Showing posts with label GOP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label GOP. Show all posts

Sunday, June 10, 2018

The Re-Election of Donald Trump




In recent weeks, Donald Trump's prospects for re-election have improved noticeably in betting markets.  For most of the early part of this year, his odds hovered around 30%.  Three weeks ago they jumped up to 35%. They currently stand at 39% on Predictit.org.  This surge does not correspond with an upsurge in Trump's approval ratings. The Real Clear Politics average of his approval ratings have stated between 42% and 44% over the last several weeks.  This upswing in the betting markets reflects two more fundamental realities than one politician's polling numbers.  Donald Trump's prospects are improving for two reasons:

1. As time goes by, Trump is being normalized. The American people are accepting behavior from Donald Trump no other president would ever dream of doing, because the American people are becoming numb to his vulgarity and weirdness. 

2. Donald Trump has utter and complete control of the Republican party.  Every single Republican politician is afraid of him, because he is immensely popular with the bloc of people who vote in Republican primaries.

If I had to bet today, I would bet against Donald Trump being re-elected in 2020. But his chances are better than a lot of thinking people want to admit. He is now embarked on a journey to Singapore for a meeting with the North Korean dictator. I think the results of that summit will have a big impact on the 2020 race and I want to sketch some thoughts about 2020 before the meeting happens.

I.  Donald Trump's 2020 Message.

Donald Trump's 2020 campaign will be predicated on simple assertion: that he has made America great again, just as he promised in 2016.  There are three policy claims that he must make, and he will make them with a straight face no matter what the facts on the ground say.  

1. I made the economy better.  He will point to whatever statistics help this cause. Right now he can accurately say that the job market has got stronger during his presidency. He will credit his tax cuts and deregulation if that's still true in 2020.  If not's still true in 2020 he will find some reason why voters should only think about how strong the job market was during the first half of his presidency. 

2. I made the country safer.  Donald Trump will point to the destruction of ISIS as his greatest accomplishment. ISIS has lost almost all of its territory, a trend that began while Obama was still president, but which did accelerate in 2017.  And it does not seem likely that ISIS will make much of a comeback as a de facto sovereign entity. It will be quite easy for the Republican party to craft compelling 30 second commercials featuring people who were tortured by ISIS and who now have a measure of freedom or been able to return to their home. It's a good starting point for claiming success on the world's stage.

The North Korea gambit is all about wanting a diplomatic victory to show that he is a great deal maker.  Trump's incentive is to get a deal that he can call "denuclearization." Kim Jong Un might have a corresponding incentive to get something done too. 

Kim was educated at a boarding school in Switzerland. He knows what the west has to offer and he has to know, on some level, that his father and grandfather's model is no way to run a state. But he also wants to retain political power and the lifestyle of a dictator.  He probably needs some western capital to make that happen.  If he's ever going to make a deal to get that capital, he might as well make it with the current president, because Trump will not make ANY demands related to human rights or political reform. Trump only cares about being able to claim that he got North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons.  So Kim could agree to a very loose, wishy-washy statement about ending their nuclear weapons program.  Such a deal will have no teeth and will not make any demands of verification before 2021, other than some symbolic photo ops of Kim's people dismantling some equipment. They will make some rhetorical concessions and empty gestures, like they did when they staged a demolition of their nuclear testing site. In exchange, they will get the prestige of having been treated as a peer by the president of the United States and they will get some sanctions relief. I think Kim will tempt Trump with the possibility of making money for his family and for his other rich asshole friends. 

Donald Trump would love to tell you that he took nuclear weapons out of a mad man's hands. He would also love to tell you that he made an incredible deal that will somehow make gas cheaper or decrease our trade deficit or create some jobs.  He's not big on details and he's way over his head on this trip.  But I think he will get a deal of some kind done, because his inner circle is committed to making that happen and they don't really care about the consequences of a bad deal. Whatever deal he makes, Donald Trump will brag about it-long, loud and wrong.

3. The Democrats are pussies. The Democrats need to nominate someone, and that nominee will have to emerge from a protracted primary battle where everyone fights to prove that they are th most anti-Trump option available to voters. 

Donald Trump's most outrageous policy changes have been in the sphere of immigration. He is breaking families of asylum seekers up. He is still intent on building that stupid wall and he is willing to shut the government down to do it.  To the extent that the wall is shorthand for his insane 2016 campaign, he has to go all out for it. It is an extension of his political persona, and therefore must be defended at all costs. For the same reason, the Democrats have to resist the wall at all costs. In the short term, the wall is hurting his poll numbers. But by 2020, he's going to be beating the xenophobia drum as often as possible, because either way, he can win on it.

If the wall gets built, he will say "Look, I did this amazing thing and now we are safe."  It it does not get built he will say "Look, I tried to save you but the Democrats blocked me and now we have gangs running around and cops getting shot" and making hay out of whatever unfortunate headlines he can point to.  

The Democratic party is vulnerable on this issue, again.  The Democratic base is rightly incensed by Trump's immigration policies. The 2020 Democratic primary race may just turn on who can get to the furthest left on issues of immigration enforcement.  But they could pay a price for that in the general election. Trump will demonize brown people in whatever way works to make voters question the ability of the Democratic nominee to lead the government-to fight for average Americans. He will definitely run 30 second commercials about some crime committed by an undocumented worker here in the states or maybe about some crime wave or other in European countries that are driven by immigrants from Muslim majority countries. 

There will be a 4th dimension to Trump's 2020 campaign.  Something personally insulting about the Democratic nominee. Lyin' Ted Cruz, Lil' Marco Rubio and, of course Crooked Hillary Clinton will know what I am talking about. Trump has the mind of a bully and he has reason to believe that people like watching him be cruel to other politicians.  No matter how the Democrats nominate, he will find a weakness and he will beat it like a drum.  Commie Bernie Sanders, Crazy Joe Biden, & Pocahantas all have easily identified monikers. But over the course of the Democratic primary, he will figure out what to call whoever the nominee is, and there will even be a chant to replace "Lock Her Up!" It will not be subtle.

II.  The Consequences Phase of the Trump Years.

On Friday, Maggie Haberman tweeted out a very interesting observation.  The White House staffers that only met Trump during the transition period all say that Trump has gotten much worse in recent months. But the people who have known Trump for a long time tend to say that his behavior is the same as ever.  The fact is that Trump was intimidated by the presidency for the first year or so. He knew he was in over his head and he reigned in some of his worst instincts. But as 2018 stretches on, he is reverting to his old self. He is becoming the world class asshole that he always has been.

The reason for this confidence is that he is surrounded by sycophants and spends eight hours a day watching a television network dedicated to talking about how successful he is. I suspect that many people reading this blog will have a hard time believing this sentence, but it's a very important one: Donald Trump genuinely believes that he is a great president. 

