was talking specifically about the inequality that has arisen on Obama's watch due to the policies implemented after the global financial crisis. You're right that another Great Depression would have been no fun, but that will be cold comfort to the people impacted anyway. Plus, the prospect of a Great Depression is far from over, as structural and long term unemployment with consequent weak demand could yet bring it about. Like I've said, the Sanders and Trump phenomena are not random happenings. Those disenchanted voters are reacting to real events.
[Lee]: " I rather doubt there's any reason for me to discuss economics with the likes of you"
Yer right there sonny, if yer previous attempts in maths and science are anything to go by. I'd say save yerself the embarrassment, but then y'all never did have the good grace to be embarrassed. Somethin' else yankin' yer chain of late, though. I haven't been eggin' y'all on any time recently, or even deigning to engage y'all on any level, but yer belly-achin' is on the increase regardless. I suppose y'all never did need much excuse to act cantankerous.
I'm not the one still broodin’ ‘bout "yer previous attempts in maths and science…" You're gonna havta let that go one of these days fat boy. Broodin’ ‘bout it ain't gonna get it back.
Okaaayyyy… The Republicans' House Select Committee on Hillary is now subpoenaing Pentagon officials who claim to not be able to find anybody matching the story line of some dude who called up Sean Hannity and fed him a line ‘bout Benghazi that got the said somebody rushed onto the air to repeat his unsubstantiated story (which was probably his goal, gettin’ on the air). Politico.com
Those disenchanted voters are reacting to real events.
Yes, they are.
When I was growing up the only homeless people you could find were down in the cities. Now you see them all the time, even here in my town. While we have seen a recovery in the stock market, and the housing market (although that is still kind of off kilter), we are still seeing incomes that aren't keeping pace with rising costs.
"I'm not the one still broodin’ ‘bout yer previous attempts in maths and science…"
LOL. I picked up a first class honours degree in astrophysics since then. How 'bout you chump? Manage to convince any other dunderheads about that speed of light thing? ;-)
[Lynnette]: " While we have seen a recovery in the stock market, and the housing market (although that is still kind of off kilter), we are still seeing incomes that aren't keeping pace with rising costs."
Exactly the point. Those things benefit people who are already asset rich. That is the direct result of quantitative easing.
"I picked up a first class honours degree in astrophysics since then."
Yeah, right. Were that true you would have known that they long ago figured out that the "too-fast" neutrino phenomenon, the ‘speed of light thing’ to which you refer, was a glitch in the sensor wiring.
Uh, I'm pretty sure *I* reported that at the time they discovered it. Regardless, *you* were the one that had previously claimed that FTL neutrinos would not irreparably bust the theory of relativity. I tried to walk you through the maths, but you got stuck on some elementary arithmetic. I understand, of course, why you blotted this from yer memory :-)
Nope, I remember it all too well. A very specific piece of a very specific paper by Einstein which you couldn't understand, leading to some dumbed down maths in an attempt to coach y'all ... but y'all couldn't understand that either. Or rather, ya pretended ya couldn't. Y'all actually came to the correct realisation three times, but then claimed amnesia when it didn't suit yer purposes. That's when I realised y'all were the ultimate mendacious exemplar of the Upton Sinclair quote. And yer still at it :-)
I'm sure ya do, but everybody else will remember the magical mystery maths that nobody ever got to see. You actually explaining something is so far out of character for you that I marvel at your ability to fabricate the memory. You with the magical mystery maths.
Hmmm.... I think it was ‘mighty magical mystery maths’ that was the term in usage at the time… Whatever, the audience will recall it I'm sure… More to the point going forward…
Few years back I dated a lady for a spell who had a college degree, a Masters' degree in some sort Social Sciences thing, worked at the State mental health hospital next county over. One of the things I discovered listening to her stories is that a lot of the crazies they kept there were crazy because they wanted to be. They preferred their fantasies to the real world. Refugees from reality I understood them to be. They chose their fantasies.
I gather that you're making much the same sort of choice here. You're remembering the story as you wish it had been. As with her refugees, I suspect it would take drugs and maybe considerable therapy to bring you back to reality and I can offer you neither (not that I would if I could). But, your fantasy here seems to be fairly benign, no danger to you nor to your fellow man, so why would I bother?
No point in carryin’ on this conversation any further; waste of my time, refugee fat boy (waste of your time doesn't bother me--waste of my time does).
One of the things I discovered listening to her stories is that a lot of the crazies they kept there were crazy because they wanted to be. They preferred their fantasies to the real world. Refugees from reality I understood them to be. They chose their fantasies.
That's sad. That life could be so bad. I know a lot of people find escape in many places, books, movies, the internet, alcohol/drugs, but to so totally disconnect from reality that you couldn't function at all in the real world is a sad waste of a life.
Pete: "Exactly the point. Those things benefit people who are already asset rich. That is the direct result of quantitative easing."
For sure. Even if I knew (or felt) this from the outset and I did my very best to make economic moves that would benefit me, there wasn't much to be done. I started at a too low rung on the ladder to benefit from it. Most I could do was to do precautions so as not to get sucked into the black hole when it materialises.
131 comments:
You'll have to excuse the bad camera work on that video. I couldn't find the link to the one I wanted. But it is the words that matter. I think it his best speech.
I'm afraid I find it hard to get past Obama's delivery style :(
In other news, I see Lufthansa has suspended flights to Venezuela. Apart from the fall in demand, currency controls instigated by Chavez mean that revenue has to be kept in Venezuela in bolívars, which have fallen 40% against the euro this year.
