“If we nominate Trump, we will get destroyed … and we will deserve it,” Lindsey Graham, May 3, 2016
With the world looking on, on Wednesday January 6th President Trump incited his followers to storm the U.S. Congress in order to disrupt the certification of the 2020 election. An election which he lost by millions of votes.
Over the last four years President Trump has mocked the Office he holds and the country he swore to defend to the great amusement of his followers, and the exasperation of his detractors. And his efforts have paid off. Some of his followers have ceased to be patriots and can now officially be labeled terrorists.[i]
Republican leaders and conservative voices were quick to condemn the violence. As House minority leader Kevin McCarthy – who had previously indicated his support for Trump on every conceivable occasion – finally muttered ‘this has gone too far.’
And that is because President Trump has been going too far a long time. And he has been aided and abetted by Republican leaders, the media looking for shock value (and thereby revenue), and by all ‘the other side does it too’ apologists.
To Republicans who wanted conservative judges and justices appointed, lower taxes, less immigration, and the repeal of Obamacare, all this behavior was acceptable. Even a source of amusement. After all, Trump was a reliable turn-out machine. He was a golden ticket; the entertainer-in-chief to a conservative base long since tired of liberals and coastal elites telling them how to lead their lives.
Republican after Republican laughed away the President’s shortcomings as foibles. As long as he pushed their agenda and helped their candidates get elected, all the President’s failures were acceptable.
In the days to come conservative voices may claim the storming of Capitol Hill was the work of foreign infiltrators, saboteurs or left-wing pederasts. Or maybe they’ll say the other side started it in 2016 when they started the campaign ‘#notmypresident. But they will be hard pressed to undo what the American people have now seen is a real-world consequence of the tweeting of falsehoods; the ineptitude and the lies that Trump has spewed for the last four years.
By backing Donald Trump to the hilt, no matter what he did or said, they have now ensured his supporters will only listen to him. Republican leaders who now call for peace won’t get it from Trump supporters. Fully 75% of Georgian Republican voters in the recent Senate runoff believed the Presidential election was won fraudulently. A claim that is simply false, but has been repeated ad nauseum by Trump and numerous Republicans.
The result is that many of these voters lost enthusiasm for the Senate runoff, and Georgia just ensured that the Senate is now also in Democratic hands. Republicans lost, and it is now too late. And this has now gone too far.
And yet it is said the darkest hour is just before the dawn. A silver lining to all of this is that these disgraceful scenes may lead to soul-searching in the Republican Party; once of Abraham Lincoln that put an end to slavery, and which broke up monopolies under Teddy Roosevelt. Perhaps they can get back to their roots as a Party of limited but just government, genuinely free markets, self-determination, and even global leadership. Such sentiments may seem far-fetched but at times like this we need is a little optimism.
Happy New Year from across the pond!
[i] Terrorism is defined in the Code of Federal Regulations as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives” (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85). https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/terrorism-2002-2005.
Feature image: Washington DC, United States. 6th Jan, 2021. Protesters seen all over Capitol building where pro-Trump supporters riot and breached the Capitol in Washington, DC on January 6, 2021. Rioters broke windows and breached the Capitol building in an attempt to overthrow the results of the 2020 election. Police used buttons and tear gas grenades to eventually disperse the crowd. Rioters used metal bars and tear gas as well against the police. (Photo by Lev Radin/Sipa USA) Credit: Sipa USA/Alamy Live News
What the hell? Most people in the U.S. appear to be freaking out about Georgia ending its lockdownbefore anyone else. Even Trump weighed in, saying he disagreed with Georgia Governor Brian Kemp. As we stand, restaurants here opened yesterday, as have bowling alleys, parks, nail salons and other facilities. The State also just declared its one thousandth death from COVID-19.
On April 2nd Kemp admitted that he didn’t know that this coronavirus could spread asymptomatically, something the world knew since late January. Kemp may be an idiot, but that doesn’t mean he was wrong to re-open Georgia’s economy. With all respect to those who have lost loved ones or suffered from a bout, it’s time collectively we get back to our new normality.
On a daily basis, we are bombarded with reasons to be fearful, but it’s in our best interest to keep this in perspective. We’re human, and merely one-hundred-and-fifty-years-ago you would be fortunate to live past forty. Now, the argument to resume a bit of human interaction is dismissed as being disrespectful to human life: anyone who dares prioritize the the economy over safety is dismissed as unethical or even cruel.
As noted by the head of emergency of a Bronx hospital, one of the epicenters, the fact that emergency visits went down on April 9th may not be a direct result of everyone staying at home. Rather the wave hit us and we came out the other side.
The wave will likely hit again, and we should be ready, but we shouldn’t follow the example of China and other authoritarian countries and give up basic freedoms in exchange for a false sense of security. We stayed at home and practiced social distancing to flatten the curve. Once it arrived, complete elimination was never going to be possible. Only a vaccine can eliminate a virus. In the meantime, anyone who would like a Chinese government app that gives you a green light whenever you want to leave your house please raise your hand.
Ok – we were slightly off the mark about Biden’s campaign being low-energy, but that doesn’t make us wrong about it overall. He’ll have a tough time holding his own against the targeting machine the Republicans have built up.
The Republicans are great at creating alternate realities for those susceptible to deception. Bull Moose’s own eighty-year-old mother expressed dissatisfaction at the harsh treatment Trump receives in the media. She didn’t seem aware that he had advocated ingesting bleach? Even the makers of Lysol had to issue a public warning. That should have been a cause for impeachment far more than the Ukraine investigations. Impeachment for sheer idiocy and delusions of grandeur.
Yet we digress. Covid-19 is the topic de jour. It’s contagious and potentially deadly. As we speak, much of the world is still in lockdown, and stories of human misery are coming out of epicenters in China, Spain, Italy, and elsewhere. Over the coming months, and especially next winter, suffering is likely to intensify, unless we find a vaccine.
It’s been interesting to observe the left vs right debate in the U.S. around Covid-19. In general, the right is advocating a rapid opening up of the economy and disregarding those less fortunate, while the left hides behind the pretense of the sanctity of all human life, wrapped up in sensationalism. Neither are right, and both sides are driven by fear.
More than ever, the U.S. needs a voice of reason from the center that is prepared to lead in a considerate, less ideological way. This is someone who could advocate for workers’ rights, while at the same time advocating for people’s right to have a haircut.
People in the U.S. love to talk about their free media, but the big problem right now is the populist, special interest media. Trump has turned overzealous partisan coverage against him media to his advantage, turning bully into victim with a sleight of hand rarely seen. He has also successfully called out a media more concerned with getting clicks through headlines than the accuracy of its reporting.
Yet, the media is itself a victim of the current power/money play. They rely on advertising, clicks and the interests of their billionaire owners. Take Jeff Bezos as a case in point. Owner of the Washington Post, he gets far less scrutiny than he deserves, which is entirely due to the fact that he is the world’s richest man.
A few weeks ago, Bezos announced he didn’t think the U.S. should open yet. I’m sorry but he doesn’t get a vote. He benefits directly from lockdowns. His net worth has increased by nearly $24 billion since the start of the year, as his quest for Amazon’s total domination continues. The world’s first trillion-dollar company (that’s a million millions…) should be regulated for the sake of our children who should not be beholden to the undemocratic decisions of a select few corporate entities.
Maybe the idea of taxing the obscenely rich isn’t so crazy. When is enough really enough, and why is no one holding Bezos accountable? It is obvious by now he drives a hard bargain, and is not a pleasant human being. If money buys power, why should he get a free pass, while we still have a voice?