Like any other narcissist, Trump is able to create excuses for any failures. But his real passion is taking credit for success.  He think the continued drop in unemployment is only happening because of his brilliant tax cuts. He also believes, with equal fervor, that the federal debt has exploded because of past sins by Democrats. No amount of evidence can convince him otherwise. He thinks the stock market boom of 2017 was due to his presidency. The fact that the market is lower in June than it was in January is the fault of fake news and lying Democrats.  This dexterity of mind is great for one's confidence, but reality can't be shut out for ever.

It's not clear when Trump's ignorance will begin to manifest itself  in negative economic news. The tax cuts have not yet caused any increase in economic growth. Last quarter we grew at just 2.2%, but the forecast is slightly better for the rest of the year. And we haven't yet seen signs of a weakening job market, although wage growth has been less than expected.  So Trump might cruise through 2018 and 2019 without a recession. But he's also beginning to play with fire when it comes to trade.

As his confidence in the Oval Office has grown, Donald Trump has begun focusing on the issues that he always cared about. International trade and trade deficits have been a point of interest with him for decades. He seems to think that a trade deficit means that one country is stealing from the other. This is balderdash, but we live in the age of alternative facts.  The president thinks this is true and he remains dedicated to the proposition that the United States should only be a thief, never a victim of  such "theft".  

Trump is beginning to act brazenly here. He is threatening to impose all kinds of tariffs, on both rival nations and our traditional allies.  Most glaringly, he is promising to impose tariffs on Canada.  He is claiming that this must be done for national security, a notion that is utterly preposterous, but that happens to be the only reason he can impose these tariffs without congressional approval. So facts be damned, we're going to punish Canada.  Canada, of course, intends to respond in kind.  That's how trade wars work.  Yesterday Justin Trudeau said that Canada will not be pushed around.  Our president threw a hissy fit in response and refused to have the United States sign off on the joint comminique of the G7 nations. That's all a little inside baseball now. But if he follows through with these tariffs, there will be tremendous consequences for American consumers and workers.  

It is possible that the economy will continue to putter along with reasonable growth rates and job creation numbers. That will strengthen Trump's chances of winning an election. But it's also possible that his trade wars and continued attempt to undermine Obamacare will have the kinds of consequences that voters remember on election  day.  Trump's prospects have improved because he has good fortune on the economic front. I don't think that can hold for another 29 months of this level of stupidity, but the margin of the election will be determined by how severe those consequences are.

III. Mueller.

Robert Mueller has compiled a year's worth of information about the ties between Donald Trump and the government of Russia. Not a single stitch of information has leaked from his shop. That's an impressive accomplishment that makes it difficult to handicap the outcome of his investigation.

This is what I suspect will happen. Sometime in 2018 or early 2019, Bob Mueller will call a press conference. At that conference he will announce a new round of indictments. Those indictments will include people in Trump's inner circle. It might include his son and/or son-in-law. He will also lay out the case that Donald Trump obstructed justice by firing James Comey in order to impede the investigation of Russia's election interference.  He will explain that he does not intend to indict Donald Trump because he subscribes to the consensus view that sitting presidents can not be prosecuted for crimes.

This announcement will infuriate a lot more people than it pleases. Many Democrats will be frustrated by the decision not to indict Trump. And Republicans will be faced with yet another moral dilemma: accept the findings of a respected law enforcement professional or side with the raving tantrums of an incompetent, compromised and dishonest president. If the past 17 months have taught us anything, this will not be a hard choice for most of them. 

There has been a lot of talk about a looming constitutional crisis. We could get lucky and avoid something really awful, but I am not optimistic. The constitutional crisis began last week when the president publicly declared that he was above the law and not a single prominent Republican office holder bothered to repudiate him.  If we go forward with the battle lines that Trump has drawn, then the ending will be very ugly.

But Mueller is likely to persuade a lot of independent voters that the sitting president is corrupt. That will probably prevent his re-election. But even under those extraordinary circumstances, the outcome will not be certain.  Donald Trump has captured a major political party. It is now his toy. For the moment, the economy is lumbering on with modest growth and a stable job market. The world has not presented Trump with a military or humanitarian crisis of a big enough to be made truly horrible by his ignorance and ineptitude. 

Donald Trump's presidency may coast to a soft landing, which will set up a very close election. In 2016, there were ten states decided by less than 4 percentage points. Donald Trump won six and Hillary Clinton won four. But more importantly Trump won the biggest states in this group, capturing 102 electoral votes to 21 for Hillary. Both parties will have multiple paths to 270 electoral votes.
The motivation of the Democratic base will be extremely high and that should be enough for them to win. But the Republican party will rally to their leader and they will run on the same spiteful promises and ugly nationalism that won the last election. It could be enough to win again. That is the political reality of the United States of America as we enter the next, even uglier phase of the Trump presidency.






Tuesday, March 15, 2016

Duper Tuesday (What to Expect)


There are 2,473 delegates this year.  The magic number to have a majority is 1,237.  After tonight we will have a much better idea of whether or not Donald Trump can get to that number.  And we will know for sure that no other candidate has a realistic chance of getting a majority.  This is my attempt to lay out the math so you can understand the significance of the results as they roll in.There are six Republican Primarires today.

1.  What we already know.
The Northern Mariana Islands have already spoken, awarding all nine delegates to Donald Trump.  That means the up to the minute Delegate Count is this:  Trump 472, Cruz 371, Rubio 166, Kasich 63, Others 21.  (Most of the "Others" delegates are uncommitted, either because the candidate who won them will not be put in nomination as the convention or because people voted to send uncommitted delegates to Cleveland.)

2.  Safe Estimates.
Most of the attention on today's primaries has been given to Ohio and Florida because they are big states that award all of their delegates to the state-wide winner. There are actually more delegates available in the other three contests, Illinois, Missouri and North Carolina. Here's how the delegates are likely to break down there.

A. Illinois 69 Delegates.  Fifty-four of the delegates are award to the winner of each congressional district in the state.  That's 18 separate battles for three delegates apiece.  The state wide winner will get 12 bonus delegates and three are for state party officials.  Trump is heavily favored to win the state and is likely to win about 12 of the districts.  A reasonable assumption would be he gets 48 delegates while Cruz wins 4 downstate districts to get 12 and Kasich or possibly Rubio might win 2 districts in or near Chicago.  That breaks down to Trump 48, Cruz 12 and Kasich 9.

B. Missouri has similar rules to Illinois but fewer congressional districts.  The The statewide winner will get 28 delegates and there will be eight congressional district levels for three delegates each.  This race is very close but I expect that Cruz will win because he has been able to focus his efforts there while Trump fights for Ohio and Florida.  The math there could be something like Cruz 43, Trump 9.

C. North Carolina.  Simplest math of the night.  Every 1.43% of the vote gets you a delegate.  Trump has commanding leads in all the polls but these rules will prevent him from running up the score. If he wins with 45% of the vote to 35% for Cruz and 10% each for Rubio and Kasich, the numbers will look something like Trump 34, Cruz 25, Rubio 7, Kasich 6.

So my combined estimate for the proportional states totals up to this: Trump 91, Cruz 80, Kasich 15, Rubio 7.  That sets the stage for one of three scenarios at the end of the night.


