The case for reelecting Trump

Ok, why should we reelect Donald Trump? Well, let’s look at the record. Not the hype: the record.

Let’s start with the obvious: judges and tax cuts and business deregulation:

With huge help from Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Trump has put two justices on the Supreme Court, 53 judges on the federal courts of appeals, 144 and counting on the District courts, and more than 20 on the specialty courts. The Constitution has been buttressed.

Trump’s tax cuts, along with the massive deregulation he orchestrated

Let’s also turn to some numbers:

The red line marks from 2017 onward. Yes, “up” is good; bet your retirement account is looking decent, huh?

But let’s get to something important. Let’s get to the United States of America and our way of life.

Yes, Trump speaks without a filter and sometimes says some impolite things; maybe even, well, he sometimes acts like a jerk. It is hard to deny that.
But at the very start, at the start of the 2016 campaign, he was open about not being a slave to political correctness:

Note the reception.

And often the media and the left exaggerates what he says. For example: he certainly mocked a reporter who happens to be disabled, but NOT for his disability:

Now back to political correctness: it IS harming our country. For example, a professor got disciplined for accurately describing a common Chinese speech pattern.

Well, Trump is attempting to put a stop to this:

President Trump is moving to revamp federal agencies’ racial sensitivity trainings, casting some of them as “divisive” and “un-American,” according to a memo by the White House Office of Management and Budget.

In the two-page memo, OMB Director Russell Vought says Trump has asked him to prevent federal agencies from spending millions in taxpayer dollars on these training sessions. Vought says OMB will instruct federal agencies to come up with a list of all contracts related to training sessions involving “white privilege” or “critical race theory,” and do everything possible within the law to cancel those contracts, the memo states.

The memo, released on Friday, also tells all federal agencies to identify and if possible cancel contracts that involve teaching that America is an “inherently racist or evil country.”

And make no mistake: that is what is at stake in this election. It is us versus the leftists.

These are leftists who think that rioting and looting are ok:

Writer Vicky Osterweil’s book, In Defense of Looting, came out on Tuesday. Osterweil is a self-described writer, editor and agitator who has been writing about and participating in protests for years. And her book arrives as the continued protests have emerged as a bitter dividing point in the presidential race.

When she finished it, back in April, she wrote that “a new energy of resistance is building across the country.” Now, as protests and riots continue to grip cities, she stakes out a provocative position: that looting is a powerful tool to bring about real, lasting change in society. The rioters who smash windows and take items from stores, she claims, are engaging in a powerful tactic that questions the justice of “law and order,” and the distribution of property and wealth in an unequal society.

Leftists think that your defending your own property from would be looters and vandals is a bad thing.

If the leftists win, you’ll find yourself having to denounce yourself for actions you *might* have thought about:

At an online town hall meeting at Northwestern University held recently, attendees began by denouncing themselves as racist.

“I’m Jim Speta. And I am a racist,” Speta, the interim dean of Northwestern University Law School, said in the meeting chat thread.

“My name is Emily Mullin. I am a racist and a gatekeeper of white supremacy. I will work to be better,” another attendee wrote.

The screenshot of the meeting was provided by author Rod Dreher on Twitter, which included a quote from a reader suggesting the interim dean was “forced” to say it. “Prof. Speta is not racist. He is a wonderful man universally loved by students. It makes me sad he was forced to say otherwise,” the reader said.

The leftists will attempt to control what you eat:

“But it’s to say, ‘Listen, we gotta address factory farming. Maybe we shouldn’t be eating a hamburger for breakfast, lunch, and dinner.”

They’ll push for fanciful, non-reality based “Green New Deals.

And the hypocrisy of the left is beyond belief. Oh, they will scream about a rally or a pool party being a superspreader event.

But their own rallies? Well, that’s different. You see, in the eyes of a leftist, the cause affects the science.

Oh, I didn’t say that much about Biden but let’s face it: he is a figurehead for Elizabeth Warren and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez; they are the ones that will call the shots, were Biden to get elected.

Bottom line: we aren’t Europe. We don’t want to drive Priuses..we want to drive trucks. We don’t want to eat tofu; we want steaks, hamburgers and fries.

Humbling deadlifts

Deadlifts:
Deficit: 10 x 134, 10 x 184, 5 x 224
regular: 1 x 244 (grip slip)< 2 misses at 279 (barely got off of the ground..attitude wasn't right)
3 x 244, 3 x 244, 3 x 244

It was humbling as I made myself come to a full stop at the bottom..no bounce, no light "touch and go." So much of it is training of the mind; I tend to quit at stiff resistance and not "grind it out."

