Random Ramblings

A few random ramblings to take you into the holidays.

Omnibus Spending Bill 

The Congress looks like it is going to pass a $1.7 trillion spending bill just days before the House of Representatives is going to become Republican controlled.

I am at a loss as to why Senate Republican leader Mitch MeConnell would agree to this bill when the leverage and negotiating power of Republicans will go up substantially in a little over a week's time when they take control in the House.

Even more difficult to understand is McConnell's defense of the compromise legislation he has been hammering out with Democrats Schumer and Pelosi.

He claimed that it was important to support the bill because of increased defense spending and the additional support it provides to Ukraine in its war with Russia.

In fact, McConnell stated that most Republicans believed that arming Ukraine was the number one priority for the United States right now.

The bill increases the amount the United States has provided to Ukraine over the last year to more than $100 billion.

Seriously, Mitch?

More important than the economy, inflation, out of control government spending, immigration or collusion between the FBI and other government agencies to interfere in elections and curtail free speech?

Of course, McConnell is not alone. He got 17 other GOP Senators to support moving the legislation forward on the final vote. It now goes to the Democrat-controlled House where passage is assured. Democrats never break ranks on important votes.

Do you think the Democrats in the Senate would do anything similar if the roles were reversed?

Not a chance.

Trump's Tax Returns

The Democrats finally got their long-awaited wish and were able to disclose Donald Trump's tax returns,

The returns for 2015-2020 were released this week.

They showed Trump had adjusted gross income of -$53 million cumulatively for the six years.

He paid $1.8 million in taxes.

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/12/21/us/politics/trump-tax-return-numbers.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20221222&instance_id=80837&nl=the-morning&regi_id=73336580&segment_id=120535&te=1&user_id=2e6cdf0ad8819ff86cda51e914c3d036

Most of the losses were associated with real estate and other businesses.

All of the years have been audited by the IRS or are currently under examination.

So Trump had negative income of over $50 million,  paid $1.8 million in taxes and the Democrats think he did not pay enough?

You lose millions of dollars, still pay a couple million in taxes and you should have paid more?

That is an interesting take since all of the deductions, credits etc. that he might have taken on those returns were put in the Internal Revenue Code by people in Washington that were not named Trump. Most were passed with a majority of Democrat votes since they were in control of Congress for most of the past 80 years.

They were put into the law to incentivize entrepreneurs like Trump to take risks in order to create jobs for workers.

Trump did not even take office until 2019.

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/12/21/us/politics/trump-tax-return-numbers.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20221222&instance_id=80837&nl=the-morning&regi_id=73336580&segment_id=120535&te=1&user_id=2e6cdf0ad8819ff86cda51e914c3d036

Democrats are also complaining that the IRS did not begin auditing Trump's 2017 and later returns as required of all Presidents until after he left office. However, in my experience as a tax attorney dealing with the IRS over the years, it was the general rule that most large returns (especially those with carryover issues from prior years) would not be be audited until several years after the tax year had concluded. I see nothing unusual in what the IRS did in this case. It was standard practice.

The fact is that almost all taxpayers would rather have an audit take place as close to the tax year as possible. It is easier to collect records, etc. The IRS is almost always the one that delays audits.

Perhaps the new 87,000 IRS employees coming on board over the next few years will speed things up.

Covid 

A couple of weeks ago I posted data showing that New York and Florida were currently admitting seeing more daily hospital admissions for Covid this year than they did at the same time last year.

This is also true looking in the United States at large for those age 70+ at the current time.

This hospitalization rate was 12.2/100,000 on December 21, 2021. It is 13.6 now for this age group.

This is a group in which 93% are fully vaccinated and 67% are boosted.

It is at odds with everything we have been told.

A recent study from The Cleveland Clinic in which it followed all of its 50,000 employees to determine the effectiveness of the new Bivalent booster provides some interesting data that might explain what is going on.

It is without question that the age 70+ group is the most at risk from Covid and most likely to be hospitalized.

It is also the age group most likely to be fully vaccinated and have gotten the latest boosters.

The Cleveland Clinic study actually found that the more vaccines doses that an individual had the more likely they would be infected with Covid over the period of the study.

In fact, those who were not vaccinated were least likely to get Covid. Those who had received more than three doses were most likely to be infected. There was a direct correlation between the number of doses received and the rate of infection in those studied.