We need a free, independent and accountable media more than ever. We don’t need CNN, Fox, BBC and other special interest ‘news’ channels that endeavor to claim to give us ‘real news’ from ‘independent’ reporters.
This year, America decides between two white men born in the 1940’s to lead them into the 2020’s. Consider that for a moment. The last three Presidents of the U.S. are all still younger today than any of the candidates today. They’ll have to decide on issues that weren’t around even a decade ago, and are hard to understand without a great deal of mental dexterity. Is either up to the task?
So the Phony War continues in the Democratic Primaries as Bernie takes the New Hampshire primary by a small margin over Buttigieg, while Klobuchar finished a surprise third. But this month’s column is concerned with the bigger picture, and how the apparently unstoppable Trump procession to the Presidency could be halted by a virus beyond its control.
Apparently the app used had security issues, and little or no training had been given to a largely elderly and volunteer army of caucus chairpersons (all 1,600 of them across the State). Also, internet trolls publicly posted the number used to call in results, rendering the phone lines that acted as a ‘fail-safe’ useless.
Whatever the reason, it should be clear by now that politics has got a lot dirtier. Yet Democrats cannot comprehend this simple point, as many are unable to let go of a bygone era when the game was played by vastly different rules. Had they learned so by now, they would have over-prepared, playing chess rather than horseshoe.
Open Mike
Enter Mike Bloomberg. The media declared the entire week a triumph for President Trump, who was ‘acquitted’ of impeachment; while Iowa showcased Democrat ineptitude to the delight of Republican pundits.
Although Buttigieg and Sanders shared the Iowa honors when the results were finally announced, Bloomberg was the real winner. He was in the process of hiring a staff of over two thousand the same week as the Iowa poll.
Bloomberg’s approach is simply to run the best campaign money can buy, spending more than any other Democrat candidate. Ever.
As Charlie Pierce put it in Esquire: ‘Bloomberg is not coming for the other candidates. He’s simply waiting, on the ground that he’s prepared, for them to come to him.’[ii]
Also, potentially at his disposal is an army of mayors and special interest groups he’s funded for years. No doubt he expects to be rewarded for his investments.
New York tabloid market
Left-leaning Dems are crying foul at the thought of a general election between two soon-to-be octogenarians New York billionaires. Clearly that’s the future America! But seriously here’s the rub.
Before the Internet deluge, the New York tabloid market operated like the modern-day internet, offering content to the highest bidder, with an attentive public and a small number of ‘kingmaker’ platforms fighting it out for relevance. Oh and all of this happening in a city that famously never sleeps.
Trump and Bloomberg were ahead of their time, for decades sharpening their claws in the then biggest media market in the world, long before the rest of us became online trolls.
Still, while you wouldn’t bet against Mike pulling off a shock he’s still a long shot. So far he has avoided the intense scrutiny the other candidates have been subjected to, but having spent $300 million this will change in the coming weeks.
Feel the Bern?
What about the rest of the Democratic field? Pete Buttigieg the surprise package; Bernie Sanders, the old timer shooting from the hip knowing it’s his O.K. Carrol; or the New York Times’s darlings Klobuchar and Warren?[iii]
If the results of the New Hampshire and Iowa polls are any indication, the center left is far more crowded than the lane further left occupied by Warren and Sanders. If Warren pulls out sooner rather than later because of her poor showing to date, it could spell trouble for Bloomberg, Buttigieg and Klobuchar. Warren supporters are more ideologically in tune with Bernie supporters. Notice we haven’t even mentioned Joe Biden, another center-left candidate.
Here’s why. Biden currently lacks the mental dexterity. He also has a Ukraine problem courtesy of Trump. At the very least, it was inadvisable for Hunter Biden, the son of a Presidential candidate, to accept $50,000 a month to sit on the board of an obscure Ukrainian gas company. It smells of corruption, and his poor showing in Iowa and New Hampshire were a direct result of this and the tired ‘same old’ feeling surrounding his campaign.
The Klobuchar, Buttigieg and Warren campaigns call to mind the words of the ‘Father of Advertising’ David Ogilvy: ‘Remember to give people a logical reason to justify their emotional decision.’
Not many would choose Warren, Buttigieg or Klobuchar on a purely emotional basis. Warren comes across as a good-natured librarian with a tendency to lecture. Klobuchar is sensible, but without a clear edge and unpredictability factor.
Likewise Buttigieg – the McKinsey nerd – sounds too rehearsed and polished, if very sensible. He’s also unable to connect with anyone under thirty – which should scare Democrats more than any inability to connect with African-Americans. Still, the emotional pull of being the first ever openly gay presidential candidate make him attractive to some voters.
That leaves us with Sanders. Feel the Bern? The Bernie Bros are the only group currently capable of pushing back against the formidable online army that Trump has built up, deploying similar bullying tactics online. For a full outline of these sinister trends I recommend this excellent article by McKay Coppins for The Atlantic.[iv]
Yet Bernie scares a lot of middle Americans suspicious of radical socialist ideas at a time when the economy is doing relatively well. His railings against billionaires disturbs many among a middle class that have done well off the back of the recent stock market upsurge.
Still, while his path to the nomination is more obvious than the others, three weeks is a long time in politics, and things could still change significantly any time up to March 3rd – dubbed Super Tuesday – when we should have a clear picture on who will take on Trump in November.
What hasn’t changed is the prediction we made in this column in January – Trump will win the election. Unless, of course, something drastic happens.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLz6ydbq3D8
Coronavirus
We can’t finish this month’s column without talking about the Coronavirus.
After the initial round of panic reason set in. Then panic hit again. And currently we have a mixture. Now dare mention the economic impact and people call you insensitive. But let’s stare the reality squarely in the face.
As of writing, the Dow Jones is still near record highs, but this could change dramatically in the months ahead. Trump’s stock market rally has seen the Dow gain 48% since the inauguration, making believers out of Republicans, as the Impeachment vote demonstrated when only Mitt Romney broke ranks.
Coronavirus might be the trigger to collapse this deck of cards. How soon? Probably by April, maybe May. The virus is expected to peak around April, but by then the quarterly earnings will have been impacted.
Should most of us in the U.S. be afraid of Coronavirus? It depends. If you’re healthy and don’t work in healthcare you’ve little to worry about. Based on the limited information we can glean from the Chinese news bubble, people with an otherwise healthy immune system, who are not regularly exposed to the virus, can rest easy. Apparently it is doctors, the elderly and other vulnerable categories who are susceptible to infection.
But that won’t stop many of us from cancelling cruise ship vacations, holidays to Asia, and even overseas trips to trade fairs. It will also impact global supply chains, which rely heavily on China. All this means lost revenue, which will hit the markets once results first show up on balance sheets in April.
The length of this market downturn will ultimately decide November’s election result.
Remember you read it first on Cassandra Voices. Subscribe Today and Share!
[i] Meghan Mistry ‘Mike Bloomberg’s campaign is looking to pay influencers’, CBS News, February 7th, 2020, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mike-bloomberg-2020-campaign-pay-influencers/
[ii] Charlie Pierce, ‘Michael Bloomberg Is the Doomsday Money-Bomb Waiting for Every Democratic Candidate’ Esquire, February 9th, 2020, https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a30834790/michael-bloomberg-looms-over-new-hampshire-primary/
[iii] Untitled, ‘In a break with convention, the editorial board has chosen to endorse two separate Democratic candidates for president.’ New York Times, January 19th, 2020, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/01/19/opinion/amy-klobuchar-elizabeth-warren-nytimes-endorsement.html
[iv] McKay Coppins, ‘The Billion-Dollar Disinformation Campaign to Reelect the President’, The Atlantic, February 10th, 2020, https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/03/the-2020-disinformation-war/605530/
Five predictions for 2020: The Trump Card, an analysis of the Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2019, CES 2020, implications of 5G rollout and a Republican climate change pivot.