Then a slow walk; convoluted course: started by 2.08 loop then went out on Moss to Western, back to McArthur, then another out and back and these were .78 miles each way. Total was 5 miles in 1:19:25, with 2 of my miles being slacker miles on the uneven sidewalk. Good enough for today.

I'll see what happens tomorrow; if a longish walk is ok and not painful, I might sign up for the QC virtual half.

Trump and the extremes

Currently, drinking some coffee and writing; will do a dead lift session and maybe some hiking afterward (or reasonable walking)
I have a few non-workplace things on my mind at the moment.

Election: One respected model gives Biden a 70 percent chance of winning the election.

This is a bit like having a random NBA player at the free throw with one shot. If he makes it, Biden wins. And yes, fans know that they sometimes miss.

The current snapshot, via Electoral Vote:

So, I went to Real Clear Politics and looked at the polls:

Here is Real Clear’s map, which is more conservative than EV’s in that, if the race is at all close in a state, it is listed as a toss up

It is clear: Biden has a lead and he is in better position than Hillary Clinton in 2016, for the following reasons:
1. There are far fewer undecided voters.
2. He is at 50 percent plus in many locations where Hillary was not.

If you just look at where she had a lead: yes, that is similar, but her lead was, in many cases, 2 or fewer points. That isn’t the case here.

Maybe there are “shy Trump voters” skewing the numbers?

Trump tended to overperform his polls in places where he was popular:

But the only poll that really matters is, yes, the election.

So, just who is supporting Trump right now? Well, some just love their tax cuts and judges. And yes, he has gotten those. Oh, some of this op-ed is nonsense, but he has gotten the tax cuts and judges.

Yes, Trump HAS said some disparaging things about those who served in the military and either were killed or captured. There is the Atlantic article and at least some of what is reported has been corroborated by Fox News.

but whatever the wording, my guess is that even Trump supporters believe that he said something like it…”he may be a jerk but he is our jerk” sort of thing.

And frankly, many just don’t care about the things “political twitter”cares about:

And I really believe that the tribal vote is already locked. And those on the fence: maybe have not been paying attention.

But I have been paying attention to some things.

I’ve frequently complained about excessive “political correctness.” Some of my, shall we say, age-peer friends are remembering the PC wars as they were decades ago; they seem to be stuck on the idea that we are talking about basic politeness (e. g. not slurring someone) But that isn’t what it is anymore.

I saw in the news that a USC professor was disciplined for discussing some Chinese speech patterns. This is the idea: in American English..when I am speaking..I sometimes get to a place in my speech when I am mentally looking for the correct way to phrase something and sometimes go “uh, uh, uh..” or “um, um, um”. Most of us do that. There is something similar in Chinese and the sound resembles a racial slur. See the video in the link.

Now of course, I am for taking such complaints seriously; investigating. And of course, were a professor to slur a student (or colleague, worker, etc) they do not need to continue in their job. No argument here. But accurately explaining a legitimate, widely used speech pattern? Oh good lord….

Anyway that is where we are.

Now of course, Trump sees an opening and is doing a push back:

President Trump is moving to revamp federal agencies’ racial sensitivity trainings, casting some of them as “divisive” and “un-American,” according to a memo by the White House Office of Management and Budget.

In the two-page memo, OMB Director Russell Vought says Trump has asked him to prevent federal agencies from spending millions in taxpayer dollars on these training sessions. Vought says OMB will instruct federal agencies to come up with a list of all contracts related to training sessions involving “white privilege” or “critical race theory,” and do everything possible within the law to cancel those contracts, the memo states.

The memo, released on Friday, also tells all federal agencies to identify and if possible cancel contracts that involve teaching that America is an “inherently racist or evil country.”

And THAT, in my opinion, is one reason for those of us who care about diversity and inclusion to be wary of overreach.
I think that some basic “sensitivity training” is a great thing: not everyone is like you and what might seem innocent and inoffensive to you might be terribly offensive to someone from a different background. We had such training in the Navy; for example when we pulled into a different country, we got briefed about local customs and sensitivity so we didn’t make asses of ourselves.
The same can apply for a diverse work place.

But due to well publicized excesses, Trump sees an opening to roll back what could be a good thing.

Our goal is “more fairness”; to ensure that one’s race, sex, gender identity/expression, etc. are not a barrier to entering an opportunity that one is qualified for. And going crazy on some sort of rush to “take people down” isn’t helping things; I believe it is alienating people.

Fairness and inclusion are great values and let’s not actively work to alienate people from such values.