(Black line- 0 doses). (Orange line- 4 or more doses).

Source: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.12.17.22283625v1.full.pdf

This data suggests that there might be something to the theories of Geert Vanden Bossche who has argued that the vaccines may make someone may vulnerable to future infection.

Is this the reason we are seeing more age 70+ people in the hospital right now than last year?

We can only hope that we are seeing an earlier peak in cases than last year. If we were to follow last year's trajectory of hospital admissions we are in deep, deep trouble.

Another interesting fact I found in the study was that 59% of Cleveland Clinic employees reported that they had never been infected with Covid almost three years into the pandemic. This is despite working in a healthcare setting.

Could this be due to the vaccines? It might.

However, less than 10% of all employees reported that they had been infected before the vaccines rolled out widely in January, 2021. Three times as many reported being infected after the vaccines were in use. 27% of employees were infected with Omicron after the boosters had been deployed.

Could it be that the vaccines might not be everything Dr. Fauci says they are? That might be true as well.

In fact, the Cleveland Clinic contains this statement in its conclusion.

“We still have a lot to learn about protection from COVID-19 vaccination, and in addition to a vaccine’s effectiveness it is important to examine whether multiple vaccine doses given over time may not be having the beneficial effect that is generally assumed.”

Why Work? 

Many employers continue to struggle to find enough employees willing to work.

It is a problem that has building for years and is the result of several factors including declining numbers of those of working age due to retirements of Baby Boomers and fewer younger people entering the labor force.

The problem has been exacerbated over the years due to the safety net of benefits that are provided to those who are not working or who are on some form of welfare program.

Unemployment benefits are taxable income but most welfare benefits are not.

As a result, it takes higher and higher wages to induce people to work to compete with tax-free government benefits.

The system makes it more profitable to collect government benefits than work for a wage.

I wrote about this problem ten years ago in these pages in a blog post titled, "Why Work?"

One big factor in why the welfare recipient makes out so well is the tax-free nature of welfare benefits and the refundable tax credits that are built into the Internal Revenue Code.  Tax loopholes are not just for the rich any more.

Providing housing assistance, food stamps (EBT), welfare, Medicaid, child care assistance and Obamaphones in after-tax dollars provides a significant income advantage to the welfare recipient compared to a middle-class worker.

Consider a cell phone.  If a private sector worker and taxpayer wants a $50 monthly cell phone plan they need to earn about $65 to pay for the cell phone.  They need to pay income taxes (15%), FICA (7.65%) and state taxes before they have the money to spend on the cell phone.  People on welfare are just given the cell phone.

I am all for helping people who need a helping hand. However, this is clearly not a sustainable path. It also clearly shows that the incentives in the system are not properly aligned to get us the results we should be getting. 

Consider this fact about a single mother in Pennsylvania with two children.

The single mom is better off earning $29,000 with gross income from working combined with welfare assistance that provides $57,327 in net income and benefits than to earn gross income of $69,000 solely from working that nets out to income and benefits of $57,045.

In other words, earning more than $29,000 from work actually starts to reduce the single mom's household income. There is no incentive to earn more. It is more profitable to stay home and collect welfare.

 

I was reminded of this subject as I saw this New York Post opinion article last week.

The authors calculated the income and hourly wage equivalent in every state for a family with two unemployed adults and two children from unemployment and welfare benefits.

The numbers are mind boggling.

In several states a family of four can make the equivalent of six figures in household income by not working!

It was far worse than this when we had Covid supplemental unemployment benefits on top of these amounts.

Is it any wonder that millions of workers disappeared into thin air?

If we incentivize people not to work what result do we expect?

I believe we know the answer. 

Happy holidays to all!

This and That---December 19, 2022 Edition

A few random observations, charts and factoids to provide some context on what is going on in the world.

Inflation

Inflation appears to be moderating. The CPI report for November came in at a 7.1% rate for all items over the last 12 months.

However, energy was still up 13.1% and food was up 10.6%.

If eggs and orange juice are your breakfast of choice inflation is taking a much bigger chunk out of your wallet. It is going to get worse based on current commodity prices.

Credit: https://www.loveandlemons.com/scrambled-eggs-recipe/

The average price of a dozen eggs in commodity markets is now $4.65/dozen. This is almost triple the price one year ago. The CPI number for November only reflects a 49.1% increase over the last 12 months.