The Trump Card
For all the talk of a fading U.S. Superpower since President Trump came to office, there is one statistic firmly in his favor. The U.S. remains the world’s most powerful global economy in absolute terms, and home to the largest stock market.
In truth, economic indicators have rarely looked better. Corporate taxes have been cut and red tape slashed. As a result, the stock market has surged to an all-time high[i] and unemployment is hovering at levels last seen in 1969.[ii] Sure there is still serious inequality, and poverty, but at least there are employment opportunities for those willing to work.
The big question for 2020, then, is whether the bull market continues. As ever, we’re feeling Bullish, but not as much about the political ramifications.
Whatever the latest polls are saying in the wake of the Impeachment, when the economy is in this state, it’s hard to see an incumbent President losing an election.
Over the course of 2020 we anticipate billions of dollars being spent on influencing the American electorate which way to vote. All of this will be keenly watched by a global audience, who are aware that where the U.S. travels, others follow.
The outcome has a sense of inevitability, hinging as it does on the health of the stock market. As Bill Clinton, another President who faced Impeachment, famously said: ‘it’s the economy, stupid!’, and this still holds true. Barring a dramatic stock market crash, or a natural disaster, Trump is going to be re-elected.
Patriot Act
In the event of the stock market crashing, Bull Moose predicts Trump will wrap himself tightly in the star-spangled banner, much in the way his one-time mentor Roy Cohn did whenever he faced trouble.
The big question is whether appealing to patriotism will be enough to save him. After all, this approach can be replicated by the Democratic opposition, even if Republicans have owned the story in recent times.
Enter another iron law of U.S. politics: whenever the nation is involved in a military conflict, Presidents don’t lose elections.
‘whenever the nation is involved in a military conflict, Presidents don’t lose elections.
Much in the same way as other ‘strongman’ leaders have done – Tayyip Erdogan, Vladimir Putin and Kim-Jong Un spring to mind – Trump is likely to develop a rallying cry, awakening fears of an external threat beyond anything the Democrats are serving up to him – just like the Bush administration used the War on Terror to galvanise its base.
He’s sure to deploy the usual rhetoric about the dangers of socialism and the ‘woke’ left, epitomized by ‘The Squad’, a group of four Congresswomen (Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan), all from so-called ‘minority’ backgrounds. But against a more centrist Democrat candidate, such as Joe Biden, this might not prove to be enough. Trump needs a scarier prospect, an enemy to make mainstream Democrats quake.
Alexandria Ocascio-Cortez
The drone-strike assassination of Qassem Soleimani on January 3rd was aimed at a domestic audience as much the Iranian regime. Much remains to be said, but henceforth every decision taken by this President should be viewed in the context of a single-minded preoccupation: to win re-election for another term.
Reuters Report
Hot off the press, The Reuters Institute Digital News Report[iii] makes for interesting reading about the state of news journalism in the world. Perhaps the most important takeaway is this:
There is no sign that the majority of people are about to pay for online news, although many recognise that information on the internet is often overwhelming and confusing. Younger audiences in particular don’t want to give up instant, frictionless (and ideally free) access to a range of diverse voices and opinions. They don’t want to go back to how the media used to be.
The global media landscape has changed forever. There is no going back.
Specific to the United States, the report reflects our view that ‘audiences remain deeply polarised, much more so than most other countries.’ This reflects what we said back in July: ‘Among the least discussed, but perhaps most important influence of the Digital Age is our tendency to live in bubbles. We no longer have to be rich to live in the equivalent of gated communities.’ A near total absence of communication between the two sides is a clear and present danger to democracy itself.
It should also be noted that many media organisations are still struggling hugely in the digital era, despite the rosy economic picture overall. Nonetheless, a few leading companies continue to do well, in effect consolidating their market dominance – think Washington Post, New York Times & Fox News.
The report points to jobs cuts affecting a variety of lesser publications, from the venerable Cleveland Plain-Dealer to digital-platform First Look Media. Notably, in January 2019, BuzzFeed laid off 15% of its worldwide workforce (a total of 220 positions). That very week Verizon Media Group, which owns HuffPost, announced a 7% reduction across its media properties, totalling about 800 positions. Gannett, the leading U.S. news publisher, also announced layoffs at local newspapers across the country.
The Report says this is ‘stoking continued concerns about the future of local news,’ although perhaps more reassuringly viewership on local television news has remained steady.
Podcasts are bucking the downward trend, however, with the U.S. leading the world in listenership, including daily news-focused offerings. The New York Times’ ‘The Daily’ began broadcasting in 2017 and now averages 1.75 million daily downloads. It is joined by the Washington Post’s ‘Post Reports’, Vox’s ‘Today Explained’, Slate’s ‘What Next’, ABC News’ ‘Start Here’, among others. Another notable development is VICE News partnering with Spotify to produce the bilingual podcast series ‘Chapo.’
While these may seem like the usual suspects, a host of small players are also succeeding in this space. This trend is likely to continue in 2020, increasing the depth and breadth of coverage around the world and inviting people to step outside their news media bubbles. This bodes well for micro-operators, such as the Joe Rogan podcast and our own Cassandra Voices, that offer fresh angles.
CES 2020
January is the time of year that for the great and the good to gather in Vegas for CES 2020 and discover the latest news and hands-on reviews from the world’s biggest tech show.[iv] Well over 200,000 people attended this year’s event, providing a useful bellwether on where the digital economy is headed in the years to come.
Amid heightened concerns about infringements on personal data, the headline panel featured representatives from Google, Amazon, Facebook and Apple, to discuss privacy.
Alarm bells should be ringing that measures are being taken by the conglomerates themselves, rather than restraints being imposed on them by democratically elected representatives. While most Americans are interested in protecting their privacy, an unspoken consensus seems to have developed, where convenience is the trade-off for the loss of personal data. The question is how long the truce will last, before consumers start to object to being told what they desire.
Bull Moose had some cause for concern himself over the holidays after being surprised to receive a data usage warning from his latest model Galaxy smartphone – unusually all 64GB of storage had been used up. On top of all that, the photo and video file cache was empty.
Facing a choice between asking his young nephew to figure out how to delete the files, Bull Moose plugged the phone into his computer to explore what was happening. Lo and behold, he came across a cache of external sites that had been collecting data on the phone’s activities – involving all manner of companies and apps.
Collectively, these were using 32GB of storage, and after deleting these nothing was lost in terms of functionality. Presumably this data was there for companies to access relevant information at their time of choosing.
Let’s be clear, the primary reason data is collected is to allow companies to profile you in order to sell you goods and services, which they believe you will want.
On the surface, a limited amount of this is ok – advertising is often a bit of a shot in the dark after all – and people are ultimately free to make up their own minds. It’s just about fine provided there is government oversight to prevent identity theft or malicious use of data. The problem is there isn’t any.
It’s only really the relatively toothless and tedious GDPR, enacted by the E.U. in 2018, and California’s new Consumer Privacy Act[v] that are attempting to curb the data free-for-all.