I'm afraid I find it hard to get past Obama's delivery style :(
I understand. He has kind of a flat "lawyerly" way of speaking. But I thought he handled the history involved in the moment and current events very well, showing that we can be our own worst enemy if we don't think things through carefully. I had not seen the speech in its entirety until I saw a video on YouTube and thought there might be others out there in the same boat. I thought it important for people to listen, especially on Memorial Day weekend.
In other news, I see Lufthansa has suspended flights to Venezuela.
One thing people like Chavez and his successor don't seem to realize is that the world doesn't function under the system they are espousing. Business doesn't have to accommodate them. Given little change in their policies I think Venezuela will become more isolated making things even more difficult for its people. They only have so much in reserve and obviously that isn't enough even now.
"I understand. He has kind of a flat ‘lawyerly’ way of speaking."
I suspect that's not his objection.
Weak speech by Obama. Not his best bY far.
Really, Marcus? I thought it quite good. Why did you think it weak?
I suspect that's not his objection.
Well, if Petes wants to he can elaborate further.
[Lynnette]: I think it his best speech.
I will qualify that. I have not heard all of the President's speeches, so I will say it is the best of those that I have heard. :)
I originally skipped the speech because it's youtubed and I don't often bother with youtube. (Been much quicker if they'd written it down and let me read it--woulda taken a lot less time for me to get through it.) But, the controversy compelled me to sit through it.
I find it neither one of Obama's best speechs nor a ‘weak’ speech. It was a good speech, but Obama sometimes soars, and this didn't soar.
Compared to Trump it soared. ;) I've listened to bits and pieces of Trump on the news and this Obama speech was so nice and refreshing. It was intelligent. I shudder to think of what I may have to listen to after the election.
Why wait! ;-)
Why Trump is gonna win
"Compared to Trump…"
Obama's job approval ratings went back up over 50% this spring as the voters got a prolonged look at crew the Republicans fielded as a potential replacement, and that was before they settled on Trump even.
Why Trump is gonna win
Depressing. But he did have a very good point about how each candidate is proceeding with their campaign. What Trump has done is plug into a discontent in America that politicians seem to have underestimated. Trump's "branding himself" as an outsider has appealed to people because of that. But while he may be an outsider when it comes to politics he is certainly not an outsider when it comes to business. And business practices in America are part of the problem. I agree that Obama seems to have a better take on how to respond to Trump's strategy. Hillary would do well to emulate him.
Obama's job approval ratings went back up over 50%...
I must admit to becoming rather fond of him myself, and I haven't always agreed with his handling of things.
"I haven't always agreed with his handling of things."
I'd go further and say some of his policies are just flat wrong. But, given the alternatives, I'd still vote for him a third time over either of the other two. Obama has said publicly that he believes he could win a third term if he were constitutionally allowed to run for a third term; I think he's right.
Obama has said publicly that he believes he could win a third term if he were constitutionally allowed to run for a third term; I think he's right.
Given the choices out there he may very well be right. It's hard to imagine with people out there who are so anti-Obama, though.
I would probably vote for him again, but I don't think that Hillary would be as bad as people think. At least she does have some experience. And even if I were able to get past Trump's obnoxious "shake 'em up" campaign strategy I think he is more part of the problem here than is Hillary. Although that NAFTA thingy her husband ushered in hasn't been all wine and roses for us.
Care to give odds on Brexit Pete?
And, on a subject of less provincial interest…
It appears that the leveling of Fallujah is well under way. They pretty much leveled Rhamadi to the ground to get about 6-8 hundred Da’esh fighters, and it appears they're well into the process of repeating that success on Fallujah.
Daesh won't let civilians leave.
If Fallujah is successfully razed to the ground I think we can look forward to Baghdad repeating that process in Mosul in the foreseeable future.
I wonder what the Americans here think of violent protests at Trump rallies? Over here, the media report it with euphemisms such as "Trump rally sparks clashes". Is it not rather the case that these are likely Democrat supporters with a tenuous grasp of democracy? Don't they realise that they get to express their opinion at the ballot box? (Ok, maybe not all of them).
[Marcus]: "Care to give odds on Brexit Pete?"
Extremely low in my opinion. Although the opposing campaigns are muddying the waters so much that anything could happen. Both sides are treating the populace like morons, and I see a rising level of frustration about it.
If Fallujah is successfully razed to the ground I think we can look forward to Baghdad repeating that process in Mosul in the foreseeable future.
I have heard that people are already trying to leave Mosul. They know.
I wonder what the Americans here think of violent protests at Trump rallies?
Not much. But from what I have read (not having been around then) the sixties saw some rather violent clashes too, so it is nothing new for us.
Don't they realise that they get to express their opinion at the ballot box? (Ok, maybe not all of them).
Now that was a little surreal. But I suppose she sees Trump's policies as a threat to her continued living here.
Has a founding father stepped forward to create a Sunnistan?
Pete: "Extremely low in my opinion. Although the opposing campaigns are muddying the waters so much that anything could happen. Both sides are treating the populace like morons, and I see a rising level of frustration about it."
OK, I asked because I saw that some polls just recently had the leave-side in the lead.
Yeah, I just saw that too Marcus. That's down from a comfortable 15 point lead just a few weeks back. As I said, both sides are doing their best to infantilise the population with "Project Fear". A tad worrying -- I think if Brexit occurs it will be the beginning of the end for the EU.
"Has a founding father stepped forward…?"
Or, Iraq's version of Donald Trump?
As I said, both sides are doing their best to infantilise the population with "Project Fear"
Or, Iraq's version of Donald Trump?
