Mr Insurance

Donald Trump has "targeted" Ohio Pennsylvania and Florida, figuring if he wins those 3 "Battleground States" he'll have a real shot.

Unfortunately for Trump, he also has to hold every state that Romney won in 2012.

Evan McMullin is running for president.

Evan McMullin is ex-CIA.

Evan McMullin is a Mormon.

Evan McMullin has some rich buddies backing him.

Evan McMullin has missed getting on the ballot in some very important states, but he managed to get on the ballot in Utah.

Evan McMullin won't win in Utah, but he'll syphon off plenty of votes - very possibly enough to make Hillary the winner in Utah.

Trump is up by about 7 points in Utah - where favorite son Romney won by 48 points in 2012. Mormon matters.

Evan McMullin's mission is to fuck up the election for Donald Trump.

Today's Pix

Stochastic Probability

Applied to politics = 

Stochastic terrorism is the use of mass communications to incite random actors to carry out violent or terrorist acts that are statistically predictable but individually unpredictable. In short, remote-control murder by lone wolf.

It's not like we aren't aware of this shit, Mr Trump.

At each step, plausible deniability increases through the diffusion of responsibility. "Oh, it was just a lone nut, nobody could have predicted he would do that, and I'm not responsible for what people in my audience do."

Trump knows what he's done, even if his intent at the time was nothing more than one of his usual stunts to say something heinously inflammatory in order to generate some free media.

And the statements that have come from his campaign are again the usual bullshit aimed at kicking the news cycle around to keep the coverage going - to give the story legs.

"It's called the power of unification – 2nd Amendment people have amazing spirit and are tremendously unified, which gives them great political power. And this year, they will be voting in record numbers, and it won't be for Hillary Clinton, it will be for Donald Trump." --Jason Miller, Senior Communications Advisor.

That's a near-perfect, classically content-free "explanation".  Notice, there's nothing in there that even tries to pretend that Trump is condemning violence against a political opponent.

Charlie Pierce put up a quote from (I think) Hunter S Thompson, and tag-lined it with this:

What he said on Tuesday is something Donald Trump does every day of his life, on purpose, as a matter of policy and a perfect expression of everything he stands for. It seems one could stoop even lower than Nixon to be president.

And of course, the usual asshole apologists were out to make sure we got a good dose of False Equivalence:

Here's the point on this little piece of your freak show, Mr Halperin: If it was bad for Hillary to say what she said in 2008, then it's bad for Trump to say what he said 2016.

See how that works?  Bad is bad is bad.  You don't get to say Hillary was wrong to do it back then, so it's OK for Trump to do it now. dick

But what riles me now is that neither The Hillary gang nor the Press Poodles are getting after this with any kind of zest or gusto.

"Here's what Americans need to hear from you, Mr Trump, and in no uncertain terms:

- you are not calling for violence

- you condemn violence against any political opponent at any time for any reason

- you reject the support of anybody who'd even think violence against a political opponent is in any way OK

- you understand that sometimes we get a little nutty, but everybody has to leave their guns out of this

- be passionate; be vocal; be steadfast - just don't be a dick"

Are ya getting any of this, Mr Trump?

Trump Trumps Trump

Trying to be fairer than I think I have to be, some of the contradictions can be explained because we have to allow people to change over time.

That said, holy fuck, dude.  You don't take a position one day in one situation, and then change it completely the next day when you're talking to somebody else.

The guy is the classic old-school sales-putz.  You just say whatever you think you need to say in the moment.  It's not about leading with your values - because this guy apparently has none - it's about looking for the cues from your prospect and pandering to them.  So, he says whatever he thinks the interviewer (eg) wants to hear.  And if he contradicts himself, he can either flatly deny it or he can blame the listener for misunderstanding, which gives him the opportunity to blather some more and explain the intricacies of his pitch because you're just too dumb to get it.

We can see you, Donald.  We're writing this shit down so we can keep track of it, so we can try to make sense of it later.  And it's one hot fucking mess.

More Cracks

First - reports of the demise of DumFux News are greatly exaggerated - or maybe they're just kinda premature.

But second - dang - It's been more than a little obvious for a good long time that Fox and the GOP are so inter-connected as to be divisions of the same Billionaire Hobby Corporation. So much so that if one craters, it pulls the other one in after it. And isn't that a happy prospect?

Get Real, Kids

"Journalism"

And again - why are we allowing all the real journalism to happen on 1/2 hour cable shows?

I wouldn't mind one little bit if we broke up the Media Mega-Giants, but I'm not advocating for a plan to then prop them up as viable outlets. Business is business, and you can't mandate profitability.

This will probably be a fairly long slow process of evolving into a workable model, but it occurs to me that along with all the scary shit about Report-o-Bots and Digital Content Generators, one thing we could get from the techno-wizardry is some kind of a built-in Fact Check mechanism.  Right now, I can high-lite a word or a string of text (on my Mac), right-click on it and look it up in the dictionary, or Google it, or go to Wikipedia or whatever - the point being in this case that the same technology that gets us a problem can be used to help us solve that problem.

In the meantime, we need to keep on keepin' on by learning more about applied skepticism and critical thinking.  

Because, even tho there are a few signs of improvement, this shit will prob'ly just get weirder before it starts to get anywhere close to relaxed and groovy.

Press Poodle of the future

Something We Should Know

It's just about being made to think Da Gubmint is taking it away from me and giving it to somebody I think doesn't deserve it.  

We don't know shit and what makes that a bad thing is that we don't even wanna know that we don't know it.

Fareed Explains

Clearing It Up

(This is a bit of a redux)

Hillary "lied" like everybody "lies" - sometimes you say things that you meant one way and people hear them a completely different way.

And always always always remember that every agency in every department in every government at every level is both a constituency itself, and/or it's either prospecting for or looking to maintain a constituency for itself.  You're a client being served, or you're in service to a client, or you're both at the same time. Everybody. Everywhere.

James Comey came up thru the Bush DoJ (he was assigned to take over the investigation of Bill's pardon of Mark Rich), and is no fan of the Clintons.

But he knows enough to be more or less a straight shooter, and he's got some chops as a Bankster Buster even tho' he's been on the inside at Lockheed, Bridgewater, and HSBC.

A bit of an odd duck, and worth watching.

Anyway, he was obviously a little peeved at the whole spectacle, having the look of a guy who couldn't quite stomach all the political bullshit.  Or maybe he was just disappointed that Cartwright asked the right questions, leaving the Repubs with basically a handful of nuthin'.

We can still find reasons to hate on Hillary if we wanna, but we should prob'ly let go of that one.