Eggs were as low as $1.10/dozen last January.

Source: https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/eggs-us

The price of orange juice is up 50% in commodity markets since the beginning of 2022.

Source: https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/orange-juice

It is going to be interesting to see where inflation and the economy go in 2023.

Retail Sales

Retail sales in November registered their smallest increase since December, 2020 when Covid was dampening consumer demand.

This is even more significant when it is considered that November includes the traditionally large consumer spending days of Black Friday and Cyber Monday.

If these numbers were inflation-adjusted they would most likely represent a real reduction in retail sales.

Source: https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/retail-sales-annual

Retail sales between October and November actually went down -.6% despite the holiday sales in November.

Source: https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/retail-sales

My casual observations when I have visited the shopping mall recently is that there seems to be a lot of inventory in the stores. The supply chain issues are clearly better than they were. However, are there enough buyers for the merchandise?

For example, this is a picture I took last week of the Apple Store at a mall in Cincinnati. A year ago there would be a long line outside the store waiting to get in due to capacity controls. That is no longer the case.

There were more Apple employees than customers at about noon on a day about two weeks before Christmas.

One other data point on retail.

This is a chart showing inventory levels for the women's workout clothing retailer Lululemon.

It is showing almost $1.8 billion in inventories which is about $1 billion more in goods than it was carrying a year ago.

That is a lot of yoga pants and leggings at $100 a pair or more.

That is especially true when household budgets are being squeezed paying for essentials like food, gasoline and home heating costs.

How essential are $118 yoga pants?

We may found out soon.

Yes, it is going to be interesting to see where the economy goes in 2023.

Covid Update

The United States is on track in 2022 to have the lowest number of deaths associated with Covid since the pandemic began in 2020.

This is due in large part to the fact that deaths in the United States have been remarkably stable for the last eight months.

Source: The New York Times

However, the news is not as good in other parts of the world.

What is interesting is that many of these countries are among the most vaccinated in the world.

Each of the following nations have much higher vaccination and booster uptakes than the United States.

You certainly don't hear about this on the evening news and the data does not conform to the narrative about the effectiveness of the vaccines in preventing severe illness and death.

The most interesting fact to me is that our northern neighbor in Canada, which initiated authoritarian measures the likes of which I thought would be impossible in a free democratic society, is looking at its highest level of deaths from Covid yet in the current year. 

Canada will finish 2022 with more deaths than pre-vaccine 2020 or 2021.

The same is true in Australia which almost looked like the Chinese were in control for much of the pandemic considering the harshness of its Covid public health measures and vaccine policies.

South Korea was not as authoritarian. The population was much more willing to take the vaccines on the recommendation of the governing authorities based on cooperative culture of its society.

However, the results are hard to explain based on the narrative about the vaccines.

"Safe, effective and will prevent severe disease, hospitalization and death."

Tiny, isolated Iceland was also not able to avoid a surge in Covid deaths in 2022 

This is despite Iceland having one of the highest levels of vaccine status across all ages of any other country in the world.

Vaccination Doses by Age in Iceland
Source: https://www.covid.is/statistical-information-on-vaccination

The same is true in Taiwan. It had almost no Covid deaths until 2022 when it started administering booster doses. 

It does not appear to have had the desired effect.

In fact, you have to wonder if it did not have the opposite effect when you look at the data.

Another interesting Covid factoid is contained in looking at the wastewater monitoring data for Covid in  Santa Clara County in California.

Santa Clara County has one of the highest levels of Covid vaccinations in the United States. 89% of every man, woman and child is vaccinated. 60% are boosted.

Vaccination Status in Santa Clara County, California
Source' The New York Times

However, Santa Clara has recently shown the highest levels of Covid in its wastewater samples since the beginning of the pandemic.

The highest levels (green line) have been in the Palo Alto Sewershed which undoubtedly has the highest vaccine uptake in the county being the home of Stanford University and the epicenter of Silicon Valley.

How do you explain it?

I can't.

I just report the data.

Beware The Illusions Of Truth

I think most people now understand that the mainstream media does not present objective news or analysis.

There is a slant or bias in everything it does based on the political views of the people who run the networks and those who cover the news.

The pervasive effects of this bias are difficult to overstate.