It does seem that people are very similar no matter what country(ies) you are talking about, be it America, the EU or Iraq.
I notice in a recent poll that Hillary now leads Trump by a slim margin.
Germany arrests 3 Syrians in ISIS terror plot
Life inside Fallujah
"As I said, both sides are doing their best to infantilise the population with "Project Fear."
Fear seems a big part of it. Cant help from wondering how a terrorist attack on the Euro Football Championship in France would play into that. My guess is it might help the leave side more. It might also give ammo to Trump in the US.
Of course you could argue that EU coherence and experience in the White House would be a better way to go in stopping future attacks but I doubt voters are all that rational and that theres a greater win for anti immigration (and anti muslim) sentiments. especially initially when feelings are upset. Which would aid Brexit and Trump.
"A tad worrying -- I think if Brexit occurs it will be the beginning of the end for the EU."
It might very well lead in that direction even if I doubt the EU would crumble anytime soon.
Lee: "If Fallujah is successfully razed to the ground I think we can look forward to Baghdad repeating that process in Mosul in the foreseeable future."
Not saying no but it's a much bigger deal. Fallujah is right on the outskirts of Baghdad. Mosul is in a whole other place geographically and much harder to get to. Not to mention way bigger. Check out zeyads map:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-pmZ5oPcWDRg/Vp-DTnXUtDI/AAAAAAAABN0/uZjOS8zej_M/s1600/CZCIBR0WUAAhxdK.png
"…but [Mosul is] a much bigger deal."
Yep. But, if the Shia government gets away with leveling Rhamadi and Fallujah both, then there's no reason to suspect they'll balk at leveling Mosul. They got the firepower to do it, and all the time it takes.
And it solves the problem of what to do with Mosul afterwards.
Just saying it's a lot of hostile territory to pass in order to get that firepower in place. Plus I'm not sure neither the "international allies" and especially not the Kurds would stand for the levelling of Mosul in the way those other cities went.
Fallujah's not entirely gone yet. But, I see no sign of ‘international allies’ sayin’ squat over the razing of Rhamadi, nor the impending razing of Fallujah. No reason to think Mosul will be any different, and long as the Shia leave the east bank (‘Left Coast’) alone the Kurds are likely to let them level the Sunni Arab parts of the city on the west side of the Tigris without much in the way of a fuss.
You may be right. I just think there would be greater outrage, well at least some outrage, against that. Plus what would all the sunni states say about it? And the refugee situation would be real bad too. You may be right but I am sceptical.
"I just think there would be greater outrage…"
Why? (And, you can add Raqqa to the list of Sunni Arab strongholds going to rubble without anybody bitchin’ ‘cept the Sunni Arabs, and nobody's listening to them on account of they're hosting Da’esh and their ‘Islamic State’.)
Paul Ryan has endorsed Donald Trump. WaPo Kinda knew that was comin’ (woulda been surprised if he didn't eventually).
It looks like Omar from Iraq the Model is blogging again. Although it looks like the most recent post was an article written for an online publication which you need to register to read.
Paul Ryan has endorsed Donald Trump.
Yeah, I saw that. Like you, I'm not surprised. Trump seems to be adept at steamrolling over all opposition.
"…for an online publication which you need to register to read."
I'm already registered there. (I used to post links to Foreign Affairs until I realized I was the only one registered there. Still, I missed Omar's article.)
Are they good? Maybe I will have to consider registering. Do they just want an email address?
Hmm...lol! Well, I suppose they must be good otherwise you wouldn't have posted links to them, would you?
"Do they just want an email address?"
That's all they ever got from me, but I signed up long time ago. I recall (I think I recall) that I had to cancel off of their mailing list after they got my e-mail address--but they accepted that first time, been no nuisance since.
You should have a trash e-mail address just for such things; I certainly do. Get a free one and give ‘em that and then never visit it.
I looked and you only get to read one article a month when you do the free registration(I haven't registered yet). Did you check out Omar's article? Was there anything new?
I should go back and read his first post at the new blog. I found this in his profile and kind of wondered about it:
I'm proud of my old blog but not of everything I wrote there. My views are my own, and they continue to evolve...So should yours.
I saved the page as a txt file and have e-mailed it to you. (They don't seem to enforce the 1 article a month restriction; don't enforce it against me anyway.)
Did you see the latest on Trump? He's apparently going after the judge who is presiding over the court case on Trump University. He's talking about his being of Mexican heritage as if it in some way would color his ruling in the case, saying he should recuse himself. At least Hillary called him on it making the point that the judge was born in Indiana and his heritage should in no way factor in on his ability to do his job. I wonder if the American people will actually wake up in time to what a poorly qualified candidate for president Trump is.
I saved the page as a txt file and have e-mailed it to you.
Thanks, Lee! I'll have to read it tomorrow. Bed time for me. G'Night.
RIP Muhammad Ali. I have an early memory of being allowed to stay up for "The Rumble in the Jungle" (1974!).
I shouldn't, but I wonder how the presidential hopefuls will try to ingratiate themselves with Ali fans.
"Did you see the latest on Trump? *** At least Hillary called him on it…"
Heard ‘bout that, yeah. PBS's Newshour had a discussion on it (Shields and Brooks) and the both of them agreed that Hillary's take down of Trump on the subject (as well as her assault on him day before yesterday, during a speech that had been publicized by the Clinton campaign as ‘a major foreign policy address’) were quite effective. I didn't catch either one of Hillary's appearances, but I had noticed that Sean Hannity was in a tizzy ‘bout it, doing his dead-level best to convince his listeners that Hillary's speech had bombed (an indication that he felt threatened by it, or so I thought at the time). Brooks is the Newshours' resident ‘conservative’ Republican but he's no teabagger and is decidedly anti-Trump, but, even so…
Surprised to hear Ali had died already, last night's news was that the family was gathering and was preparing for his passing, but I figured it'd take longer to get everybody together before they turned off the life support. He had a fairly large family; nine kids I think. I echo the sentiments. RIP Muhammed Ali; he was a credit to the nation.