3. The Possible Scenarios After Tonight.

Trump will almost certainly win Florida, but we have to consider that Rubio has a chance of pulling the upset.  Kasich is more likely than not to win Ohio, but it's far from guaranteed. So let's look at where the math will stand in a few hours time, depending on which winner take all states Trump wins.

Trump has 472 delegates.  If he gets 91 from the proportional states, he will have 562. Add Ohio he has 623. Add just Florida but not Ohio and he has 661.  Add moth and he has  722.

Cruz has 362 Delegates. He can't win OH or FL but I estimate he will have 442 at the end of the night.

Rubio has 166 and should win a handful in NC.  If he also wins Florida he will have about 270 delegates and will stay in the fight.  If he lose Florida, he will leave the race with about 172 delegates.

Kasich has 63 delegates. He'll win about a dozen in the small states and needs to win Ohio's 66 to stay in the race.  If he does he'll have around 240 delegates and can be the establishment choice going forward.

If Trump has a big night, winning OH and FL, he will be on pace for well over 1,300 delegates.  He will be the nominee.  Even with a split he will be the heavy favorite.




Saturday, March 5, 2016

Super Saturday Expectations

There were a few interesting developments this week on the predictions markets for the Republican nomination.  Donald Trump fell by more than10 points despite having won 7 of the 11 contests on Super Tuesday.  He went from a peak of 83 percent down to a bottom of just below 70 percent before rebounding up to 73% as I write this.

What's most interesting about this is that none of that advantage went to Marco! Rubio.   He won Minnesota on Tuesday but finished third almost everywhere else. (Behind Kasich in New England and Cruz and Trump everywhere else.) The gains went to Ted Cruz, who went from a low of 2% back to nearly double digits, to John Kasich who bounced up from 1% to 5% after looking like the only adult in Thursday night's debate in Detroit. And last but not least both sides of the 2012 ticket, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan entered the market at 1% and have stayed there since.

But now we're back to a voting day. Four states weigh in on Saturday, with a primary in Lousiana and caucuses set for Maine, Kentucky and Kansas.  The delegate math won't move much today. None of these states are winner-take-all and all four candidates can expect to win at least some in one or more states.  The real test today is whether an intense week of anti-Tump effort can anyone slow his momentum.  Here are a few good things to watch for:

1. How many states does Trump win?  He's a heavy favorite in Maine, Louisiana and Kentucky.  Cruz should win Kansas, but Trump was leading in the most recent poll.  If Trump gets four wins today, that's a pretty resounding rejection of the #NeverTrump movement by the base.

2. Can Kasich win Maine?  John Kasich is the only candidate still running without benefit of having won a contest yet.  But he has done well in New England so far, having finished in 2nd place in New Hampshire, Vermont and Massachusetts. If Thursday's debate has really created a groundswell for a candidate more mature than the shrieking babies he has shared this stage with, then he just might be competitive in Maine. A victory will help him enormously going forward, especially in Michigan.

3. Can Cruz pull an upset somewhere?  Cruz should win Kansas.  It's a closed caucus and it's right in the alley of the other states he's won (OK and TX to the south, Iowa to the Northeast.) Winning there is expected. But if he pulls off an upset in KY or LA, then he can make an undisputed claim as the most viable alternative to Donald Trump.

4. Will Rubio even get a 2nd place?  Marco Rubio has been abandoned by the establishment and by Fox News in particular.  In between Nevada and Super Tuesday, Marco got on the gutter with Trump and came out of it looking worse for wear.  It's not hart to imagine him finishing 3rd in all four places and he might be 4th in Maine.  That will hurt his images very much and I don't think a likely win in Puerto Rico on Sunday will do him any particular favors going forward in the GOP.

5. How big of a number can Trump put up in Louisiana.  It's the only primary today and it's in the deep south, where Trump has done especially well so far.  If he gets over 40% he starts to look like a presumptive nominee rather than just a front runner. Rubio could also miss the 20% mark here which would mean he gets no delegates from another sizable state.  He can't let happen.

Predictions:

1.  Louisiana: Trump 43%, Cruz 27%, Rubio 19%, Kasich 10%.
2. Kentucky:  Trump 34%, Cruz 30%, Rubio 27%, Kasich 9%
3. Kansas      Cruz 37%, Trump 32%, Rubio 22%, Kaich 9%
4. Maine     Trump 28%, Kasich 27%, Cruz 26%, Rubio 19%


So rough night for Rubio, again.  I think at noon on Sunday the Predictwise market will look like this:

Trump 77%
Cruz 12%
Kasich 5%
Rubio  4%
Ryan 1%
Romney 1%

By the way I think Ryan is the best buy in this market.  He's a much more logical consensus pick at a brokered convention than Romney. If the establishment is out to get Trump, then he's well positioned. But I think their opportunity to do that depends on Trump losing both Ohio and Florida and I don't think that is likely.  After March 15th the GOP will have two choices: nominate Trump or screw him out of the nomination.  I'm really not sure which is worse for them in the long term.













Saturday, February 6, 2016

Nine Candidates, 5 Losers, 5 Possibilities (Updated GOP Handicap)


       Some endorsement, Rick.

Where does the time go?  I haven't blogged about the Republican race in almost three months.  What's most remarkable is how little has happened in that time. Of course there's been a steady stream of gossip and gaffes but the only changes have been the elimination of candidates who were never going to win the nomination.  (For the record, I thought Huckabee and Santorum might over perform in Iowa, but they very much did not and now they are gone.)

What we have left is nine candidates that are pretty easily divided into three tiers of three candidates. Each candidate is listed by their chance of winning the nomination. (With the change from December in parenthesis.)

I. Three Contenders.
1. Marco Rubio 55%. (Up 1 from 54%).
The establishment has clearly rallied to him.  He now has the most significant nomination in the field, although as the video above shows they haven't all been very helpful. Most impressively he got the media to believe that his third place finish in Iowa was somehow a bigger story than Ted Cruz winning or Trump coming second.  If he comes 2nd in NH, the establishment will do black flips to line up behind him.

2.. Donald Trump 20% (Up 3 from 17%).
Six months ago a 2nd place finish in Iowa would have seemed like an unbelievable accomplishment. But he underperformed slightly and I do think there's something to the idea that he has a ceiling for how many people are willing to vote for him.  He will win New Hampshire, but the most important number will be what percentage of the vote he gets.  If he gets under 30% in a state that is his best chance for a win will not be a good sign.


3. Ted Cruz 15% (Down 2 from 17%)
Winning Iowa should be a boost but it has become very clear in the last few months that the establishment doesn't merely dislike him, they loathe him and they worry about him becoming the face of their party.  If he comes in the top three in NH and wins South Carolina, then he will bill be around for months.  But NH has a history of rebuking the Iowa winner and I thin he is going to be somewhere in the middle of the pack on Tuesday.