However, very few understand how pernicious this bias is in shaping the attitudes and views of our society.

Repetition is the first lesson of propaganda. 

The drumbeat of repetition engages the "illusory truth effect" in humans. Simply stated, the more often we hear something the more likely we are to believe that it is true---even if it is a complete fabrication.

One of the key principles in any successful attempt to influence is lots of repetition by repeating your points over and over again to engage the "illusory truth effect" in us.

The substance of what this means is that mainstream media have become propaganda factories.

I wrote about this in 2019 in pointing out the astounding number of stories The New York Times had written involving President Trump his first two years in office.

Look at this comparison of the percentage of articles in the entire paper that mentioned Trump compared to his predecessors.

It is almost as if there was no other news that was "fit to print."

Of course, 90%+ of those articles were negative.

It was the same with the major network news outlets.

Trump bad. Trump bad. Trump bad. Trump bad. Trump bad. Trump bad. Trump bad.

Credit: https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/rich-noyes/2019/01/15/networks-trashed-trump-90-negative-spin-2018-did-it-matter

If you recall, a good portion of the negative coverage of Trump involved constant reporting about "Russian Collusion."

Of course, we know now that this was a story that was entirely fabricated.

It did not matter. 

It became "the truth" as it was repeated over and over.

Many still believe the story is true today although innumerable credible sources have completely debunked the Russian Collusion narrative

We are now finding out as well about the massive role that social media companies have also had in shaping the attitudes and views of the public.

We are discovering that Twitter was not much more than a haven for left-wing activist employees that considered it to be their mission in life to amplify views that they agreed with and censor views and people they disagreed with.

In a sane and objective world the Twitter disclosures that have been made since Elon Musk bought the company should be capturing every news media outlet.

In particular, the lengths Twitter personnel took to bury the Hunter Biden story before the election, the efforts to ban Trump from the platform and the censorship of any dissenting opinions by doctors and others that questioned the Covid policies pertaining to lockdowns, school closures and vaccine mandates.

To that point, look at this analysis of how much time the major mainstream media outlets have spent covering the disclosures regarding the Twitter files.

These are the number of mentions of the story per an analysis by Grabien Media over the 11 day period after the disclosures were first made.

Source: https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1603029824934649856

Source: https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1603029824934649856

Source: https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1603029824934649856

Source: https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1603029824934649856

Source: https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1603029824934649856

Compare to the mentions by Fox News and Newsmax.

Source: https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1603029824934649856

Source: https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1603029824934649856

Are people really getting "the news" from the mainstream media outlets?

I thought this chart from Grabien was also interesting in comparing the number of mentions by CNN relating to various threats to society that they have reported on---climate change (blue line), Covid (red ), Democracy/Trump (yellow), January 6th insurrection (green) and Ukraine (orange).

This is for the period January, 2019 to the November, 2020.

Source: https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1602782333723189249/photo/1

We tend to think we were inundated with Covid news for most of 2020 and 2021.

However, CNN viewers heard much more about Trump and/or the threat he was to democracy (even when he was no longer President) than they ever heard about Covid.

What I found even more remarkable is the number of mentions about Ukraine that dominated the news of CNN in 2022. Those mentions outnumbered anything regarding Covid even compared to the height of Covid craziness in 2020.

You wonder why you saw Ukraine flags everywhere in 2022?

My favorite was what used to be a Russian market near my house. A Ukraine flag in the lower right window and tape crossing out "Russian" that captured in this photo last April indicated the owners were no longer identifying their store as having anything to do with Russia.

( Postscript--the store now has a new sign that refers to it as an Eastern European food store. The sign is (you guessed it) blue and yellow.

That huge spike in stories occurred in March/April and has continued at a higher level the remainder of the year than Covid ever did did.

What followed?

Do you think this reaction was all a coincidence?

Source: https://www.fox21news.com/news/businesses-deal-with-high-demand-for-ukrainian-flags/

Source: https://www.fox13news.com/video/1057401

Source: https://specialtyfabricsreview.com/2022/05/01/ukrainian-flags-in-demand-after-russian-invasion/

Yes, we know Vladimir Putin is a bad actor.

We know Russian had no business in invading Ukraine.

However, do we really know what kind of actor Zelensky is?

Do we know where the $100 billion taxpayer dollars we have sent this year to Ukraine has gone?  For context, that is about twice the total annual Russian military budget.