The Rise of 5G
Enter 5G technology, which is likely to alter the way our societies interact with technology. 5G-enabled technologies and networks are characterized by delivery of ultra-high-speed bandwidth, ultra-low latency, and ultra-high reliability of service. It is believed this will lead to connection speeds up to one hundred times faster than we are used to. But it will also generate greater possibilities for tracking and data collection.
CES 2020, then, will be an opportunity for tech makers to demonstrate that 5G will be an actual thing this year, and they’re not going to hold back. Some of these announcements will be around specific devices, like Dell’s 5G-ready Latitude laptop. Others will be around chipsets: MediaTek, for example, plans to roll out a premium 5G chipset for phones at CES, and Qualcomm will likely expound upon the announcements it made at its annual Hawaii summit back in December. Most importantly, expect infrastructure updates, as the US carriers continue to expand their 5G networks and show off how the fifth-generation of wireless will transform healthcare, “smart” cities, and autonomous vehicles.[vi]
While most consumers view 5G much like the arrival of 3G or 4G, i.e. as just another smartphone upgrade, in fact it will have a transformative impact on the technology we use ever more in our daily lives.
Besides privacy questions and public health issues (5G requires a great number and more integrated cell-phone towers), there are also concern around China’s, and specifically Huawei’s, lead in this new technology. As Linsday Gorman in the Atlantic puts it:
Policymakers on both sides of the Atlantic, from European economics ministers to President Donald Trump, have viewed the 5G dispute first as a trade issue … the West has ample reason for caution about Chinese 5G suppliers. For one, the recent Chinese National Intelligence Law requires these companies to comply with Communist Party demands to turn over data or otherwise engage in snooping or network-disruption activities.
… recent revelations about how China’s ruling party exploits the full panoply of personal information it has amassed about its citizens—facial-recognition images, mandatory DNA samples, 24-hour GPS coordinates, and search-history and online-activity tracking, as well as plain old eavesdropping—to quash religious freedom and basic rights should give major pause to Western governments and wireless carriers alike.[vii]
Taken together – trade, security, changing interaction with technology, tracking and personal health – the issues that came to the fore around 5G in 2019 seem likely to gain traction.
Five Predictions for 2020
The stock market run will finally come to an end, forcing President Trump to play his remaining card. Military involvement in the Middle East will escalate as the President wraps himself in the flag to counter ‘unpatriotic’ Dems.
News fatigue and mistrust will reach all-time highs. On the positive side, however, the demand for reliable information and fresh content will see people exploring beyond their news bubbles.
Trump will be re-elected. Each one of the four realistic Democratic Presidential candidates, Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg has weaknesses that will be mercilessly exploited.
The roll out of 5G will bring renewed scrutiny of Big Tech, with fears over data intrusion becoming a political issue.
Global warming will continue to hog the headlines as fires and other disasters occur around the world. Here we may see a Republican pivot, with denials giving way to acknowledgement and the identification of opportunities, just as Putin’s Russia is looking ‘to use the advantages’ brought by climate change.[viii] Notably, Trump has recently acknowledged that climate change is no hoax.[ix] Watch this space.
Featured Image: Tampa, Florida, USA 24th Oct, 2016 Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump hugs an American flag as he takes the stage to speak at a campaign rally at the MidFlorida Credit Union Amphitheatre in Tampa, Florida, the third of five cities Trump is visiting during a two-day campaign swing through Florida. (Paul Hennessy/Alamy)
If you appreciated this argument please do us a favour and share it. Also, feel free to drop us a line with your thoughts on what you think are the big issues that will affect the U.S. in 2020 to bullmoose@cassandravoices.com.
[i] Yun, Li, ‘Here’s what happened to the stock market on Tuesday,’ CNBC, December 24th, 2019, https://www.cnbc.com/2019/12/24/what-happened-to-stock-market-tuesday-new-all-time-high-for-nasdaq.html
[ii] Untitled, ‘U.S. Unemployment fell to 3.6%, lowest since 1969,’ Washington Post, May 3rd, 2019, https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/05/03/us-economy-added-jobs-april-unemployment-fell-percent-lowest-since/
[iii] Reuters Institute, ‘Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2019,‘ Oxford University, December, 2019, http://www.digitalnewsreport.org/
[v] Cohen Coberly, ‘California’s Consumer Privacy Act has taken effect, bringing GDPR-like data protections to the US,’ Techspot, January 2nd, 2020, https://www.techspot.com/news/83385-california-consumer-privacy-act-has-taken-effect-bringing.html
[vi] Untitled, ‘The 8 Things We Expect to See at CES 2020,’ Wired, January 4th, 2019, https://www.wired.com/story/ces-2020-preview/
[vii] Linsday Graham, ‘5G Is Where China and the West Finally Diverge,’ The Atlantic, January 5th, 2020, https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/01/5g-where-china-and-west-finally-diverge/604309/
[viii] Agence-France Press, ‘Russia announces plan to ‘use the advantages’ of climate change’, The Guardian, January 5th, 2020, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/05/russia-announces-plan-to-use-the-advantages-of-climate-change
[ix] Rachel Frazin, ‘Trump says ‘nothing’s a hoax’ about climate change,’ The Hill, January 9th, 2020, https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/477548-trump-says-nothings-a-hoax-about-climate-change
For new Americans, spending Thanksgiving in the U.S. comes as a surprise. It’s the busiest travel time of the year, ranking ahead of Christmas and the 4th of July. While some associate Thanksgiving with shopping bonanzas like Black Friday or Cyber Monday, for most it’s simply an opportunity to spend time with family and friends; watching football or just gathering around the dinner table.
Given that it’s always the last Thursday of November, it also marks the beginning of the holiday season. A time then to take stock, reflect and make plans for the year ahead, finishing any business before the year closes.
It is little secret that Americans are becoming ever more polarized politically, in no small part due to the comfortable bubbles with which we surround ourselves, in our day-to-day-lives and online.
All too easily, we can tune out people with whom we disagree. Except when it comes to Thanksgiving. Sitting around the dinner table, it’s hard to steer conversation away from current events. Issues like climate change, inequality, the composition of the Supreme Court, the mess in DC, what to make of Trump, or even football, bubble up.
Polarization may also be causing people to fall out with one another over politics: according to Pew research more than eight-out-of-ten U.S. adults (roughly 85%) say political debate in the country has become more negative and less respectful.[i]
Interestingly, a lot of Republican voters feel victimized in this regard. By a wide margin, Republicans believe the mainstream of political discourse is more hospitable to Democrats than to the GOP. Interestingly, Dems also think Republicans are more comfortable sharing their viewpoints, but only by a few percentage points.[ii]
Given this toxic climate, many choose simply to stay away from any issue that is remotely political, especially given how few people are likely to be dissuaded from their current stance.[iii]
The problem is that not taking ownership of political views can be harmful. It begs the question as to whether any democracy built on the free sharing of opinions and facts can survive in the face of this extreme polarization within social media bubbles and alternative facts. The jury is still out.
It seems as if truth and facts are becoming ever harder to determine. People have warmed to the argument that there are always two sides to every issue.
But there are plain facts which don’t have two sides – the truth.
In today’s America, it has become commonplace to argue over facts. In some quarters, it might seem improper to suggest that sea levels are rising, despite the mounting evidence; or that a crowd at an inauguration was smaller than a previous one, or that black unemployment is at an all-time low.
As in other parts of the world, truth is under attack, muddled by a barrage of special interest and nation states seeking to weaken the very democracy the West is built on. If this sounds alarmist, it is. As an aside – I suggest you watch Sacha Baron Cohen give his views on social media moguls, and their blatant lack of responsibility with regards to the truth.