II. Three Middlers.
4. John Kasich  5% (Up 4 from 1%)
I've always been a little bullish on Kasich.  I think he's the best candidate for the GOP because he will carry Ohio and it will be harder for the Democratic nominee to portray him as an extremist.  He has placed all of his chips on New Hampshire.  If he doesn't finish 2nd or 3rd, then he will probably drop out.  But a second place finish will be an enormous boost to his campaign and it would probably prevent the rest of the establishment from rushing to endorse Rubio. He also has a winner take all primary in Ohio that has 99 winner-take-all delegates waiting to be won by someone. He's a long shot, but he has a chance of being the big story on Wednesday morning.

5. Jeb Bush 1% (Down 1 from 1%)
I never thought I could feel sorry for a member of the Bush clan but the repudiation of this man's campaign is painful to any observer. He is much smarter than George W. Bush and it must be very frustrating to know that he will never be the political equal of his idiot older brother, but that's life.

6. Chris Christie 0% (Push).
His greatest contribution to the race is the above video.  His second best contribution would be to do poorly on Tuesday and get the hell out of the race.  He's an abrasive jerk but even in a year of abrasive jerks, I am glad to watch him flame out.

III. Three Also-Rans.
7. Carly Fiorina: I think the GOP made a mistake by excluding her from the last debate but I for one am glad to never have to hear her voice again.  She might have been a decent stealth VP candidate, but her grating style and her willingness to lie about anything under the sun are disqualifiers. She will not be missed.

8. Ben Carson: I'm still not sure if he ran for President because he wanted to win or because he wanted to make money by elevating his public profile.  Either way, he will not be president. But I think he is angry at Ted Cruz' stunt in Iowa and that might make him hang around a little longer to split the evangelical vote. If that tips the nomination away from Cruz, the party will be grateful to him.

9.  Jim Gilmore. Twelve votes in Iowa, surely hundreds to come in New Hampshire.

New Hampshire predictions.
Trump will win.  I think he will get about 32%.  If Rubio comes second, he heads south as the heavy favorite. If Kasich comes 2nd, the race will be re-oriented.  Cruz just needs third place.

The upshot of NH will be that four candidates will be left: Trump, Rubio, Cruz and whoever does best among Bush, Kasich and Christie. I think Bush and Carson will stay in, no matter how poorly they do in NH.  SC should be a good state for them. Christie will drop out unless he finishes in the top four.  I hope that Fiorina also drops out, but she probably doesn't have much else to do with her days so maybe she'll hang around for awhile.

Whoever wins SC and or NV will be very strong going into Super Tuesday. But I think those states will not be won by the same person and mostly likely there will be three or four candidates winning states well into the spring months.  I think a brokered convention is a real possibility.  If you add up the probabilities of the candidates above you get 96%.  I'm leaving a little wriggle room for a brokered convention that turns to a consensus compromise candidate that all remaining camps can live with. Right now the only name that I can think of filling that role is Mitt Romney.

Five possible nominees, in order:  Rubio, Trump, Cruz, Kasich and Romney.










Thursday, November 12, 2015

Symmetrical Warfare: The GOP Race Enters Phase Two



The most substantive part of the debate.


Last night the GOP held its fourth debate of the 2016 cycle. Only eight candidates made the main stage, while four were relegated to the kiddie table and three candidates failed to qualify for either event. The pared down cast improved the show by allowing the plausible candidates to have more time.  Almost immediately I notice that the most sense was coming from the far ends of the stage, from the two candidates clinging for dear life to their right to be on that stage at all. So for this review of the state of the GOP race, I will evaluate the candidates by how they were paired up on stage.

1. The Outliers (Kasich and Paul).  Here is a sentence I never expected to write: I thought Rand Paul was the best candidate in that debate.  He obviously has decided that his only hope for relevance is to reignite some love for his watered down Libertarianism by shitting on the ridiculous neconservative fantasies that pass for policies among the serious candidate.  He also corrected Trump on a very stupid factual mistake related to free trade.

From the other end of the stage, John Kasich came thundering to the defense of reason and in opposition to the truly insane, unsustainable tax policies of his competitors. He was impolite and sensible, so not surprisingly he was booed by the crowd and roundly panned by the right wing media figures today.  At one time I thought Kasich might become the establishment candidate that the base could put up with if they became convinced that he was their best shot at carrying Ohio and taking the White House. That seems very unlikely now.

Neither Kasich nor Paul will be the Republican nominee next year. Paul has apparently decided to speak up for his ideological preferences and Kasich for pragmatism.  Paul will probably benefit from this choice and get a modest bump.  But Kasich is officially doomed.  If he keeps u this rationale nonsense he just might play his way out of what should be a very strong chance at becoming the Vice-Presidential nominee.

2. The Lamestream (Jeb! and Fiorina).
Sixty days ago I'm sure that both Jeb Bush and Carly Fiorina believed they were likely to become the nominee and probably thought they would more likely than not become the 45th President of the United States. It is quite obvious that this will not happen. Jeb is a terrible candidate who managed to finish dead last in microphone time for yet another debate.  When he did speak he was boring and way off-message.  He doubled-down on the invasion of Iraq for the 947th time and that did him no favors.

Someday Carly Fiorina will be an amusing piece of presidential campaign trivia. She vaulter herself from the kiddie table to the primetime debate with a well-rehearsed shtick as the anti-Hillary.  The base took a good look at her in this fall but she did not complete the sale.  She is playing out the string.

In some alternate reality, these candidates are not stuck in the 5th and 6th spot. But I don't see either of them moving up, barring a profound implosion by a couple of the heavyweights.

3.  The Finalists  (Rubio and Cruz).

Rubio and Cruz have run the most intelligent campaigns in this cycle.  They still have not come close to closing the polling gap with the nominal front-runners, but they have built steadily and they have not alienated anyone.  The establishment and the donor class are ready and even eager to support Rubio.  Cruz does very well among evangelicals and working class Trump voters. He is well positioned to take the votes from Cruz and or Trump should they fall from grace.

Six months from now, this race will probably be whittled down to these two men. Both are intelligent, ambitious and willing to fight. One of them is a sociopath.  But my money is on the other guy, even if he sometimes uses the wrong credit card in Las Vegas.

4.  The Cincinnati Bengals (Trump and Carson).

The weirdest part of the geometry in Milwaukee was that the center-most podiums felt the least relevant to the process.  Dr. Carson and Mr. Trump dominate the national and state-level polling.  They typically combine for a bare majority of the responses while every other candidate in the field is delighted to be at or near 10 percent. But nearly everyone expects an implosion for them once real voting happens.

Dr. Carson did not even try to look prepared. Most of his answers were the rambling word salads of a very bright man talking about a subject he knows nothing about.  Imagine a Supreme Court justice holding forth on quantum physics. It almost sounds serious, but when you parse it out, there's just nothing there.

Trump was his usual self but that really is beginning to wear a little bit thin.  Which does not mean he will slide in the polls.  A certain kind of voter just loves his shtick. But part of his appeal is the arrogant confidence that will be destroyed by coming in third in Iowa or New Hampshire.  If he has a setback like that, he'll probably leave the field with a lot of huffing and puffing about how great he did very early next year.