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Yes. He had a long path to negotiate at the end before he found rest.
...both of them agreed that Hillary's take down of Trump on the subject (as well as her assault on him day before yesterday, during a speech that had been publicized by the Clinton campaign as ‘a major foreign policy address’) were quite effective.
I thought her take regarding Trump's remarks on the judge were quite eloquent and spot on. But then, I to, am anti-Trump, so perhaps I am biased. But at least she sounded like an adult with her reasoning, unlike Trump.
"But at least she sounded like an adult with her reasoning…"
That seems to be the general consensus. She managed to match his attacks (Crooked Hillary) without bringing herself down to his level. Most people haven't taken notice of this, but Trump's macho, alpha-male act doesn't work against women. Carly Fiorina gutted him on stage during the debates, and he couldn't figure out how deal with it. His performance against Megyn Kelly of FoxNews wasn't a whole lot better. Hillary's gonna make him look like what he is; she's gonna expose him for what he is, ‘cause he's a one-trick pony, and that trick don't work against women who're not inclined to play that game.
(I've said it before; ya'll ain't seen nothin’ yet; Hillary's only now just beginnin’ to do her number on Trump. He's been takin’ free shots at her whilst she had to deal with Bernie. That free ride's apparently over.)
And, just for good measure, Elizabeth Warren (whom Trump cannot abide) was out there today takin’ more shots at The Donald. Politico.com Repeat performance for her; she's gotten under his skin before.
If only Warren was the Dem candidate instead of Crooked Hillary. Just my wishful thinking.
Flicked on the news. I think I'll have to have a news moratorium for a couple of days. First two minutes was Obama, Bill Clinton and Jesse Jackson in a melee of Ali sycophancy. I suppose some people are bound to be hijacked after death by the "great and good". I'm gonna stick to my own memories of the singular person that he was. (Mind you, Ali's Ireland is as dead as he is ;-/
Trump's making a visit here in the next few days to survey one of his golf courses. A couple of our leftie eejit politicians will be staging a protest. These "Americanophiles" will be the same sort of people that took hatchets to American troop transports at Shannon en route to Afghanistan and Iraq. Probably not the people who mourned outside the US embassy on 9/11.
How in hell do you continentals stick the heat? We've been saved from the western European floods by a bit of a polar high ramming the confluence of Saharan air and continental warmth to the south. I appreciate the wall to wall sunshine, but 20 (C) overnight is stretching my temperate limits. Sixteen at midday would be perfect. Anything into double digits at nighttime is oppressive.
Ok, enough rambling. Just met a few people for Guinness that I've known since Ali was in his prime ;-)
It looks like Bernie is fighting tooth and nail till the end, vowing there will be a contested convention. No wonder Hillary hasn't been concentrating on Trump yet. Although there have been others who have been giving her a helping hand.
I appreciate the wall to wall sunshine, but 20 (C) overnight is stretching my temperate limits.
Okay, I googled that. Wait, I can't believe I saw that right, I'm going to go do it again...yup, it equals 68 F. That is just about perfect weather, especially if there's a breeze. Hmmm...
Hasn't anyone else been getting a message lately about the blog and comments section becoming unresponsive? It goes away if you click on the "wait" button, but it is annoying, as it comes back.
"Hasn't" should be "Has"
"…anyone else been getting a message lately about the blog and comments section
becoming unresponsive?"
Nope. Maybe you should dump your cache?
"Hasn't anyone else been getting a message lately about the blog and comments section becoming unresponsive? It goes away if you click on the "wait" button, but it is annoying, as it comes back."
I've always found Blogger page load times to be pretty dismal. Never tried to get to the bottom of it before. Your front page is only 140 KB, which should not be a burden. The background image is large but should be cached. There are some scripts but I haven't delved into what they do. You do have 20+ links to youtube vids, perhaps the downloading of the relevant stills is a drag.
Not at all sure that changing the number of posts on the front page will improve anything, but you could try. If you go to the blogger dashboard, go to "Settings"/"Posts, comments and sharing" ... there is a setting for "show at most x posts". Check that number. The default is 7, but yours is showing 12 posts on the front page. Try reducing the number. Might or might not help. (I'd do it for you but can't since I committed admin hara-kiri ;-)
Maybe you should dump your cache?
Okay, we'll see if that works.
Lee,
It seems that Gary Johnson has declared his candidacy for the Libertarian Party. I was thinking it was kind of late in the day for a third party candidate? But, in any case, how will this affect each of the other parties candidates? Who do you think he will draw from? He says he is fiscally conservative (doesn't want to go to war willy nilly) and is socially liberal (wants to legalize marijuana).
Try reducing the number.
Ok, I'll try that too. Other than adding a few links on the sidebar I haven't messed with any settings since you set everything up.
"Gary Johnson has declared his candidacy for the Libertarian Party."
Yeah, months ago in fact. He was their nominee last time, 2012; got 1% of the vote. He has some competition for the position, neither of which stand a chance in hell of getting the nomination; Johnson's got that sewn up already. The Libertarian Party is a perennial contender in almost all 50 states in that they're already on the ballot in most states. There's some states where they'll have to qualify again this year, but they've either done it already or are virtually certain of qualifying again before the time limit.