If you think this is simply a problem on the right of the political spectrum, you’re mistaken. The left is just as adept at bending the truth to suit themselves. The ‘woke’ left is famous for eating its own, so to speak. Writing in The Bulwark, Tim Miller brilliantly documents how Pete Buttigieg, who aspires to be America’s first openly gay President, is a under a multi-prong attack from so-called ‘progressives.’[iv]
‘Washington DC’s most interesting ‘power’ couple’
So, on to the Impeachment Hearings. What we are witnessing is a political tactic that is as old as democracy itself. If you cannot win an argument with facts, you shout louder than the other side.
Say what you like about the proceeding, but the Republicans are shouting louder. With the political theater gripping the nation – the needle of public opinion has hardly moved in recent months – Republicans are screaming about the unfair process and treatment to Trump.
Last week, when a legal scholar remarked that even Barron Trump could not become a Baron as Trump is not King, Republicans erupted in indignation. How could Democrats drag a thirteen-year-old boy into the conversation?[v]
Ah, the moral outrage. On and on the playbook goes – shout, distract, divide – with little change in public opinion on whether Trump should be removed from office.
Did the Democrats call out the Republicans on this fake moral outrage? No. Actually the legal scholar later apologized for bringing Barron into the conversation. One of the few to call out Republicans on the ‘nothing burger’ was George Conway III – one of Trump’s harshest critics, and none other than spouse to Kellyanne Conway.
Wait, what? The same Kellyanne Conway, advisor to Trump, who famously coined the term ‘alternative facts’ when asked about the true size of the crowds the latter’s inauguration?
Yes, together they form Washington DCs most interesting ‘power’ couple. One is a fervent Trump supporter, and survivor of a White House where few, except family and Stephen Miller, survive for long.
The other thinks Trump suffers from a ‘narcissistic personality disorder’[vi] and is constantly feuding with him online. Interestingly, he was once the head of the conservative Federalist society at Yale and reportedly was introduced to Kellyanne by none other than Ann Coulter. He also dated Laura Ingraham. For anyone unfamiliar with Laura Ingraham, she currently hosts the 10pm weekday evening slot on Fox – and is the reigning queen of conservative broadcasting.
Home Comforts
Over Thanksgiving dinner Bull Moose posed a question to some of his more left-leaning friends: ‘why are Republicans more aggressive in their use of social media and defense of their own?’
We hear the standard answer: ‘it’s because of corporate media control.’ The argument runs that billionaires are not giving voice to Democrat views. It holds some truth, but at best it’s an incomplete picture. Look at George Conway or AOC – if you are willing to shout loudly there are ways around the filters.
But maybe, also, it’s the very nature of today’s mainstream left to care inherently about another person’s point of view, which makes them less aggressive in the defense of their viewpoint.
What is certain is that it’s high time for ordinary Americans, right and left, to stop being afraid of hurting one another’s feelings, and being offended by a different point of view. If Kellyanne and George – who Donald has called a husband from hell and a stone cold LOSER – can do it, maybe the rest of us can engage in a bit more civilized discourse over dinner, without fear of reprisal.
George Conway, often referred to as Mr. Kellyanne Conway by those who know him, is VERY jealous of his wife’s success & angry that I, with her help, didn’t give him the job he so desperately wanted. I barely know him but just take a look, a stone cold LOSER & husband from hell!
[i] Untitled, ‘Public Highly Critical of State of Political Discourse in the U.S.’ Pew Research, June 19th, 2019, https://www.people-press.org/2019/06/19/public-highly-critical-of-state-of-political-discourse-in-the-u-s/
[ii] Bradley Jones, ‘Republicans see a national political climate comfortable for Democrats, but less so for GOP’, Pew Research, June 24th, 2019, https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/06/24/republicans-see-a-national-political-climate-comfortable-for-democrats-but-less-so-for-gop/
[iii] Domenico Montanaro, ‘Poll: Americans Overwhelmingly Say Impeachment Hearings Won’t Change Their Minds’, NPR, November 19th, 2019, https://www.npr.org/2019/11/19/780540637/poll-americans-overwhelmingly-say-impeachment-hearings-wont-change-their-minds
[vi] Daniel Lippman ‘Kellyanne Conway defends Trump after he attacked her husband’, Politico, March 20th, 2019, https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/20/kellyanne-george-conway-trump-1229193
Two stories were in the headlines this October illustrating how money is undermining our values. ‘Ah,’ I hear you say, ‘a story as old as time,’ but before tuning out, let us explain what’s different this time, and why it really matters.
Given the pace of technological change, the weight of power of two individuals, LeBron James and Mark Zuckerberg, have raised the stakes. They are among a tiny elite with the power to influence our collective future. In America, this group includes Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Nancy Pelosi and Donald Trump.
It matters, therefore, when these individuals make public pronouncements.
Hong Kong Protests
On October 4th, Houston Rockets NBA team’s General Manager, Daryl Morey, retweeted an image (since deleted) that simply read: ‘Fight for freedom, stand with Hong Kong.’[i]
The Chinese reaction was swift. Within a matter of days, Chinese teams, streaming services, sponsors, and partners had cut ties with the Rockets and the NBA. As the NBA struggled to contain the fallout, Commissioner Adam Silver initially made a non-committal statement, recognizing and regretting that the tweet had deeply offended certain people. Only later did he explicitly defend Morley’s freedom of expression.[ii]
Enter LeBron James on October 14th, fresh from touring China, who explained the situation to reporters in the following terms: ‘Yes, we all do have freedom of speech,’ he said, ‘but at times, there are ramifications for the negative that can happen when you’re not thinking about others, and you’re only thinking about yourself.
He continued: ‘I don’t want to get in a word sentence feud with Daryl Morey, but I believe he wasn’t educated on the situation at hand, and he spoke. And so many people could have been harmed, not only financially, but physically, emotionally, spiritually.’[iii]
The essence of what LeBron was saying seemed to be that ‘we should be careful to exercise freedom of speech in case, heaven forbid, we offend someone.’ Yes, this is the same LeBron James who not long ago vowed to keep speaking out on social issues, no matter what the backlash;[iv] the same person who has been called the most powerful voice in his profession, and publicly feuded with Fox News over criticism of President Trump.[v]
Caring only for the interests and values of ones’ own community, while giving a metaphorical shrug in response to others, is nothing new in the world of sport. Football fans might recall Manchester City’s manager Pep Guardiola’s insistent support for Catalan independence, while he turned a blind eye to the right of self-determination of those in the Middle East living under his bosses’ thumb.[vi]
Yet this situation was different, and not simply because of the vast sums of money involved: by a conservative estimate the NBA makes $500 million in annual revenue from China; there were reports that the NBA stood to lose up to fifteen percent on its salary cap next year because of the Chinese ban.
Not that the players needed reminding. Faced with questions over how he viewed the issue, Houston Rockets star James Harden simply tweeted: ‘We apologize. We love China.’ [vii]
Questioning Zuckerberg
On October 23rd, a different but related story was being played out in Washington DC, as Mark Zuckerberg fielded questions before Congress over proposals for Libra, Facebook’s new digital currency.
In case you aren’t aware, Facebook is seeking approval for it from regulators, but the hearings quickly turned into a debate on the company’s recent decision not to fact check, or ban, political ads.
This matters for two reasons: first, the scale of the Facebook’s earnings from ads; secondly, because social media is becoming the primary source of Americans’ news.