The Cincinnati Bengals have been one of the better teams in the AFC over the past half-decade.  Since Marvin Lewis became their head coach they have won 55% o their games and made the playoffs six times. But they lost their first playoff game all six times.  This year they are undefeated at 8-0 but no one can quite take them seriously given their track record  And that's how you have to feel about the candidacy of Trump and Carson.  They are crushing the competition but it's hard to shake the doubts that they will fold when the campaign begins in earnest.

The Updated Forecast

There is not a lot of movement in this one.  Rubio inches up slightly and Cruz improves his odds form 8 to 1 to about 6 to 1. Carson, Trump and Bush slip slightly and I've officially given up on Fiorina's chances. If she was going to win the nomination she would have built on the momentum she had coming out of the first debate. She has not. 

 There are 4 candidates who will have the option of going beyond the early states.  But I think Trump and or Carson may tire of this game by then. I am hoping we get a middle stage of the primaries with Rubio and Cruz having to deal with Trump on a stage that only has three podiums.  But eventually this will come down to a fight between the establishment choice of Rubio against the Tea Party's favorite Cruz. That will be tough emotional waters for me because I loathe Ted Cruz.  But I fear Marco Rubio. 


Candidate Pre 1st debate Post 1st Debate Pre 2nd Debate Pre 3rd Debate Post 3rd Debate Post 4th Debate Change
Rubio 23 28 26 46 53 54 1
Trump 2 1 8 12 18 17 -1
Cruz 1 1 2 10 12 17 5
Carson 0 0 3 5 7 6 -1
Bush  34 31 24 17 3 2 -1
Huckabee 3 3 1 1 1 1 0
Santorum 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
Kasich 1 2 6 3 2 1 -1
The Field 1 1 3 3 2 1 -1
Paul 2 1 1 0 0 0 0
Christie 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jindal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fiorina 0 2 3 2 1 0 -1
Graham 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pataki 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Gilmore 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Walker 32 29 22 -- -- -- --
Perry 0 0 -- -- -- --


Sunday, November 1, 2015

The Field is Steady but the Math is Uncertain (Updated GOP forecast)

Not going to happen, except when it might.

I. Upate on Our Taxonomy of Candidates.

In my previous post on the GOP field I created a new taxonomy for the candidates. This taxonomy included four categories: Outsiders, Serious, Niche and Charity. My thesis was that the traditional "tiers" model could not accurately capture the dynamics of the 2016 GOP primary. The Outsider candidates (Trump, Carson and Fiorina) were dominating the polling but nearly everyone still believe the nominee would be a more conventional candidate.  Two weeks and one debate later, the polling number of the Outsider candidates remain strong but I'm still skeptical of their chance to be nominated.

At the start of this process I thought there were three candidates (Walker, Rubio and Bush) who had roughly equal chances at being the nominee. Since then Walker has dropped out and Bush has imploded. I now believe that Marco Rubio is a better than even money bet to win the nomination. The bookmakers at Paddy Power agree that he's the heavy favorite but not by as much as I do.  (The have him as a 2.37 to 1 shot, which translates into a 30% chance of being the nominee.  I have him at 52%.)

Before I write about my updated handicap, I want to look at the recent polls for this nomination process.  In the earlier post, I added up the Real Clear politics averages of the candidates in each of my categories.  There has been almost no movement among these groups in this time.  The Outsiders are a majority, the Serious Candidates are fighting over 1/4 of the voters and the rest of the field is right around 10 percent.  Whoever gets the nomination will get them by convincing undecided voters or persuading votes away from the Outsider candidates.

Category Oct. 18 Nov. 1st
Outsiders 54.3 54.8
Serious 26 25.4
Niche 10 8
Charity 1.1 1.6

II. Individual Candidates

Two big themes emerged in the post-debate coverage. The first was that Marco Rubio crushed Jeb Bush in a head to head confrontation over his voting record. The second was that the candidates complained about the toughness of the questions. The questions were pretty tough, but no more than than during the first two debates on Fox News and CNN.  What was different this time was that the moderators did a terrible job of controlling the candidates. We saw a lot of interruptions and cross-talk, which of course is how CNBC sounds during most of its broadcast day. It made for bad television and gave the GOP an excuse to whine about the event.  I think this whining may bounce back on them as they came out of the hulabaloo looking like a bunch of men who promise to thrash ISIS but are incapable of withstanding CNBC.  

We also saw another predictable theme with regards to the front-runner. After each of the first three Republican debates, the punditry has been quick to declare a setback for Donald Trump. After the first two, his numbers slipped slightly for about a week and then rebounded. I expect that pattern to repeat this time.  But I think Trump did fine. The moderators for this debate, unlike their predecessors at other networks, didn't give him an excessive amount of questions and he faded into the background a little. But he didn't need to dominate the conversation. He just needed to be himself. And he was, especially during a rousing final speech about how he saved us all from the event being 30 minutes longer than it was. (If future generations are reading this blog post on a recovered Internet cache, just trust me on this.  The front runner got rousing applause by bragging about keeping the event short.)

But they were right about Jeb Bush. He got crushed.  I have come to the conclusion that he is a lousy candidate and that people just don't like him. The conventional wisdom at the start of this process was that Jeb would have to work hard to overcome the stigma of his name.  I didn't really buy that because the Republican base never really blamed Bush for all the horrific things his presidency led to. I thought Jeb could bill himself as the smarter, wonkier version of his older brother. But he's not even getting that chance. People don't like him, which probably explains why he lost his first crack at becoming Governor of Florida.  He still has a lot of institutional support, so I'm not completely writing him off.  But it is hard to imagine the narrative he would corral to get back into this race. When John McCain was faltering in the polls we all knew he had an extremely remarkable biography to fall back on.  Jeb's biography is remarkable but not for reasons that could ever make him credible as a plucky outsider.  He is no maverick and he probably needs to get used to living with the fact that his idiot brother achieved a pinnacle that he will never reach.

In my original forecast, I gave Bush, Rubio and Walker a combined 89% of being the nominee.  I know have Rubio at 52, Bush at 3 and Walker has left the race. I gave Trump a 2% chance and Carson and Fiorina none at all. Today I have them with a combined 31% chance. So they have gained nearly all of the probability lost by my three original front-runners. 

The only other significant movement has been the emergence of Ted Cruz.  Given just 1% in my first forecast, I now have him at a solid 12%. He has played the game well. His fund raising is strong and he has positioned himself to pick up a lot of Trump/Carson voters should one or both of them implode sometime between now and Super Tuesday.  