Who will he draw from? May not matter; he got 1% last time.
ISIS shooting civilians trying to flee Fallujah
ISIS is targeting civilians attempting to leave the militant-held city of Falluja, as Iraqi forces and militia attempt to wrest back control of the city, a European non-profit operating in Iraq says.
Good OpEd piece in my paper on Sunday.
Sink to Swim
Republicans interested in the long-term viability of their party may be wise to change radio stations. Turn off the conservative talking heads who can’t get past their intense dislike of Hillary Clinton. Turn on sports radio. There, they might learn the value of “tanking” and how it could save the future of the Republican Party.
"Good OpEd piece in my paper on Sunday."
I saw another piece with a somewhat similar subject matter in Politico (I think it was Politico) over the weekend. Yeah, it was Politico; it's more specifically about how Republican folks are maneuvering to not go down with the Republican ship with Trump at the helm--maybe even save the ship.
Word is Hillary's got enough delegates; the major media are calling it for her. Bernie disagrees. It's really rather odd that he's now trying to get the Superdelegates to give it to him after Hillary's got some 3 million more votes than he does and more earned delegates (Bernie did manage to out-organize her and pick up more caucus delegates than she has grabbed, but not at nearly the pace at which Obama ran up the totals on her back in ‘08, and not enough to overcome her lead in voted primary delegates). Meantime The Donald is gettin’ bunches of flack from Republican officeholders and Republican talking heads and pundits of all stripes for bashing the judge in his fraud trial for being a ‘Mexican’ (judge is an American, born in Indiana, and, while he does have some Mexican roots, his family's been here in the States longer than Trump's family, who came from Germany).
It looks like some Republicans are waffling on their endorsement of Trump after his remarks about the judge presiding over the court case involving Trump U.
Whether or not Trump is a racist his remarks about the judge do amount to bullying, in an attempt to influence a decision in a legal matter.
Word is Hillary's got enough delegates; the major media are calling it for her. Bernie disagrees.
Bernie has stayed in long enough, he should concede. Right now he is only shooting the Democratic party in the foot. They should be unified in opposition to Trump, not divided fighting each other.
Meantime The Donald is gettin’ bunches of flack from Republican officeholders...
Ahh, I see you already mentioned that. Well, it an important point, as there are a lot of people out here whose families originated from other countries.
You know, I have to wonder if Bernie isn't fighting so hard because he knows there are people out there who are willing to vote for anybody but Trump. People who might not choose Bernie in the normal course of events...like me.
"I have to wonder if Bernie isn't fighting so hard because…"
Bernie did not expect to be able to mount a serious challenge to Hillary when he started. This was a ‘cause’ campaign designed to drive the Democratic Party further to the left. (And he's been remarkable successful at that.) He was as astounded as anybody else that his campaign caught fire. Now he's fighting ‘so hard’ because lightning never strikes twice in the same place. This is his one and only shot--he won't get another one.
Bernie did not expect to be able to mount a serious challenge to Hillary when he started.
I think that what we are seeing with both Trump and Bernie is a symptom of the polarized state of America at the moment. We are seeing extreme candidates doing well because people are more unhappy than is understood. People with well paying jobs and lives that are going well don't always notice what is happening with the rest of the electorate who are not as fortunate. The stabilizing effect of the middle class is shrinking, just as the middle class itself is shrinking. Even if Hillary does succeed in becoming president she will find herself with some huge problems to try to fix, especially if she can't get cooperation from Congress.
"…Trump and Bernie…symptom of the polarized state of America at the moment."
I believe you're on to something there.
"The stabilizing effect of the middle class is shrinking, just as
the middle class itself is shrinking."
Yep, definitely on to something there.
"…she will find herself with some huge problems to try to fix…"
Obama faced worse; he was looking The Second Great Depression straight in the eye. He will get credit for putting a stop to that (shared with Bernaki who may deserve more credit than Obama). And he had a Republican minority strong enough to block him in the Senate and religiously dedicated to that very task, at all costs. He managed to get some things done in spite of them. Hillary won't face worse.
I just finished listening to Hillary speak. She came out with both barrels aimed at Trump. Very strong. I loved it. Say what you will about Hillary, but she really sounded presidential and deserving of the office, unlike Trump.
Obama faced worse; he was looking The Second Great Depression straight in the eye.
This is true. And how quickly I forget. We were very fortunate to have capable people in place to face that challenge.
Hillary won't face worse.
After her speech tonight I am more confident that she would be up to the task of dealing with whatever comes along. For the first time I actually feel I might be voting for her on her own merits, rather than as the lesser of two evils.
Any thoughts on a possible VP pick for her?
"She came out with both barrels aimed at Trump."
Yeah, from here on in the kid-glove treatment for Trump is over.
It's kinda complicated explaining why the Republicans couldn't actually go after him in a big time way; that story is a good thirty plus years long; goes clear back to Ronald Reagan; and thirty plus years makes for a complicated story.
But, Hillary suffers no such impediment; she doesn't have to pretend that Reagan was anything other than a major, but slowly evolving, disaster. And so Trump has lost the relatively free ride he enjoyed in the race for the Republican nomination. Truth time now--she doesn't think the Republican faerie tale histories must be maintained.
"For the first time I actually feel I might be voting for her on her
own merits"
Hillary's got a lot of flaws, but one thing she is good at is backroom politicking. (Not one of Obama's strong points.) She might actually get shit done that Obama failed to get done. (And, I'm still damn leery of her foreign policy.) I can only hope she goes in there thinking of her national legacy from day one.