Facebook already enjoys a metaphorical license to prints money through its early arrival at the scene of the social media goldrush, and through clever (some would say monopolistic) acquisitions of WhatsApp and Instagram.
By the third quarter of 2019, its global advertising revenue had risen to over $17 billion dollars, growing 28% year-on-year. If current trends continue, Facebook’s earnings will approach $100 billion in annual revenue by 2020 from advertising alone.
Moreover, recent research suggests over 55% of Americans now get at least some of their news from social media.[viii]
Combine these facts with the company’s ability to psychologically profile users, and tailor messages accordingly, and this translates into a significant power to influence, if not outright buy, Presidential elections.
As Siva Vaidhyanathan pointed out in TheNew York Times, Facebook actions were logical: even if they had been willing to differentiate between what is political and factual, in practice it is often nigh-on impossible.[ix]
We can assume that Zuckerberg, ever the calculating pragmatist, would justify his company’s stance on political ads on the basis that it aligns with freedom of speech values.
This assertion is not simply questionable, but plain wrong, for multiple reasons. Just one example suffices: it was not a question of freedom of speech to allow an ad to run saying the Pope had officially endorsed Trump in the last election,[x] it was simply an implicit endorsement of a lie.
Silicon Valley has long been identified with the liberal left, but Facebook’s new approach is altering this view. For one, the company seems to have concluded that its digital currency stands little chance in a Democrat-controlled House or Senate.
In the short term, aligning itself more heavily with Republicans may seem like good business on Facebook’s part, but in the medium term it risks alienating the other side of America’s polarized electorate.
During that same hearing on the Hill, some Republicans jumped to defend Facebook on Libra, saying any Democratic interference amounted to regulatory overreach and would strangle American innovation. They also applauded Facebook’s non-interference policy on political ads.
Facebook followed on by playing the nationalist card, with Zuckerberg claiming: ‘Libra will be backed mostly by dollars, and I believe it will extend America’s financial leadership as well as our democratic values and oversight around the world.’ Otherwise, he added, China would take the lead on digital payments.[xi]
In China, Zuckerberg may have found a convenient scapegoat, which has also frustrated the global advance of his company. While other multinational brands like the NBA, Apple and Google, have large operations in China, Facebook has never been able to crack the Chinese market. This is not for want of trying. Zuckerberg famously jogged through the smog in Beijing, learned Mandarin, and even asked Xi JinPing to give an honorary Chinese name to his soon-to-be-born child four years ago – a request Xi declined.[xii]
Money, China and Values
The United States of America has been, by many measures, one of the world’s most successful democracies, with freedom of expression a core value. In certain respects, such as raising life expectancy and GDP, China can also boast great achievements, but these have been achieved with compliance and obedience as core values, and against a background of well-documented human rights abuses.
The challenge for the U.S. in the 21st century is to maintain its freedoms, even as we enter into a new digital age with unlimited potential for monitoring, surveillance, censorship and mass manipulation.
In the end, calling on Facebook to fix itself, or the NBA to uphold universal values and free speech may be futile. Instead, perhaps we should accept that these companies hold power that is not subject to democratic oversight, and in some cases interference is unwarranted.
As Americans we’ve always expressed our preferences for companies and products with our wallets. For the times we are in, therefore, Bull Moose argues we should become more conscious of where we spend our time online, and with whom we are sharing our data, as the data we leave behind, and our attention, is increasingly being monetized.
The old saying, ‘if the product is free, you are the product,’ is more relevant than ever. Whether it is the NBA or Facebook, you have a choice to love, hate or even speak out against them.
It is that freedom that still sets us apart from China.
[i] Untitled, ‘NBA’s Rockets try to calm storm after ‘stand with Hong Kong’ post prompts fury in China’ Hong Kong Free Press, October 7th, 2019, https://www.hongkongfp.com/2019/10/07/nbas-rockets-try-calm-storm-stand-hong-kong-post-prompts-fury-china/
[ii] Untitled ‘Adam Silver supports free speech rights of Rockets GM Daryl Morey’, ESPN, October 7th, 2019, https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/27792662/adam-silver-supports-free-speech-rights-houston-rockets-gm-daryl-morey
[iii] Dylan Scott, ‘Why everybody is mad at LeBron’, Vox, October 15th, 2019, https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/10/15/20915339/lebron-james-hong-kong-quotes-daryl-morey
[iv] Untitled, ‘LeBron James plans to keep speaking out on social issues’ NBA.com, August 29th, 2018, https://www.nba.com/article/2018/08/29/lebron-james-los-angeles-lakers-vows-speak-out-social-issues
[v] Jerry Bembry, ‘LeBron James is the most powerful voice in his profession’, The Undefeated, February 28th, 2018, https://theundefeated.com/features/lebron-james-to-take-floor-for-nba-all-star-game-as-the-most-powerful-voice-in-his-profession/
[vi] David Mathieson, ‘Guardiola’s hypocrisy over Man City’s owner undermines his pleas about Catalonia’, The New Statesman, March 13th, 2018, https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/sport/2018/03/guardiola-s-hypocrisy-over-man-city-s-owner-undermines-his-pleas-about
[vii] Kurt Baddenhausen, ‘China Feud Over Morey’s Hong Kong Tweet Threatens Rapid Growth Of NBA Team Values’, Forbes, October 9th, 2019, https://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenhausen/2019/10/09/the-nbas-soaring-franchise-value-growth-at-stake-with-china-feud/#5c00fb0e4257
[viii] Peter Suciu, ‘More Americans Are Getting Their News From Social Media’, ForbesOctober 11th, 2019, https://www.forbes.com/sites/petersuciu/2019/10/11/more-americans-are-getting-their-news-from-social-media/#15012e063e17
[ix] Siva Vaidhyanathan, ‘The Real Reason Facebook Won’t Fact-Check Political Ads’, New York Times, November 2nd, 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/02/opinion/facebook-zuckerberg-political-ads.html
[x] Hannah Ritchie, ‘Read all about it: The biggest fake news stories of 2016’, CNBC, December 30th, 2016, https://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/30/read-all-about-it-the-biggest-fake-news-stories-of-2016.html
[xi] Gregory Barber, ‘Watch Mark Zuckerberg’s Libra Testimony to Congress’, Wired, 23rd of October, 2019, https://www.wired.com/story/how-watch-mark-zuckerbergs-libra-testimony-congress/
[xii] April Glaster, ‘Why Mark Zuckerberg Keeps Saying Facebook Needs to Win Against China’, Slate.com, 23rd of October, 2019, https://slate.com/technology/2019/10/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-libra-cryptocurrency-china-free-speech.html
As Washington swirls with the drama and intricacies of the impeachment enquiry, spare a thought for climate. Yes, our climate.
Much was written in Europe, and elsewhere, about the remarkable Greta Thurnberg. The effectiveness of her singular obsession with the issue – seemingly aided by an Asperger’s condition that leaves her unaffected by social cues that would deter most of us – caused a storm. She was honest, impassioned, and right about the dire consequences awaiting our planet if we fail to take action. Yet, her message was also largely ineffective this side of the pond.
Not that she was a hypocrite, having made her way to the US on a solar-powered sailing boat. Everyone remembers Al Gore’s huge mansion powered by low wattage light bulbs.
Just last month, the rich and famous made their way to Sicily by way of private jet and luxury yacht to discuss climate change. Really. It made for great headlines here in America: ‘further evidence of the liberal elite telling ‘us’ what to do, while abiding by a different set of rules…’
For the host, Google, being tone-deaf in the climate debate counted for little. It was a lobbying effort. Besides, compared to the Exxon Mobile’s of the world, at least they’re trying to do something.