Are there facts we are missing in all of this?

Are we getting the full story?

The lesson here is to be wary of any story or narrative that is repeated endlessly.

Beware the illusory truth effect.

The truth in most things does not require someone else to report it to you.

Your own observations, analysis and critical thinking should suffice.

This is an especially important lesson to teach our children and grandchildren.

They are particularly vulnerable to propaganda which dictators and authoritarian leaders have understood for centuries.

Truth is not hard to discern if facts are not hidden and there is a free exchange of opinions and views where dissent is not censored or silenced.

Unfortunately, that is not the world we are living in today.

Understand it and adjust your thinking accordingly.

Long Covid or Something Else?

We hear a lot about Long Covid.

Here's an article that says Long Covid is distorting the labor market due to the number of workers who have chronic disease and disability.

Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/08/long-covid-is-distorting-the-labor-market-hurting-the-us-economy.html

Here's another that says Long Covid could be the next public health disaster.

Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/30/why-long-covid-could-be-the-next-public-health-disaster.html

Here is an article from earlier in the year from the UK that claimed that the Covid vaccines may not protect you from being infected but they would protect against Long Covid.

Source: https://www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/covid-19-vaccination-protects-against-long-covid

Other studies I have seen suggest that there is little reduction in risk for Long Covid in those who have been vaccinated.

Dr. Marty Makary of Johns Hopkins had a guest opinion column in The Wall Street Journal this week in which he argues that Long Covid has been vastly exaggerated  He agrees that some cases are legitimate but diagnosing fatigue as Long Covid five weeks after a viral infection is the medicalization of ordinary life.

Long Covid is real. I have reliable patients who describe lingering symptoms after Covid infection. But public-health officials have massively exaggerated long Covid to scare low-risk Americans as our government gives more than $1 billion to a long Covid medical-industrial complex.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention claims that 20% of Covid infections can result in long Covid. But a U.K. study found that only 3% of Covid patients had residual symptoms lasting 12 weeks. What explains the disparity? It’s often normal to experience mild fatigue or weakness for weeks after being sick and inactive and not eating well. Calling these cases long Covid is the medicalization of ordinary life.

As usual with Covid, who are we to believe?

Whatever the facts are it is clear that we hear an awful lot about Long Covid and its effects.

Considering all of this, I recently came across a cohort study published at jamanetwork.com I found to be very interesting. 

It studied patients with symptomatic illness who had been given a Covid test.

The study then followed the patients in two groups between those who had tested positive for Covid and those who did not and checked with them after three months to determine how they were doing in their physical, mental and social well-being.

A comparison was then done between those patients who had tested positive for Covid and those who had not.

Did the Covid positive patients exhibit residual symptoms after infection at a higher degree than the Covid negative patients?

The surprising answer was that the Covid positive patients actually reported fewer residual symptoms long term than the Covid negative patients even though both clearly had symptomatic illness to begin with.

39.6% of the Covid positive patients reported residual symptoms after three months.

53.5% of Covid negative patients reported residual symptoms.

Credit: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2799116?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

It is an interesting finding. It supports the conclusions of Dr. Makary.

It seems to suggest that being sick with any symptomatic virus can have lingering effects.

What might be different with Long Covid?

Is it different because we have given it a name and amplified all of this in people's minds with the amount of attention it has received?

Did we ever talk about "Long Flu" before? 

This study suggests that Long Flu might be real as well. However, it was never given a name or became "a thing."

Putting all of this aside, it is true that we have seen substantial increases in the numbers of people with a disability in the United States over the last two years.

This chart from the Federal Reserve of St. Louis database tracks the population of those age 16 and over with a disability over the last two years.

I have placed a blue line at the beginning of 2021 as that is the point it seems we reached an inflection point and disabilities began increasing very rapidly.

Source: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNU00074597

Is this the result of Covid or Long Covid?

Could it be something else?

You will notice during the first year of Covid during 2020 (red arrow on left) the population of those with a disability was actually going down.

This suggests that Covid was not driving higher disability.

It is possible that Long Covid is a driver of increased disabilities based on what we see beginning in 2021.

However, why were the visible effects delayed so far past the onset of Covid?

Disabilities did not start to spike until over a year after Covid was widely circulating.

