The TV newsies keep talking about one. They would just die to cover a "brokered convention". The good old fashioned smoke filled room where party bosses cut a deal to select the nominee. Dream on newsies.
In real life, the voters expect the party nominee to be chosen in primary elections. If this doesn't happen, the voters will think something illegal, or immoral, or merely fattening, has happened behind closed doors. They will refuse to support for any nominee selected by anything except a majority of the primary elections. If necessary they will vote for a third party candidate who has some legitimacy. Which will hand the general election to Hilliary.
Does the establishment or the voters understand this? Given the horrible state of American schools, they may not.
This blog posts about aviation, automobiles, electronics, programming, politics and such other subjects as catch my interest. The blog is based in northern New Hampshire, USA
Sunday, March 6, 2016
Saturday, March 5, 2016
NH legislature off on wild goose chases
Let's see. First we have the commuter rail project. Costs $300 million to set up, plus $12 million a year running costs, Only serves Nashua. They want all the taxpayers in NH to pay for it. Nice work if you can get it Nashua.
Then somebody wanted to pass a new state law on indecent exposure. We have been doing just fine with existing law going back to the colonial period. Why do w need to change anything. Far as I am concerned, if guys or girls want to walk around stark naked, fine by me. I will enjoy the view. I don't see any need for a law.
Then someone else wanted to pass a new law about bestiality. I know the Old Testament is again it, but I hadn't heard of any cases in NH in the last fifty years. Again, we have law on the books, going back to colonial times, that has been perfectly adequate.
Why is our gallant legislature wasting time with this sort of stuff?
Then somebody wanted to pass a new state law on indecent exposure. We have been doing just fine with existing law going back to the colonial period. Why do w need to change anything. Far as I am concerned, if guys or girls want to walk around stark naked, fine by me. I will enjoy the view. I don't see any need for a law.
Then someone else wanted to pass a new law about bestiality. I know the Old Testament is again it, but I hadn't heard of any cases in NH in the last fifty years. Again, we have law on the books, going back to colonial times, that has been perfectly adequate.
Why is our gallant legislature wasting time with this sort of stuff?
Labels:
bestiality,
commuter rail,
indecent exposure,
NH legislature
Friday, March 4, 2016
Kelley Ayotte event in northern NH
Kelly Ayotte is our incumbent US Senator, running for re-election. She traveled up to northern NH to give a town hall event today. It was held in the classic NH location, a VFW hall, this one in Haverill. Turnout was good, parking lot was full, so was the VFW hall. It was a close knit affair, Kelly knew half the people present and greeted them all.
Thursday, March 3, 2016
Learning to trash The Donald
Just watched Mitt Romney laying into The Donald on TV. Wow. Zap. Mitt came on just as strong as Marco Rubio, maybe stronger.
Wednesday, March 2, 2016
Learning to love The Donald
The Donald is gonna win the Republican nomination, unless something really weird happens, like an assassination, or all the other Republicans consolidate behind either Cruz or Rubio. Or lightening strikes the convention. Not likely.
I have some problems with The Donald as president, but I have more problems with Hilliary. So I'll vote for The Donald, and work to get him elected. I sincerely hope that The Donald can beat Hilliary in November, but I have my doubts. Hilliary's negatives are very high, but The Donald's are higher.
I have some problems with The Donald as president, but I have more problems with Hilliary. So I'll vote for The Donald, and work to get him elected. I sincerely hope that The Donald can beat Hilliary in November, but I have my doubts. Hilliary's negatives are very high, but The Donald's are higher.
Tuesday, March 1, 2016
Everyone whines about the US deficit
But nobody running for president talks about how to reduce it. It's very simple, Uncle spends more than he takes in with taxes. So Uncle borrows whatever to make up the difference. So far, Uncle has borrowed a total of one year's output of the entire US GNP, call it $17 trillion.
The only way to reduce the deficit is to hike taxes (highly unpopular with everyone) or cut spending (highly unpopular with those on the federal teat). Nobody wants to talk about either alternative except The Bern, who wants some good old fashioned soak-the-rich taxes. Trouble with soak-the-rich taxes, is we will all be rich in a few years from inflation. So soak-the-rich today means soak everybody tomorrow.
Since the people on the federal teat are less than everybody, it's more politically possible to cut spending than to hike taxes. Although it still ain't easy.
If we are gonna cut spending, it makes sense to start with the biggest money suckers, namely Medicare, Social Security, and perhaps Medicaid. The US spends 19% of GNP on health care, twice as much as any other country in the world. Some investigation ought to reveal how decent first world countries like Canada, Britain, France, Germany and a bunch of others get by spending half what we do. Naturally the doctors, the drug companies, the insurance companies, and the hospitals will scream bloody murder when Uncle does a little cost cutting, but let 'em. They don't have that many votes.
Social Security (the third rail of American politics, touch it and die) is harder. Cutting retiree's social security benefits would create a nationwide firestorm against those stupid enough to try it. But Social Security pays out a lot in "Survivors Benefits" and "Disability Benefits" which could be tightened up somewhat. Even a small cut in a big program would save serious money.
And nobody running for president is talking about any of this. Wimps.
The only way to reduce the deficit is to hike taxes (highly unpopular with everyone) or cut spending (highly unpopular with those on the federal teat). Nobody wants to talk about either alternative except The Bern, who wants some good old fashioned soak-the-rich taxes. Trouble with soak-the-rich taxes, is we will all be rich in a few years from inflation. So soak-the-rich today means soak everybody tomorrow.
Since the people on the federal teat are less than everybody, it's more politically possible to cut spending than to hike taxes. Although it still ain't easy.
If we are gonna cut spending, it makes sense to start with the biggest money suckers, namely Medicare, Social Security, and perhaps Medicaid. The US spends 19% of GNP on health care, twice as much as any other country in the world. Some investigation ought to reveal how decent first world countries like Canada, Britain, France, Germany and a bunch of others get by spending half what we do. Naturally the doctors, the drug companies, the insurance companies, and the hospitals will scream bloody murder when Uncle does a little cost cutting, but let 'em. They don't have that many votes.
Social Security (the third rail of American politics, touch it and die) is harder. Cutting retiree's social security benefits would create a nationwide firestorm against those stupid enough to try it. But Social Security pays out a lot in "Survivors Benefits" and "Disability Benefits" which could be tightened up somewhat. Even a small cut in a big program would save serious money.
And nobody running for president is talking about any of this. Wimps.
We got so much crude oil they are stashing it in railcars
US oil production is up, sales are down and the oil is piling up every where. The surplus is so bad that owners are renting empty rail tank cars to just hold the stuff until prices rise or customers come forward. That's a long way from "peak oil". The Wall St Journal says US oil inventories have not been this high since the 1930's.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)