Here's the Updated Forecast:

Candidate Pre 1st debate Post 1st Debate Pre 2nd Debate Pre 3rd Debate Post 3rd Debate Change
Trump 2 1 8 12 18 6
Bush  34 31 24 17 3 -14
Walker 32 29 22 -- -- --
Rubio 23 28 26 46 53 7
Huckabee 3 3 1 1 1 0
Santorum 1 1 1 1 1 0
Paul 2 1 1 0 0 0
Cruz 1 1 2 10 12 2
Kasich 1 2 6 3 2 -1
Carson 0 0 3 5 7 2
Christie 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jindal 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fiorina 0 2 3 2 1 -1
Graham 0 0 0 0 0 0
Perry 0 0 -- -- --
Pataki 0 0 0 0 0 0
Gilmore 0 0 0 0 0 0
The Field 1 1 3 3 2 -1

III. Process and Very Premature Delgate Math

The first delegates will be determined four months from tonight in Iowa.  The field has been pretty stable up until now but I'm sure we will see a flurry of changes as that date draws near.  Some of the minor players might drop out, although it's hard to say who.  Christie and Paul should throw the towel in but they both seem too stubborn to do so. I think Paul finds value in espousing his vaguely libertarian ideals in these forums.  All of the field seems to enjoy the attention. Even absurd long shots like Jindal and Pataki have access to national microphones that will be gone forever once they drop out. 

Jeb is too well-heeled and connected to drop out soon. He probably believes that he can weather this storm and that most people will eventually come to their senses on Trump and Carson. But he also seems weary of the process. He might drop out before Iowa, but only if he thinks the nomination is going to be won by someone he respects. I think that's a short list. Kasich for sure and presumably Rubio too. The most likely outcome is that he hangs around through the early states and hopes to swoop up some delegates on Super Tuesday.

Individual Contests.

1. IOWA: MOST LIKELY WINNER; BEN CARSON.  
Iowa seems likely to be won by either Trump or Carson.  I think Carson might benefit from the same dynamic that helped Obama in 2008. Iowans are nice people and I know that Iowa takes some pride in the role it played in electing the first black president. I think that pride has rubbed off on the Republicans there and unless Carson says something disqualifying or the competition succeeds in portraying him as a fraudster for selling snake oil supplelments and then lying about it, he will be in a strong position there. 

Rubio and Cruz should battle for third place but this contest has previously been won by two of our long shot candidates-Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee. I think some odd ball like that will get a surprising third place or a very strong 4th. That person will be able to survive New Hampshire.

2. NEW HAMPSHIRE MOST LIKELY WINNER; DONALD TRUMP:  
Trump is dominating the polls here. NH has a long history of shunning the Iowa winner so it might be in Trump's best interest to lose close in IA, then sweep up in NH.  In fact, that seems likely. Bush, Kasich, Rubio, Christie will all be vying or 2nd place. If Kasich doesn't get that, he'll probably drop out and wait for his phone to ring in July. If Christie finishes lower than 4th, he will probably drop out too.

3. SOUTH CAROLINA:  MOST LIKELY WINNER: DONALD TRUMP

South Carolina votes on February 20th, Nevada on February 23rd.  I think the field will split after NH with most candidates focusing on one of these states and ignoring the others.  Rubio and Cruz will try for NV, Trump, Carson and Bush for SC.  The hangers on will each take a shot somewhere but they won't have much chance of medaling in either place.  

The most interesting scenario is if Trump manages to wins South Carolina.  His outer boro obnoxiosness should not play in the south, but I think it will play to this crowd. He is currently leading the polls there by 13 points and I think he will win there next February. That will begin to push Carson to the margins.  

4. NEVADA:  TOO CLOSE TO CALL
Nevada could be won by Rubio, Cruz or Trump.  If Carson has pulled the upset in SC, then this race could pull him back into the lead ahead of Super Tuesday. There has only been one published poll of this race in he last 90 days.  Trump led comfortably but I suspect some of the lower-tier candidates will try to ramp up a presence there in December and January.  

DISCLAIMER:  The picture beyond these early states is very murky.  I'm going to go through the rest of the states in order to create a record of my predictions, but the truth is, if Kasich or Bush pulls an upset in NH, the rest of my predictions will look foolish. The underlying premise of everything else is that Trump, Carson, Rubio and Cruz all come out of the first 4 contests with at least some delegate and one or more strong performances in an early state.

5. SUPER TUESDAY:  12 States Voting on March 1st, 2016.

Twelve states vote on March 1st. The states are from all over the map but more than 2/3 of the available delegates come from Southern states. (And that's with counting Oklahoma as a Midwestern state, although its politics are a lot more like the former Confederate states than the great plains.)

Southern: 408 delegates from Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia
Western: 57 delegates from Alaska, Wyoming
Northeastern: 58 delegates from Massachusetts, Vermont
Midwestern:  81 delegates from  Minnesota, Oklahoma, 

By this point, Trump will either have burned out, dropped out in a fit of pique or gained national credibility.  I suspect the latter is most likely but Cruz and Rubio will be well-positioned to get a lot of delegates in the Southern and Western States. 

I suspect after these contests that Rubio, Trump and Cruz will all have enough delegates to seem like plausible candidates. Carson also could be viable then.  Bush, Kasich and Fiorina will have needed one or two big upsets to still be around.  Santorum, Huckabee and Jindal will be playing out the string but why not hang around for 4 more days

6. MARCH 5th: Old Home Saturday.  Caucuses in Maine, Kansas and Kentucky. Primary in LA.

By now we will be playing for pride.  Every contest before March 15th must award its delegates proportionally.  Jindal and Paul will be hoping for home state wins to corral some delegates.  That will be the last we hear from them. And it's hard to imagine Maine and Kansas resolving much.

7. MARCH 8th; The Last Proportional States; Idaho, Hawaii, Michigan and Mississippi.

Cruz could win Idaho and Mississippi, Trump should win Michigan and Rubio will probably compete in all Four States.

8. MARCH 15th: The Field Will Thin.

With apologies to Puerto Rico (March 13th), the nomination very well may be decided on the first day of Winner Takes All Contests. Ohio, Illinois, Missouri, Florida and North Carolina all go to the polls.  If Rubio holds home court in Florida, those 99 delegates will probably get him at or near the lead in the delegate count.  Trump will need to win Ohio and Illinois, Cruz will be banking on wins in NC and MO.  If Rubio wins any of those other states, he will have the delegate lead. 

If Kasich has hung on to this point, he could throw the math off by winning Ohio's 66 delegates. But this seems increasingly unlikely.  He may stay in the race at that point only if he thinks he can keep Trump from getting those delegates.

I know I've been discounting Carson through all of these predictions.  I guess I just don't see him having the wherewithal for a long political fight.  I know Cruz and Rubio have that.  Unless one of them is shut out on March 15th, they will soldier on to the next contests.  Trump will probably be neck and neck with Rubio for the most delegates, and ready to go scorched earth on the young Senators.

9.  The Rest of the Races
March 22nd: I think Rubio will win UT because he is far and away the most polite candidate of the three left standing.  Arizona could be a sprawling three way race. 

April 5th: Wisconsin.  This will be 2 weeks where Scott Walker wishes he didn't give up so easily. 42 delegates to either Trump or Rubio

April 19th: New York.  If Trump is still running, he wins. If not, it's Rubio's.  Cruz could be on life support after this race.

April 26th: Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island.  So THIS is where the establishment has stashed the sane states. That's 172 delegates and I think Rubio does well in all of those states. Cruz will probably have to concentrate in MD and PA. If he wins those 2, then the race is still too close to call.  

