kurt_cagle
kurt_cagle's JournalThat can be difficult
I like Obama because he is intelligent - he can communicate sophisticated concepts with clarity and precision. However, as the OP points out, when you're used to thinking at this level, it is very difficult to scale back the concepts and present them in a form that people without that level of intellect can respond to. Of course, it also usually means that the mind behind the clarity and precision has usually mentally explored the concept in question in greater depth. Romney strikes me as being a very shallow person, intellectually - he speaks at a seventh grade reading level because that's the way he thinks, and would likely establish policy at a very shallow level without fully fleshing out the ramifications.
I noticed that there have been discussions about the MSM about the first debate being wonkish - I don't think this was accidental. The narrative needed to show that Mitt Romney is able to engage about as an intellectual equal, but from my perspective, Romney said very little "wonk". It's also a more subtle trap on the readership or viewership - "governing is hard, and you as an audience aren't in fact up to understanding it - don't hurt your head over these things and leave governing for the 'professionals'. Next up, the Kardashians!".
Do I Believe Romney will Start WWIII?
No. Do I have a feeling that Romney may very well stumble into a situation where a heated local conflict becomes WWIII. Yeah. I'd say it's likely in fact.
Syria is a flash point. Iran is a flash point. The King and Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia are both in their 80s, and succession is far from guaranteed past that. Pakistan/India are flash points. These currently stay contained largely because the US is cooperating with the rest of the world. Romney has shown his ability to cooperate or his aptitude for diplomacy is nil and his backers include most of the military-industrial complex. I'd say the likelihood of multilateral war is higher today than it has been at any point in the last fifty years, and I don't see Romney negotiating the waters to keep local wars contained.
He won't need to start it. He just won't stop it.
Suppose Obama Wins? What happens to the GOP?
For the record, I believe he will, and I want him to.
The question I have though is that I also believe that the Republicans will NOT go down gracefully - in many respects, if the GOP gets swept from the presidency, the senate and the house, what do you believe that both the GOP itself and the hard core supporters will do? There is so much rancor and hatred at this point coming from the Right that I cannot see them going into the wilderness easily.
I Want National Election Day
Nearly every other democracy on the friggin' planet makes election day a holiday, so that people can go and vote without impact from work, and so that children can participate in the democratic experience rather than being in school all day. I'd gladly give up Columbus Day for it - always felt that one was a pretty vile day, or Washington's Birthday.
The only reason that Election Day ISN'T a holiday is because the Republicans are deathly afraid that people would actually come out to the polls and vote if there was a day set aside for the purpose, and they are adamantly opposed to letting that happen.
Debating a Ouija Board
I have a slightly different take than most. I don't think that Obama did well on the debates, but that a big part of that was the fact that the man who he was planning to debate against never showed up.
Obama's a deep thinker, but not necessarily a fast one. He's a fairly classic introvert. He came in expecting to debate the Tea Bag Mitt, and instead he got Mr. Moderate. Romney is an extrovert - he's a salesman, someone who talks fast, thinks shallow, is far less concerned about facts or accuracy and far more concerned about making the sale. About 30 minutes in, it was obvious to me that Obama realized he was in a no win situation - get aggressive and get painted as the Angry Black Man, appeal to the (non-existent) moderator and be seen as a rule's lawyer, or simply let Romney rant and hope to mine the situation for sound bites after the fact.
Romney gained a little ground after the first debate. Good - it will make Democrats a little less complacent. He did so by repudiating his positions from the last six months, by throwing his VP under a bus, and by making some pretty major mistakes of his own (Big Bird is going to hurt him - Big Bird is waiting in the alley beyond 123 Sesame Street with a large lead pipe.) Romney's going to be seen by undecideds (which are admittedly thin on the ground right now) as attempting to pander, and he may have lost some of his base last night as well.
I don't think this was Obama's strategy initially, but I don't think the evening turned out as badly as some here paint.
The Martyrdom of Big Bird
Romney grew up before Sesame Street aired, and I seriously doubt that it ever really impacted him. However, if you are fifty years old or younger, Big Bird defined your childhood. This single line may very well end Mitt's chances of becoming president. Mitt Romney will become known as the man who would kill Big Bird, and that's a terribly legacy to be known for.
Donations = Access
Especially on the Republican side. A lot of donors to Romney looked at him early on as being a shoe-in to win against Obama and figured that getting on board early would increase their access in a new Republican administration, regardless of their own political feelings. As Romney stumbles, a lot of them are going to start siphoning money not to down-ticket races but to Obama, not wanting to be on the losing side of a bet gone wrong. That's the real danger that Romney faces - he's now sending at least a portion of what he thought was sure money directly to his opponent.
Ads? There are ads?!
I watch remarkably little television, perhaps 2-3 hours or so a week. That includes Dr. Who, the occasional British mystery, and on occasion Rachel Maddow. I spend far more time on the Internet, but even there, I've encountered very few Romney ads. I have to wonder how much of that huge ad buy is simply going off to the ever smaller set of people that either can't TIVO past them or don't get most of their information from the Internet?
Ann is a resource to Romney
That is all. Just another part of the marketing plan.
I have to wonder if there's another thing beginning to dawn in Ann Romney's head - that maybe she is simply a tool for Romney to use, and not the devoted husband that she thought he was. Seeking political office is a profound test of the strength of a marriage - you discover things about your partner that you didn't know before, and can see him or her not as you've known the person, but as the public perceives the candidate.
Sometimes that strengthens the bonds. Sometimes that changes the nature of the relationship, and sometimes it ends it altogether.
Actually, it may be that the Neanderthals are more likely Democrats
There's some very intriguing evidence that suggests that introversion as a personality trait (as well as Aspergers and possibly Gluten intolerance) may in fact be holdovers from a higher percentage of Neanderthal genes in the human genome than is found in "neuro-typical" genetic makeup. Introversion may also be found in the Denisovans, who were like the Neanderthal communal, cold-adapted hominids. Because these hominids were typically living in harsh climes, their total numbers were never very big - perhaps 5% and 2% of the Homo Sapiens populations respectively. As the glaciers retreated, these two sets of hominids interbred with Homo Sapiens, effectively breeding back into the large Homo gene pool.
Homo Neanderthalis was noted for short, stocky bodies and red hair that adapted to blonde farther north as an evolutionary adaption (blondeness by itself seems to be ready adaptation to the cold, but red hair is rare - only about 1-2% of the population worldwide have it, and even in Europe only 2-6% have it). It's possible that the Picts of Scotland (and through them the Scottish Celts), the Finno-Ugarinic Peoples (Finland and Hungary), the Etruscans, the Gypsy population, the Basque and the Japanese Ainu shared some Neanderthal history, while the Devonians may have contributed genetically to the Melanesians and Australian aboriginals.
Given that Neanderthals had larger brains and overall settled into more egalitarian societies (based admittedly on a very scant amount of evidence) it may very well be that the progressive impulse may be due to those self-same Neanderthals.
Profile Information
Member since: 2002Number of posts: 534