Even in America it’s apparent that the climate is accelerating faster than expected. Anecdotal evidence is piling up. In cities like Houston, Miami, Charleston, and San Francisco, historic rains, drought and storms are starting to sway public opinion.
In Atlanta this September more heat records were broken than any ever before. Even some Republicans – accustomed to towing the party line of sowing seeds of doubt about the cause of climate change – are beginning to acknowledge the changing conditions.
This is a first step. As one ardent Trump supporter, Florida Congressman Matt Gaetz, put it bluntly: ‘I didn’t come to Congress to argue with a thermometer.’[i]
Whether Republicans are prepared for real measures is another matter as, for many Americans, taking away an automatic right to a supercharged engine is akin to taking away their guns – not on your life.
In this context, let’s examine how Greta was received in the US. While many praised her direct message and blunt language, not a single person we spoke to had actually changed their mind; while Fox News’s depiction – satirizing a Stephen King novel ‘children of the climate’ – generated lots of laughter, regardless of political conviction.
Also, Greta Thunberg’s angry accusations against politicians, paradoxically, made them seem sympathetic by comparison. In America even a dagger to the back is often accompanied with a smile; in the political culture and day-to-day-life outward politeness is a constant, especially in the South, which is where most people need convincing about the human impact of climate change.
Maybe Greta’s speech at the UN swayed some young people, and gave momentum to environmentalists. But it did little to sway public opinion, define a clear strategy, or mark a way forward.
So, with the oxygen sucked from the pages of the news by impeachment, how can real change be inspired in America?
For America to take a leadership role on climate two things need to occur. First, Republicans, who make 30-40% of the national electorate, need to be convinced that this is an urgent priority. Currently a majority either think it’s a non-issue (outright denial), or that it should not be a priority.
Secondly, the issue needs to be reframed into one of opportunity, rather than as a daunting problem because of our past and current habits. This last point is often missed. America has thrived on being a nation of opportunity. Obama got elected on the back of a message of hope; Trump on a ticket of change to the status quo.
When it comes to climate, we are far more adept at talking in terms of catastrophes than we are at talking up opportunities. Perhaps it is because obvious solutions simply don’t exist, or perhaps it’s the size of the task appearing too big.
Yet for there to be real action this issue needs to be reframed. Environmentalists should stop trying to inspire fear, and instead talk in terms of opportunity, disruption, innovation, the American Dream, leadership – appeal to America’s pride rather than guilt. And perhaps remember that the Chinese character for crisis is the same as opportunity! Taking on board this message is key to winning the next election.
[i] Rebecca Beitsch and Miranda Green, ‘GOP lawmaker parodies Green New Deal in new climate bill’April 4th, 2019, The Hill, https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/437244-gop-lawmaker-introduces-viable-alternative-to-green-new-deal
Anyone unfamiliar with Joe Rogan would do well to watch his stand-up shows on Netflix, or read a recent piece entitled ‘Why is Joe Rogan so Popular?’ from The Atlantic. Perhaps you already know him from a notorious interview with Elon Musk, where the latter liberally drinks whiskey and smokes weed, much to Wall Street’s chagrin.
Why is Bull Moose talking about Joe Rogan? Well, for starters, he has the second most popular podcast in the country, but, more importantly, he is popular with men across the political spectrum. Men who are fed up with political correctness, the victimhood so prevalent in American politics, and above all the constantly changing idea of what it means to be a man in America. Listen to Mr. Rogan and you’ll soon learn that he provides a welcome reprieve from conventional thinking, if nothing else.
Joe Rogan is a showman. He is a professional comedian. But he’s also one who seemingly understands that the ‘average’ American man is frustrated. This average man has political power, yes, but his personal power (and his pocketbook) has been curtailed since the Great Recession. He asks his wife about whether he should change the diapers; seeks her for permission to go out for a beer; can’t pay off his debts, and somewhere along the way, Joe Rogan contends, he stopped acting like a man and started behaving like a pussy.
The average Joe Rogan fan is unhappy about this state of affairs. They are American men of whatever race and background who realise they should have the power to succeed, and strive to be a better version of themselves, but see obstacles in their way. They realise the empty promise of a bigger TV, or a faster car. As Joe Rogan put it:
We got sidetracked and diverted into these boxes, these cubicles in offices … So instead of investing your time in a passion, you’ve sold your life to work for an uncaring machine that doesn’t understand you. That’s the problem with our society. And what’s the reward? Go home and get a big TV.
The media widely assumes that this group of disaffected, frustrated men voted for Trump. Many of them did, but just as many would never vote for him. They are the accountants, the soccer dads, the everyday Americans who believe this country is already great, and that, no, we don’t need to buy Greenland.
Reaching out to this disaffected part of the population and offering them a voice will be key to winning the White House in 2020. Trump did it in 2016, and will surely count on their support in 2020. Democrats should take heed. Understanding the scale of their frustrations is one of the keys to a successful campaign. The anointed Democratic candidate should voice their concerns, appreciate their contributions, and make them feel part of his or her agenda.
No, Bull Moose is not calling for an embrace of divisive gender politics as a way to win an election. Quite the opposite, the candidate that taps into this frustration will be the one that gives men the sense that they too can be who they want to be: a citizen who feels good about the opportunity he has for personal and professional success, to the benefit of the country as a whole.
Past American leaders of different political convictions – from FDR to JFK or even Reagan and Obama – all called for sacrifices for the greater good. They instilled a pride in the average American man that his individual sacrifice was contributing to a great country. Increasingly, however, his sacrifices are accompanied by a diminishing quality of life, and income; nor has he much to feel proud about in the public sphere.
What Joe Rogan understands – and what makes his so popular – is that lying beneath male frustrations is an enduring conviction that the ‘average Joe’ can become whatever he wants, and that self-actualization is more important than material gain. They are inspired to become the hero in their own movie: to be kind; to pursue excellence; to be relentlessly positive; to think freely; to be unafraid.
So, you might ask, what’s the point? The point is Democratic Presidential candidates should start talking about opportunity and freedom inclusively, and not only for those disadvantaged historically. Also, please refrain from using the expression ‘the average hard-working American man.’ No one wants to be labelled “average.” Focus instead on the unlimited potential of every human being.
Feature image is Joe Rogan with Gerald Strebendt, circa 2002.
Among the least discussed, but perhaps most important influence of the Digital Age is our tendency to live in bubbles. We no longer have to be rich to live in the equivalent of gated communities.
TV, radio, and the internet provide echo chambers for our beliefs. Sophisticated algorithms deployed by Facebook and Google generally only exposes us to what we agree with. Friends with different opinions? Don’t worry, Facebook has it figured out. You won’t find them on your feed any longer. An article in Google News about Sudan? Not a chance. Google determined that based on my geography and preference for inane sports news this is unlikely to appeal to me.
This is important, not least because we spend hours each day glued to our smartphones. What we see is curated for us and controlled by a handful of corporations.
I was reminded of this recently on a flight to Atlanta from Chicago, when I struck up a conversation with a man sitting next to me, a doctor, who, despite holding very different world views to my own, made for a great travel companion.
We shared stories, asked questions and even argued about the nature of America’s divided politics. It was entirely refreshing. As we left the plane, he thanked me, noting he hadn’t had such a meaningful chat with a stranger in years, despite being a regular traveller. Why? Because most of us hardly look up from our smartphones, even to say hello.