The Delagate Math So Far:
I don't know the exact mechanics for distributing delegates int he proportional states. But I just tried some very crude back of the envelop math on how the delegate counts will look after April 26th.  What I have is a very competitive three way race.   Here's the very inaccurate projection:

Trump      694
Rubio        534
Cruz          520
Carson        58
Paul             21
Jindal          15
Bush             3
Huckabee     2
Santorum     1

I have Kasich at 0 but that is likely to be off by a lot if he does better than expected in the early states and is able to win all 66 delegates by squeaking out a win in his home state of Ohio.  He may have an incentive to stay in if the math is this close, because those 66 delegates might be the difference between getting the needed majority and not.  And the VP Slot is not too much to ask in that scenario.

10.  What the Heck: Why Stop Being Wrong Now?.

I was going to write some boring paragraph about the rest of the races being too early to call but let's face it, this blog is just for fun and almost certain to be wrong.  So no half-measures tonight.  Here's how the rest of the races will go, with the winner's haul of delegates in parenthesis. 

May 3rd
Indiana  Rubio (57)

May 10th: This could be Cruz' last stand. He will need a win that day but I don't think he'll get one.)
Nebraska Turmp (36)
West Virginia Trump (34)  

May  17th  Oregon Rubio (28)

June    7th  Each of the 3 candidates could get a win here but only 2 of them can win more than one race. If Trump and Rubio both go all in for California, Cruz would be wise to concentrate on the other states and hope to finish the day in 2nd place. More likely they will all fight for CA and Rubio will win.

California Rubio (172)
Montana Cruz (27)
New Jersey Trump (52)
New Mexico Rubio (24)
South Dakota Trump (29)

June 14th:
District of Columbia  Rubio (19)

The Dates to be Determined.
Obviously the timing and spread of these contests will affect who wins where. But I'm assuming none of these will go before March 16th and I'm taking my best guess at who will win. 

North Dakota  Cruz (28)
Colorado Rubio (37)
Washington Rubio (44)
America Samoa Rubio (9)
Guam:  Cruz (9)
N. Marianas Trump (9)
Virgin Islands Trump (9)

10.  Final Delegate Math (A Political Nerd's Dream Come True)

Rubio:  933     37.8%
Trump: 853     34.5%
Cruz:    584     23.6%
Others: 100       4.1%

A brokered convention is too good to be true.  If the math begins to shape up this way the party would put enormous pressure on Cruz to drop out and let Rubio vanquish Trump mano e mano. But Cruz has big ambitions and he won't come cheap.  He also probably prefers Trump to Rubio if only because he's more likely to inherit Trumps supporters in 2020 should he not stick Trump in the back. So next July in Cleveland might be the first brokered convention of my lifetime, but I know there are powerful forces dedicated to preventing that.  I'll try to update my Math as we get past the early states and have real voting data to work with.

IV. FINAL THOUGHTS

We could get through the four February contests with eight candidates who still believe they can be the nominee.  The early states are not important because of the delegates they allocate. They are important because the media ignores and the donors stop supporting the candidates who do poorly there.  This year's Republican field is twice the size of a typical nominating process which means that the votes will be distributed across many more candidates than usual. In 2012 John Huntsman dropped out after only getting 17 percent in New Hampshire.  Any candidate other than Trump would be delighted with that number this time around.  I can foresee five or even six candidates vying for double digits there, and a couple other candidates might do well in Iowa and/or South Carolina.  Even little Bobby Jindal has reason for optimism this week after an Iowa poll put him at a whopping six percent.

Iowa's most likely outcome is Carson first, Trump second and Cruz third. If Huckabee and Jindal break double digits there, they will soldier on to South Carolina.  Trump, Carson, Rubio and Cruz will all set their sites on winning new Hampshire.  Kasich, Bush Christie and Paul will all be hoping to edge out the others to finish a strong fifth.  That's ten candidates who will choose between SC and NV to get one more respectable finish.   Lindsay Graham will have to choose between accepting reality or hoping to play spoiler with a 4th place finish in his home state.

Then it will come down to personality.  I can see Kasich getting discouraged, maybe Huckabee and Christie too. Bush might succumb to reality if he hasn't yet medaled. Pataki and Santorum (barring another Iowa miracle for him) will pack it up. But the other seven will probably move on to Super Tuesday if only for lack of something better to do. And only when the race moves to winner take all contests will we know who the real contenders are.  Trump, Rubio and Cruz will almost certainly still be standing.  Carson could be out by then, but he also could be the front-runner.  Bush, and Crhistie will probably be gone by then. Paul, Jindal and Kasich might be tempted to try to steal their home state contests to influence the process in the summer.  Or they might clear the field to prevent the Trumptacolypse.










Thursday, October 29, 2015

The Liz Mair Debate Questions Challenge (An Extremely Unlikely GOP Candidate Answers Extremely Unlikely Debate Questions)




That's how you debate.


Last night's Republican debate on CNBC was a complete mess.  The narrative coming from the candidates is that the questions were "unfair". That's a nonsensical accusation but the moderation was in deed terrible and there was an almost constant din of three people speaking at once in between the questions. The panelists were unable to regain control and it was terrible television. Tonight several of the campaigns announced that they will be meeting on Sunday to discuss a new format for the future debates. If I had a vote, it would be for more debates with fewer candidates. Imagine 3 debates with 4 candidates each, chosen at random.  That will never happen because the networks want Trump in every debate. 

A much better but equally improbably proposal was made by Liz Mair on Twitter last night. Ms. Mair is a former adviser to several major Republican candidates, including Carly Fiorina and Rich Perry. She has been a guest on Real Time with Bill Maher and is one of the most intelligent right-wing voices on Twitter. (That praise is more faint than I intended. She is worth following: @lizmair.)

Her proposal was not for a new format but for better questions.  She posted 18 questions that she would want the candidates to answer.  I would LOVE to hear Presidential candidates answer these questions. I never will, but I decided to do the next best thing: answer them myself.  Spoiler alert: I will not be the 2016 Republican nominee for President of the United States.  Here goes nothing.

Q1: Get your tax person up on stage with you. Here's a whiteboard. Do the math on your tax and spending plan. Show me deficit reduction.

Well there goes the nomination for me.  In this fantasy scenario where I am running for President I would have fleshed out a much more specific proposal but here's the broad strokes:

1. Tax hikes for income rates over $125,000 , with income taxes above $200,000 going back to pre-Bush rates.  
2.  Eliminate the preferential treatment of capital gains. (Tax investment income at the same rate as earned income.)
3. Raise the cap on pay roll taxes, over 10 years to $200K.
4. Increase the federal gas tax by 5 cents a gallon.
5. Increase the Estate Tax to pre-Bush levels.

I don't know how much more revenue that would generate, but it would be significant.  In a rational party, this would be well received. 

Q2: If you failed that question, here's a pie chart showing how much we spend on everything. What are you prepared to cut, right now?