Is there anything else that might have contributed to the rise in disabilities beginning in January, 2021?

Could this be a factor?

Source: https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#vaccination-trends

It is a question that needs to be answered. However, there are not many willing to even consider the question let alone look for answers.

Another question that needs to be examined is what has caused the higher number of excess deaths that were not Covid related (particularly among those age 15- 45) we have experienced since the beginning of the pandemic?

This is a chart from the CDC's Wonder database that shows excess deaths above a 2019 baseline after Covid deaths are removed.

This analysis was done by Kyle Lamb who is a researcher/data analyst for the state of Florida. I found Lamb to one of the more reliable sources of data on Covid throughout the pandemic.

Each line on the chart represents a month since March, 2020.

Source: https://twitter.com/kylamb8/status/1601283434806026241

Why has this occurred?

Is it just a coincidence that Governor Ron DeSantis of Florida announced shortly after that data was published by Lamb that he was calling for a grand jury investigation of potential "crimes and wrongdoings" related to the Covid vaccines in Florida?

Source:https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/3773773-desantis-calls-for-grand-jury-investigation-of-covid-vaccines/

I wrote about the concerning number of non-Covid excess deaths in 2020 among those in the age 15-44 age group in a blog post in June, 2021 titled "The Road Not Taken". I questioned what effect Covid policies (lockdowns, school closures etc) might have had on deaths in this age group.

What was causing these excess deaths if it was not Covid?

The most obvious answer is that non-Covid excess deaths in these age groups are lockdown related.

Suicides? Drug abuse? Delayed treatments for cancers and other serious conditions?

For example, Dartmouth College had three suicides among its freshman class this year.

Three! These students were the cream of the crop. Why?

What is the societal cost of the deaths of so many young people during 2020---not due to the virus but our public health response to the virus?

It is clear now that in addition to the economic cost of the lockdowns there was also a huge human cost in populations that were not very vulnerable to the virus

The chart above shows that non-Covid excess deaths not only continued into 2021 but they got even higher.

They have also continued into 2022. The graph above shows that the excess may be declining recently but some of that undoubtedly relates to reporting lags. This will need to be followed closely as time unfolds.

Most of the severe lockdowns and school closures were lifted in 2021. However, non-Covid excess deaths among the young still grew between 2020 and 2021. 

We are not talking about slightly elevated death levels. The CDC data is showing increases in the order of 15%-35% over 2019 levels for much of the last two years

Is there anything that might have contributed to the additional non-Covid excess deaths in 2021 and 2022 in the age 15-44 age group besides drug deaths and suicides?

Is it Long Covid?

Is it something else?

Another question is why non-Covid excess deaths in the 55+ age group are lower than the young over the last two years. These generally are up around 10%. That is still a large percentage increase when it comes to death statistics but it is lower than what we are seeing in the 15-45 age groups. 

Is that due to increased suicides and drug deaths in the young that were not as prevalent in older age groups?

Note that non-Covid excess deaths still spiked to 15-20% over 2019 levels in most older age groups in mid-2021.

Why?

So many questions.

So few answers.

Cause or Candidate?

I received an excellent comment on BeeLine's last blog post from reader Sharon J. in Georgia.

In my last post, I argued that the Republican loss in the Georgia Senate race between Raphael Warnock and Herschel Walker had more to do with what is "Baked In The Cake" in that state from a demographic and identity politics perspective than any other factor.

I said that it was fair to cast blame at Walker, Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell or RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel for the loss but the demographic and identity politics in the state made it unlikely that any other Republican could have won this race against the incumbent Warnock.

This is Sharon J.'s comment.

It is an excellent comment and one that may very well be correct.

The problem is we will never know one way or the other.

What I do know is that any other Republican candidate would not have had Walker's name id to start with. 

That would have cost any other candidate millions of dollars to buy.

Any other Republican candidate would have also faced the fact that they would have been outspent by over $100 million like Walker was.

Any other Republican candidate would have also been attacked viciously and made out to be a monster as the Democrats do in any consequential campaign.

Sharon J. makes one other comment that is 100% correct.

"Candidate quality matters." "I hope we can start recognizing that we need leaders of character on both sides of the aisle."

I would not stop at character. We need candidates that demonstrate the ability to do the job. Candidates that are mentally and physically fit and have the energy to represent us. Candidates that are willing to earn the vote of the electorate. Candidates who do not misrepresent who they are and what they really believe in order to get elected.