"Any thoughts on a possible VP pick for her?"
Not a clue.
"Say what you will about Hillary, but she really sounded presidential and deserving of the office, unlike Trump."
Surely you jest! :-0
What I heard was a pile of vacuous buzzwords and soundbites. Not a single mention of policy, unlike Trump's speech shortly before. Of course, his policies are nuts, but Hillary doesn't have any plans to change the status quo. None that she's willing to give voice to, at any rate. Which brings me to ...
"Obama faced worse; he was looking The Second Great Depression straight in the eye. He will get credit for putting a stop to that"
Another jester. We're still looking a Great Depression in the eye. The only credit Obama will get is for extending it another decade. All he's got to show for it is ballooning debt and a lot of very happy corporate bandits. You think the middle class (the ones that Hillary didn't devote two words to in her speech) is shrinking for no reason? Obama has presided over the greatest growth in inequality in modern times. And Hillary can be depended upon to do zilch about it.
"Obama has presided over the greatest growth in inequality in
modern times."
I'm not sure that's true, but it may be. I'd have to check the stats on that for myself; your word is hardly credible, you being you. But, it might be true in spite of you having said it. However, that's not a trend that started with Obama--that was baked into the cake before he ever thought about running for Prez. (That he spent his political capital on other things and didn't even try to fix that is one of the things that make him such a disappointment to me.)
"And Hillary can be depended upon to do zilch about it."
I'm afraid that may be true. However, Hillary is a clever bitch. Possible she may understand why Obama beat her last time and Bernie put up such a strong (if not credible) challenge this time, and realize the two are connected. Maybe if she wants bad enough to be though well of later…
"We're still looking a Great Depression in the eye."
Well, Ireland is, but we had Obama, and Ireland did not.
The fact that you don't know what way income distribution is trending says a lot about why you might countenance voting for Hillary. You're right, it didn't start with Obama -- he just copperfastened it. Credit where credit is due: the bailout of the auto industry has been a great success. But QE has created asset inflation for those who need it least, while low interest rates have failed to benefit those who need them most. Income inequality has risen in two out of three metro areas in the US under Obama's watch.
You're right about Hillary -- she leeched so much cash out of corporate America for the Clinton machine that she might be able to afford to sit back and think about her legacy now. Somehow I doubt that all her benefactors expecting some quid pro quo will be thinking quite the same.
P.S. don't make me laugh -- Great Depressions in Ireland have nothing to do with what our president, prime minister, or government do. We blow whatever way the global economy is going (at least, the bits we trade with). We got hammered by the recession, and now our last four years of GDP growth has been at a level the US couldn't hold a candle to even in the boom. In fact it needs some serious hosing down if we are not to overheat.
Interesting comments here. I am curious about the Trump VS Clinton race and how that will play out. Enough of the primaries and let's go into the finals already.
As for recessions and bubbles we have had a new law imposed here in Sweden. As of June 1'st banks can't lend money without an amortization plan. Of course they couldn't go and make it an easy law like 30 or 40 year mortages. No it says that a loan must be amortized down to 75% of the house "value" (initially the purchase price) by 2% per year, then down to 50% of the "value" by 1% per year. And it's only for new loans, existing ones are not impacted.
I guess the idea was to make a law that actually did scale down the growth in private debt, but to be real careful to try to not pop the bubble. To bring about that "soft landing" that's often mentioned but that we have hardly any examples of.
As you might imagine this led to a rush to both buy and sell houses last month. Since buyers wanted to get them good ol' loans you don't pay off and sellers predicted prices might fall ones them good ol' loans were gone so they wanted to cash in before that.
By the way if you're interested in how bad the bubble is, and why I am so adamant we're in for a crash look at the following graph. From bottom up the lines mean:
Green: Real wages
Blue: House prices
Red: Real debt in the housing sector.
Yellow: Apartment prices (insane and driven to a great degree by Stockholm inner city)
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HFb0UNzTv7s/VwJe-pluudI/AAAAAAAAEwM/2pjrZo3Rqao6zljtrCGqMiJDFPzfaM7vA/s1600/Bostadspriser1970-2015.png
You might notice the smallish dip during the global financial crisis of -08 and how much prices and debt have risen since.
Also look at the downturn in the early 90's. That's during what used to be called our "financial crisis" and it was actually quite bad for many. Now compare that to todays situation and you might get what I mean. There will be no soft landing but a monumental crash.
And that will also efficiently and for a long, long time end any notion about Sweden being or should be a "humanitarian superpower". Any politician who speaks like that post crash will likely end up on a rope (well not really, their career will just be over).
Not so fast on the primaries, Marcus. The Bern has just announced he ain't giving up! :-) Hillary's gonna have to wage a war on two fronts for the next month and a half.
Those Swedish numbers look pretty scary alright.
"The fact that you don't know what way income distribution is
trending says a lot…"
That's not what I said, and it's not a fact, but that's par for your course…
"P.S. don't make me laugh -- "
You got nothin’ to laugh about, but I rather doubt there's any reason for me to discuss economics with the likes of you; pearls before swine and all that…
One of my neighbors claims to know Bernie Sanders, personally, doesn't claim to be good buddies with him or anything like that, just claims to know him from her days as a college professor in New England. (Bernie's wife was head of a small liberal arts college.) This piece describes the guy she describes, my neighbor that is, not Bernie's wife.
Associate Press says Clinton won California, and it wasn't even close. NYT reporting AP feed results. A quarter of California Republican primary voters voted for someone other than Trump, although there is nobody still running for the nomination, other than Trump.