I would make very steep cuts to defense spending. I would roll back our submarine fleet and I would kill some of the unwieldy impractical weapons programs like the F-35. But while we are being honest, I would turn that money around to spend on useful infrastructure programs like roads and bridges.


Q3: Here's a map. Find these places on it right now: Tblisi, Kiev, Islamabad, Kabul, New Dehli, Beijing.

This obviously is a visual question, but I'll do my best to explain how I would do. I know Tiblisi is the capital of Georgia, and Georgia is directly south of European Russia. I have no idea where within Georgia Tiblisi, so I would put a dot right in the middle of that country. (Since she didn't specify, I will assume this map has lines for national borders.)

Kiev is the capital of Ukraine, and it's in the eastern part of the country, more southern than northern. (I think.) Islamabad is the capital of Pakistan and it's up north, closer to India than Afghanistan. Kabul is the capital of Aghanistan and it's in the northeast portion of the country. New Dehli is the capital of India, and it's pretty close to the border with Pakistan. Beijing is the Capital of China and it's well the Northeastern part of the country but I'd be fudging the exact location.

Q4: Now, who runs each of the countries in which those cities sit? Ever met any of them? Ever talked to any of them?

Ukraine: I know they had a very attractive female President for a while, but she's out of office now. I don't know....Plitcheko? Total guess. I know he doesn't like Russia.
Georgia: No idea
Pakistan:  His name is Hussain. That's all I know about him.
India's Prime Minister is named Modi  He held a big rally in Madison Square Garden last year. I think he was accused of ethnic cleansing when he was a governor. That's about all my Moodi knowledge.
China: Xi Jinping.  The worlds worst Communist. He was at the White House a few weeks ago.

Q5: Who's the British PM? Who's the Canadian PM? Who's the German Chancellor? Who's the Russian President? Met any of these people?

David Cameron, Justin Trudeau, Angela Merkel, Vladimir Putin.  No, I have not met any of them but I obviously know a lot more about NATO countries than the rest of the world.

Q6: Are you for free trade?
Generally, yes. That might be I would lose the Democratic primary too.

Q7: Do you think immigration is a net positive or a net negative for our country? Will you make it easier to come here legally?

Net positive and yes, absolutely. Sad to think that none of the candidates on that stage could have given this simple answer.

Q8: What will you do about the 12m people currently here? If you say "deport," show me your math to prove it's doable & inexpensive.

If I was running for Dictator, I'd wave a magic wand and make them all legal. Because I have to provide political cover to congress, I will agree to some stupid points system that punishes people for having committed crimes and to generate some revenue I would agree to a substantial fee for the process. Oh and I would call the form a Ted Cruz form, because he's an evil dickhead.



Q9: Show me your actual health care plan. No, an actual plan. No, writing "repeal Obamacare" on the whiteboard doesn't count.

Well, I suppose we have to give Obamacare 10 years or so to work but I'd love to lay the ground work for states to be able to experiment with single payer systems. That will have to be surreptitious.

Q10: Name 15 specific regulations that you know hamper small business right now, and explain how, in detail.
I can't name 3. But this would be a great excuse to rail against the drug war. Hopefully by this point Chris Christie will have given his eloquent defense of Fantasy Football and I can point out the hypocrisy of him wanting to throw people in jail for smoking weed.

Q11: How will you fix education in this country. In detail. No, "repeal Common Core" does not count as "in detail." You can phone a friend.

I would reduce standardized testing and rebuild our arts and music programs. I would double the time devoted to physical education and I would make federal funds available to high schools that create programs oriented toward skilled professions. In short: more band, more gym, more shop.

Q12: Do you really think we can defeat ISIS. If so, how? Be specific. How much are you willing to spend to do it? How do we measure success?

No. the cost of winning a military struggle against them would not justify the costs. And if we entered that fight in full-force it would legitimize the Jihadists' narrative that the United Stats is at war with Islam. The long term solution to groups like ISIS is for a non-fundamentalist version of Islam to become mainstream and acceptable in the Arab world. I don't know how to bring that about but it's not worth a trillion dollars and several thousand American lives to find out.

Q13: Have you ever met Bibi Netanyahu? How about King Abdullah of Jordan? Any other Middle Eastern leaders?

I have not had the pleasure. This is the one question that I would probably re-work because it would be too sickening to watch all 10 of those jerks compete over how wonderful they think Netanyahu is.

Q14: Name 5 nominations you'd like to make to the Supreme Court.
I can't give names because the only people I know who would possibly be qualified are a few law professors that would be too embarrassed to read their name on my shitty blog so I will give 5 categories of people I would like on the bench:

1. Someone with an advanced degree in a hard science.
2. A lifelong criminal defense attorney. (So the 4th amendment has a chance.)
3. Someone that went to a non-elite Law School. We've had way too many Harvard, Yale and Stanford grads on the bench. How about a UCLA or a Minnesota?
4. Someone from Staten Island so all 5 Boros can be represented on the court.
5. A WASP. It's crazy that our entire Supreme Court is made up of (6) Catholics and (3) Jews.

Q15: Describe to me the precise process you will use to stop abortions happening after 20 weeks & how you'll deal w legal challenges...

Obviously this is a quesiton that only works at a Republican debate. The scientific consensus is that fetuses are incapable of experiencing pain until the 26th week. A policy of ending abortions six weeks before that line is crossed is not something I could ever support.  What I would like to do as President is force the proponents of such laws to explain what the specific punishments should be for a woman who has an abortion during week 21 and for the doctor who performs the procedure. 


Q16: What caused the 2008 financial crisis? What do you think the next crisis might be? How about the next bubble? How will you stop it?

The three principal causes were the Bush Tax Cuts, the 2005 reforms of the bankruptcy code and the extremely suspect lending practices of the home mortgage loan. I think the next crisis might related to student loan debt. I would try to work reductions in the interest rate on student loans into the budget over time, but they would be gradual. I would also love to gradually eliminate the mortgage interest deduction over a course of several decades. It would be unfair to hit homeowners with that hit immediately but if you reduce it by 5% a year for 20 years, the real estate market will absorb that shock.

Q17: What is your biggest weakness
I get bored with ambitious projects before they are completed.

Q18: Who's your political hero? Note: You cannot say Ronald Reagan. I repeat: You cannot say Ronald Reagan.
The 40th president of the United States. (Ha! I played by your rule, Ms. Mair.) Okay, in all seriousness it's FDR.
Q19: What will you use the bully pulpit for as President? Recognizing that you won't be able to/want to legislate/regulate everything.

Secularism and the need for evidence-based reasoning, especially in the sciences. I would also beat the drum for baseball as our national past time and refuse to meet with any soccer team, no matter how many trophies they win. In my administration, the Vice-President will handle the soccer photo ops, no exceptions.

Q20: Explain to me what net neutrality means, in theory and in practice? Can't do it? Phone a friend. Now, same deal re: patent reform.

Net neutrality is the very important concept that Internet Service Providers can not favor certain contents over other content. I am less familiar with patent reform but I believe it relates to eliminating predatory practices like patent trolling.