Politics today is an extension of these echo chambers. We hear what we want to hear. That is nothing new – we have long preferred to block out whatever hurts us, or flies in the face of our world view. What is new is that we no longer need to block out anything ourselves.
Were I to listen to talk show radio, turn my TV to Fox News and read articles on Breitbart, supplemented by Google or Facebook curation, I am likely to agree with Trump’s reality. There, immigrants are invading our Southern border and taking our jobs; liberals are down with killing third trimester babies; global warming is a hoax; the economy has never been better; and we’re making America great again. Who is to say I am wrong? It is my reality.
If I listen to NPR, switch to CNBC/CNN and read the Washington Post or the New York Times, with a little help from social media, I am likely to see Trump as a mean-spirited bully, who is out of touch with reality, my reality. There immigrant children are needlessly torn from their families; conservative men are taking rights away from women; the environment is being destroyed; the economy is pumped up on steroids by virtue of a tax cut for corporations; and only the next election can save America. Who is to say I am wrong? It is my reality.
These alternative realities are borne out in poll numbers, which have been remarkably consistent over the last few years. Trump’s approval rating hovers around forty-percent, no matter what he does. Why? Mainly because in this ‘alternative reality’, the truth is hard to distinguish.
Fake news does exist – except its not fake. It is real news written from a point of view that serves the interest of their owners/advertisers, and, yes, the consumers of news. It is only fake because it is not unbiased, objective news. Instead of fake news we ought to call it biased, lazy news.
I include lazy as well as biased, because news such as a natural disaster occurring doesn’t have an agenda, nor is it always mean-spirited. Often what we get is simply lazy journalism, jumping on immediately apparent realities that gets more eyeballs today, even if it will not stand the test of time.
A case in point. For those who read the previous edition of Bull Moose, what about this for an attention-grabbing headline ‘GOP Equates Abortion to Holocaust,’ which, for anyone who took the time to read the Bill, is what they did. Except journalists rarely read a Bill, they merely see its news value, and talk about how restrictive it is.
By being constantly in the news, Trump has attained mastery over media in today’s America. Rather than blame him, however, journalists, and the public, should look themselves in the mirror. Being informed is a choice we make, no matter how difficult it is. This requires us to be citizen journalists, on a continuous quest for truth, and discerning about who and what we believe.
It should also involve talking to our neighbors. Engaging in free and open dialogue is a hard-earned democratic entitlement. Let’s step out of comfort zones and try talking to the person sitting next to us.
Do you think this piece is valuable? If so, you might consider providing us with financial support via Patreon, or simply pay us a small sum directly using PayPal: admin@cassandravoices.com. Thanks for supporting independent journalism. Subscribe for free to our monthly newsletter here.
Earlier this month Alabama Governor Kay Ivey signed into law ‘The Alabama Human Protection Act’ passed by both the Alabama House and Senate entitled. This law, which does not take immediate effect, bans all abortions except:
…activities if done with the intent to save the life or preserve the health of an unborn child, remove a dead unborn child, to deliver the unborn child prematurely to avoid a serious health risk to the unborn child’s mother, or to preserve the health of her unborn child. The term [abortion] does not include a procedure or act to terminate the pregnancy of a woman with an ectopic pregnancy, nor does it include the procedure or act to terminate the pregnancy of a woman when the unborn child has a lethal anomaly.
The law is now the most restrictive law outlawing abortion in the United States. But punishments for doctors performing procedures contrary to it could lead to a custodial sentence of up to ninety-nine years.
It appears many have not actually taken the time to read the law. As is the case with most laws, hysteria makes more waves than actual discussion and it is no different in this case. It is worth taking a moment to check and see exactly what Alabama achieves.
The law recognizes that a person is, ‘A human being, specifically including an unborn child in utero at any stage of development, regardless of viability.’ The law is designed to protect that human life because,
In the United States Declaration of Independence, the principle of natural law that “all men are created equal” was articulated. The self-evident truth found in natural law, that all human beings are equal from creation, was at least one of the bases for the anti-slavery movement, the women’s suffrage movement, the Nuremberg war crimes trials, and the American civil rights movement. If those movements had not been able to appeal to the truth of universal human equality, they could not have been successful…
It is estimated that 6,000,000 Jewish people were murdered in German concentration camps during World War II; 3,000,000 people were executed by Joseph Stalin’s regime in Soviet gulags; 2,500,000 people were murdered during the Chinese ‘Great Leap Forward.’ in 1958; 1,500,000 to 3,000,000 people were murdered by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia during the 1970s; and approximately 1,000,000 people were murdered during the Rwandan genocide in 1994. All of these are widely acknowledged as Crimes Against Humanity. By comparison, more than fifty million babies have been aborted in the United States since the Roe v Wade decision of 1973, more than three times the number who were killed in German death camps, Chinese purges, Stalin’s gulags, Cambodian killing fields, and the Rwandan genocide combined.
What the Holocaust, or Pol Pot’s purges have to do with abortion or an unborn fetus is unclear. It is equally unclear where the number of fifty million abortions comes from – the mind boggles that Alabama is using a national statistic to justify a specifically Alabama law.
It is really unclear why this law quotes from the Declaration of Independence, which is a statement of principles not an actual law or part of any American Jurisprudence. Indeed, Justice Anton Scalia, among the most conservatives judges to have served on the Supreme Court, was fond of heckling any student or lawyer who cited the Declaration as precedent.
In short, this law was written by an individual or individuals who knows nothing about the laws that govern this nation, passed by lawmakers that seemingly didn’t read it – even though the legislation is actually only about four pages in length – and signed off by a Governor who wants to make a political statement.
Now for some real law. Roe v Wade (and its counterpart Planned Parenthood v. Casey) established that the Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides a fundamental ‘right to privacy’ that protects a woman’s right to have an abortion. This ‘right’ is not absolute however, and must be balanced by the government’s interest in protecting a woman’s health and protecting prenatal health. That’s the law as it stands: women have a fundamental right. This is the important part: her right may be balanced by interests of government or the health of the fetus but is the woman’s right not the government’s or the fetus’s.
Alabama’s law takes away that right almost fully, and only recognizes the interests of the government and the fetus. For that reason alone the law cannot last.
There has been much ink spilled over this law and many more tweets. The President and many Republicans have distanced themselves from the law stating, in effect, that it goes too far. Governor Ivey is also rumored to have said she does not expect the law to be upheld by the Supreme Court.
This brings us to the twofold crux of the matter: first, we have a law that is being passed not for the sake of women but for the government’s interest in preventing abortion. This is a big leap for a Political Party that has at its base a philosophy of endeavouring to keep government out of people’s lives.
Secondly, this law probably wasn’t even written by the people who passed it. It has been a long time since lawmakers in the US have taken the time to write laws. Laws are written by special interest groups and then copied wholesale onto State and Federal Letterhead where they are signed into law by Executives who have taken even less time to read what is in front of them.
And it has to stop. Alabama’s brainless and brazen effort to make headlines in their attempt to overturn forty-five years of American Jurisprudence makes a mockery of the process and the people they govern. It is shockingly insensitive to try and relate the Holocaust to the reproductive choices of many American women. This choice is intensely personal and excruciatingly difficult to make. If only this was an isolated event. In fact, this happens at all levels if State and Federal Government.
It is time for American lawmakers to make at least a good faith effort to offer laws that they at least have a hand in crafting. Writing the laws is their job and they ought to start performing that role.