Hillary's got a lot of flaws, but one thing she is good at is backroom politicking.
Yes, and she may get along better with some who had their backs up against Obama, just because. There needs to be some cooperation in Washington to get things done. The question comes with whether or not she meant the things she was saying last night. Obviously politicians say what they think the voters want to hear. People have already accused her of stealing a leaf from Bernie's book. But at least she came across as being sincere, especially when talking about her mother and the road women have had to take to get to the point of actually having a woman nominated by a major political party for the office of president.
She might actually get shit done that Obama failed to get done.
Despite her seeming drawback as a Washington insider, that may actually be a plus. Because it will take real change on the inside to get things done. It's the same argument you have given for real change in the Middle East, it has to come from within. It all boils down to what she wants her legacy to be.
Not a single mention of policy, unlike Trump's speech shortly before.
I didn't feel it was the place where she needed to go into detail. It was basically a thank you speech for all of those who have supported her so far, and asking others to give her a chance. If there are those who are seriously considering voting for her in the general election (assuming she finalizes her nomination at the convention) I am sure there are various places they can go to see what her platform is. I also assume there will be some kind of debate, if not more than one, between the final candidates for president where some detail can be learned (one would hope, anyway).
Of course, his (Trump's) policies are nuts,...
Got that in one. Change is one thing, but voting for him would be like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Obama has presided over the greatest growth in inequality in modern times.
He has certainly been president during that time. But I suspect that this was longer in the making and that other presidents before him contributed something to that.
Credit where credit is due: the bailout of the auto industry has been a great success.
I'm not sure, but didn't Bush actually put in place the start of that? Obama just continued with it.
We got hammered by the recession, and now our last four years of GDP growth has been at a level the US couldn't hold a candle to even in the boom.
That actually sounds a little scary. A nice steady rise sounds a little more sustainable. It just sounds like you're mired in a high and low cycle that will eventually cause you to crash and burn again.
But QE has created asset inflation for those who need it least,...
QE may come back to bite us, yes. But another Great Depression wouldn't have felt very good either. :(
You might notice the smallish dip during the global financial crisis of -08 and how much prices and debt have risen since.
It looks like there was a smallish dip around 2011 as well. What was that?
Now compare that to todays situation and you might get what I mean.
Yeah. Those numbers look bad. How much of the apartment price increase is due to the influx of more people into the country? That could be partly why those prices are so out of sight. Supply and demand at work.
"…didn't Bush actually put in place the start of that? Obama just
continued with it."
Nope that was the TARP program, the bailout of Wall Street. Bush was gonna let Detroit go down. Obama reversed that decision and actually diverted some of the unused TARP money from Wall Street to Detroit.
A quarter of California Republican primary voters voted for someone other than Trump, although there is nobody still running for the nomination, other than Trump.
That doesn't sound like they place much confidence in their parties presumptive nominee.
Nope that was the TARP program, the bailout of Wall Street.
Ahh, okay. I had forgotten about that.
Bush was gonna let Detroit go down.
Which would, as it turned, have been a horrible idea. So the credit does go to Obama.
"So the credit does go to Obama."
As Petes said, but even a blind hog finds an acorn once in awhile.
"Federal filings show that Daniel Petrocelli [lead defense lawyer, Donald
Trump's lead lawyer, for the class-action lawsuit against Trump
University] has…contributed $2,700 [,federal maximum allowable for a
personal contribution, to Hillary Clinton's campaign] after Trump brought
him on to the politically fraught case."
Politico.com (emphasis added)
Lol!
Lynnette: "It looks like there was a smallish dip around 2011 as well. What was that?"
That'd be Greece and the Euro-crisis.
I didn't watch that speech by Hillary that came up before (Lynnette @ Tue Jun 07, 11:01:00 pm ↑↑), but the reviews seem to be all in accord, including praises from Republicans one would ordinarily expect to be hostile parties. Consensus, overwhelming consensus is that it was a very good speech. The sole voices to the contrary, to this point, appear to be Sean Hannity and Petes.
I mentioned before that Hillary was a better backroom politician than was Obama. VOX generally agrees and goes on to elaborate on that theme. I think Klein is on to something there; worth the read--not too long.
Consensus, overwhelming consensus is that it was a very good speech.
I grabbed a YouTube link to it if anyone wants to listen. The video is just so so, but it was the better one I found.
Hillary's speech
That'd be Greece and the Euro-crisis.
Ahh, that's right. Just like the TARP thing I had already forgotten. Yet at the time of both of those events it was of critical importance. Strange.
From Lee's article:
In this telling, in order to do something as hard as becoming the first female presidential nominee of a major political party, she had to do something extraordinarily difficult: She had to build a coalition, supported by a web of relationships, that dwarfed in both breadth and depth anything a non-incumbent had created before. It was a plan that played to her strengths, as opposed to her (entirely male) challengers' strengths. And she did it.
And maybe, more than anything else, that is the kind of experience and talent we need in a president today, to unite us again. That's why I was so thrilled with her speech the other night. For the first time that was what I thought I saw in Hillary.
[Lynnette]: "But I suspect that this [growth in inequality] was longer in the making and that other presidents before him contributed something to that."
Yes it was, but I was talking specifically about the inequality that has arisen on Obama's watch due to the policies implemented after the global financial crisis. You're right that another Great Depression would have been no fun, but that will be cold comfort to the people impacted anyway. Plus, the prospect of a Great Depression is far from over, as structural and long term unemployment with consequent weak demand could yet bring it about. Like I've said, the Sanders and Trump phenomena are not random happenings. Those disenchanted voters are reacting to real events.