On both sides of the aisle.

Unfortunately, this is another factor in elections today that is baked in the cake.

There are a significant number of Republican voters who apply these standards.

It is rare that you will find any Democrat voter do the same.

Democrat voters value the cause as more important than the candidate.

They have proven that they will overlook almost any flaw in a candidate in favor of the overall cause of electing Democrats.

That is not true of a share of Republican voters. They are willing to sacrifice the candidate for the cause.

The problem is that when one side follows one set of standards and the other side a different standard, you are going to get asymmetrical results.

For example, if we were following the standard that Sharon advocates it should be no surprise that Walker lost. Questions were raised on whether he was fit for the job.

However, John Fetterman should have surely lost to Dr. Oz based on the same standard.

Fetterman was barely able to string a sentence together during the campaign. His one debate performance (he only did one reluctantly) was judged by many to be the worst in recent political history.

Here is an example of what I am talking about.

This opinion column admits that Fetterman's debate showed he was not up to the job. However, the writer state that it doesn't matter because "on the merits" he is better than Oz. 

What "merits" are those? It is the liberal/progressive cause.

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/oct/27/john-fetterman-dr-oz-pennsylvania-senate-midterms

In addition, there is no way that Katie Hobbs should have beaten Kari Lake in Arizona's gubernatorial race base on a candidate standard.

Hobbs refused to debate Kari Lake and was invisible to the media and most of the voters for a good part of the campaign.

Even The New York Times published an article titled, "Where's Katie'? two weeks before the election.

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/21/us/az-governor-katie-hobbs-kari-lake.html

That race was reminiscent of the Trump-Biden race in 2020 where Biden hid in his basement and Trump crisscrossed the country at large rallies asking for the voter support.

It did not matter in Arizona and it did not matter in 2020 with Biden.

Biden's deficiencies are in full view now but it does matter a whit to the Democrats.

The cause is more important than the candidate.

This is baked into the cake and will continue to put Republicans at an advantage in general elections contests as long as these asymmetrical standards continue.

I wish this was not the reality.  Unfortunately, it is.

Sharon J, is correct about what should matter to voters.

However, as long as Democrats keep prioritizing the liberal/progressive cause above the candidate, or the cause of the country, my suggestion to Republicans is that you have little choice but to focus on the cause rather than the candidate in all general elections.

Primary elections are useful in that they allow you to vote for the candidate that will best represent you and what you want to be your cause in the general election.

However, in the general election, you realistically only have a binary choice.

Do you support their cause or your cause (or some variation of your preferred cause)?

What is clear in today's political environment is their cause is going to be miles away from your cause.

This is the way Democrats think and vote today.

The cause is all that matters. The candidate matters not one bit.

This is also baked in the cake.

Ignore it at your own peril if you are a Republican or independent that still thinks the country is worth saving.

 

It's Baked In The Cake

As Republicans look to assign blame in the wake of the Georgia Senate race between Raphael Warnock (D) and Herschel Walker (R) there are fingers pointing in numerous directions.

Donald Trump

Mitch McConnell

Herschel Walker 

RNC Chairman Ronna McDaniel

The Warnock victory also meant that the Democrats held every incumbent Senate seat.

Every Republican incumbent Senator also won reelection.

To put that in historical context, there has never been a Senate election that every incumbent won in over 100 years.

All of this occurred despite a backdrop of high inflation, an uncertain economy, increasing questions about the place of the United States in the world and a Democrat President with a low approval rating.

This also was the result despite only 21% of Americans approving of the way Congress is handling its job. 75% disapprove.

Source: https://news.gallup.com/poll/1600/congress-public.aspx

How do you explain it?

With any loss there is always plenty of blame to go around. You can make an argument that all the names above deserve some of it.

However, what really comes to mind to me is the old adage "It's baked in the cake".

It seems that political views and preferences are so set right now that almost nothing is going to change the voting patterns of most Americans.

It is convenient to blame the candidate, or Trump, McConnell or the RNC chair but it appears to me that most of the American electorate is immovable.

They have put a stake in the ground (or planted a flag in the cake) on who and what they believe is best for the country and no person or persuasion is going to change their minds.

It's baked in the cake.