[Lee]: " I rather doubt there's any reason for me to discuss economics with the likes of you"
Yer right there sonny, if yer previous attempts in maths and science are anything to go by. I'd say save yerself the embarrassment, but then y'all never did have the good grace to be embarrassed. Somethin' else yankin' yer chain of late, though. I haven't been eggin' y'all on any time recently, or even deigning to engage y'all on any level, but yer belly-achin' is on the increase regardless. I suppose y'all never did need much excuse to act cantankerous.
"…or even deigning to engage y'all on any level…"
Odd claim for you to be makin’ here in light of your attempts to engage me in an argument just above. E.g. Petes @ Tue Jun 07, 11:17:00 pm, supra.
Argument? Sounds like y'all are lookin' for one, but no thanks.
"…Sounds like y'all are lookin' for one…"
I'm not the one still broodin’ ‘bout "yer previous attempts in maths and science…" You're gonna havta let that go one of these days fat boy. Broodin’ ‘bout it ain't gonna get it back.
Okaaayyyy… The Republicans' House Select Committee on Hillary is now subpoenaing Pentagon officials who claim to not be able to find anybody matching the story line of some dude who called up Sean Hannity and fed him a line ‘bout Benghazi that got the said somebody rushed onto the air to repeat his unsubstantiated story (which was probably his goal, gettin’ on the air). Politico.com
Those disenchanted voters are reacting to real events.
Yes, they are.
When I was growing up the only homeless people you could find were down in the cities. Now you see them all the time, even here in my town. While we have seen a recovery in the stock market, and the housing market (although that is still kind of off kilter), we are still seeing incomes that aren't keeping pace with rising costs.
"I'm not the one still broodin’ ‘bout yer previous attempts in maths and science…"
LOL. I picked up a first class honours degree in astrophysics since then. How 'bout you chump? Manage to convince any other dunderheads about that speed of light thing? ;-)
[Lynnette]: " While we have seen a recovery in the stock market, and the housing market (although that is still kind of off kilter), we are still seeing incomes that aren't keeping pace with rising costs."
Exactly the point. Those things benefit people who are already asset rich. That is the direct result of quantitative easing.
"I picked up a first class honours degree in astrophysics since then."
Yeah, right. Were that true you would have known that they long ago figured out that the "too-fast" neutrino phenomenon, the ‘speed of light thing’ to which you refer, was a glitch in the sensor wiring.
Uh, I'm pretty sure *I* reported that at the time they discovered it. Regardless, *you* were the one that had previously claimed that FTL neutrinos would not irreparably bust the theory of relativity. I tried to walk you through the maths, but you got stuck on some elementary arithmetic. I understand, of course, why you blotted this from yer memory :-)
Hmmm..why do I feel the need for a new post? lol!
I'll sleep on it, maybe one will come to me.
"Regardless, *you* were the one that had previously claimed that FTL
neutrinos would not irreparably bust the theory of relativity."
I see, so this is a full-scale fantasy attack you're having then? Not just some minor misremembering of events in which you somehow didn't screw up.
Nope, I remember it all too well. A very specific piece of a very specific paper by Einstein which you couldn't understand, leading to some dumbed down maths in an attempt to coach y'all ... but y'all couldn't understand that either. Or rather, ya pretended ya couldn't. Y'all actually came to the correct realisation three times, but then claimed amnesia when it didn't suit yer purposes. That's when I realised y'all were the ultimate mendacious exemplar of the Upton Sinclair quote. And yer still at it :-)
"I remember it all too well."
I'm sure ya do, but everybody else will remember the magical mystery maths that nobody ever got to see. You actually explaining something is so far out of character for you that I marvel at your ability to fabricate the memory. You with the magical mystery maths.
Hmmm.... I think it was ‘mighty magical mystery maths’ that was the term in usage at the time… Whatever, the audience will recall it I'm sure… More to the point going forward…
Few years back I dated a lady for a spell who had a college degree, a Masters' degree in some sort Social Sciences thing, worked at the State mental health hospital next county over. One of the things I discovered listening to her stories is that a lot of the crazies they kept there were crazy because they wanted to be. They preferred their fantasies to the real world. Refugees from reality I understood them to be. They chose their fantasies.
I gather that you're making much the same sort of choice here. You're remembering the story as you wish it had been. As with her refugees, I suspect it would take drugs and maybe considerable therapy to bring you back to reality and I can offer you neither (not that I would if I could). But, your fantasy here seems to be fairly benign, no danger to you nor to your fellow man, so why would I bother?
No point in carryin’ on this conversation any further; waste of my time, refugee fat boy (waste of your time doesn't bother me--waste of my time does).
One of the things I discovered listening to her stories is that a lot of the crazies they kept there were crazy because they wanted to be. They preferred their fantasies to the real world. Refugees from reality I understood them to be. They chose their fantasies.
That's sad. That life could be so bad. I know a lot of people find escape in many places, books, movies, the internet, alcohol/drugs, but to so totally disconnect from reality that you couldn't function at all in the real world is a sad waste of a life.
It's hot and humid here, low 90's F. I think while it is still relatively cool I will mow a little grass.
Pete: "Exactly the point. Those things benefit people who are already asset rich. That is the direct result of quantitative easing."
For sure. Even if I knew (or felt) this from the outset and I did my very best to make economic moves that would benefit me, there wasn't much to be done. I started at a too low rung on the ladder to benefit from it. Most I could do was to do precautions so as not to get sucked into the black hole when it materialises.
Post a Comment