If they did not move in this election, despite bad news all around them, they are not likely to move unless their world literally starts crashing down on them.

Let's look at the Georgia Senate race.

The latest results show that Walker lost to Warnock by 2.8 points in the runoff.

In the 2020 Senate runoff in Georgia, Kelly Loeffler lost to Warnock by 2 points.

It is a rounding error's difference.

Interestingly, Warnock only received 79.3% of the votes he got in the 2020 runoff which was hotly contested in that the control of the Senate rested on that race. The stakes were not quite as high this year as Democrats already knew they were in control even if Warnock lost.

Walker got 78.3% of the vote total that Loeffler did. That 's another rounding error difference.

However, it also shows that the Democrats did a slightly better job of turning out the vote than the Republicans did and that was all it took.

Donald Trump got 743,000 more votes in 2020 than Walker did in the runoff. 

If only 15% of those voters had showed up for Walker he would have won.

Turnout is that important. 

Could another candidate have done better than Herschel? 

It's possible but unlikely when you consider what is already baked in the cake in Georgia.

For example, in DeKalb County, in Atlanta's eastern suburbs, Warnock beat Walker 87%-13%. Trump lost to Biden 83%-16%. It's baked in the cake in DeKalb with a population that is 55% African American.

Trump lost to Biden 73%-26% in Fulton County. Walker lost 77%-23%.

Perhaps another Republican could have picked up a percent or two more in those two counties but unless bigger turnouts could have been achieved in rural Red counties it still would not make a difference in the statewide results.

You also have to face the fact that almost any other candidate that would have replaced Walker would have had a fraction of the name ID that the former Georgia football star did. Name ID matters a lot in politics.

Some argue as to how could incumbent Republican Governor Brian Kemp win reelection by 7 points while Walker lost?

First, Kemp was the INCUMBENT. We have seen evidence of why that is so important.

Second, Kemp's opponent, Stacey Abrams, had picked up considerable baggage over the last four years due to her whining about the last election.

Third, you also have to consider the money advantage that Warnock had over Walker.

 

Source: https://twitter.com/DavidGiglioCA/status/1600326688948490240/photo/1

An extra $100 million buys a lot of attack ads.

When you have that type of money advantage in politics a victory is also usually baked in the cake.

As long as identity politics continues, Georgia is a tough state for a Republican to win.

33% of the population of Georgia is African American.

10% are  Hispanic.

Only 51% are White.

If 90% of African Americans automatically cast their ballot for the Democrat in every election it's baked in the cake.

If 70% of Hispanics vote for Democrats it's baked in the cake.

If you do the math, a Democrat candidate has 37% of the vote starting out before the Republican even gets started in Georgia trying to earn votes.

White voters have to back the Republican candidate by almost 75% just to offset that advantage out of the box.

However, White voters do not vote anywhere near those numbers as a homogenous identity group (despite what the mainstream media and liberal pundits want you to believe).

That is especially true for White women college graduates. 

Could there have been a Republican candidate in Georgia that appealed more to White women college graduates?

Perhaps a couple more points could have been gained in the election results with another candidate.

However, putting Dr. Oz on the ballot in Pennsylvania (who seemed to be the ideal candidate to appeal to White college educated suburban women) did not turn out well.

White women with a college degree in Pennsylvania supported the barely functional John Fetterman 62%-37% over Oz. White women without a college degree supported Oz 55%-44%.

Oz lost overall by 5 points in a state Trump only lost by 1.2%. 

It is difficult to ignore the obvious impacts that the education system has had over the last 30 years in shaping the hearts and minds of young voters with progressive propaganda.

That reality is also baked in the cake.

The fact is that there is so much baked in the cake today that it suggests a difficult road ahead for Republicans in Georgia and other swing states based on the 2022 midterm results without placing blame on any one person.  

I had some optimism before the election that we might see some movement in some of the hardened political views because of how quickly the nation has spiraled downwards the last couple of years.

The 2022 election suggests to me those views are baked in the cake pretty firmly right now.

It can change.

However, it is clear that it is going to take much more pain and disruption in the lives of voters for this to occur. 

That is not a prospect I look forward to but it may have to occur before all is said and done as we live through The Fourth Turning.

(If you are not familiar with the term "The Fourth Turning" I suggest you read the first of several blog posts I have written about it in these pages here.)