As will now be customary, the Twitter roundup is below the fold. Reminder: My new Twitter-free RSS feed is now available.
From my Twitter feed (9/16-9/22)Sep 22, 2011 at 12:31 PM | |
|---|---|
| Powered by Keepstream | |
RT @bpump: Is this the first time a political scientist has been portrayed on Broadway? Gary Segura: Pioneer. http://t.co/HmXEMn8S | |
| http://www.afer.org/wp-content /uploads/2011/09/8-program-for -web.pdf | |
| Sep 22, 2011 at 1:15 AM | |
Marit finds Palin down 5 vs Obama http://j.mp/qqWE1y Total outlier http://j.mp/nX68nh Also, too early for trial heats! http://j.mp/nURVHx | |
Poll finds Obama losing ground to Republicans - Political Currents - MiamiHerald.com WASHINGTON -- Look out President Barack Obama. Even Sarah Palin's gaining on you. A new McClatchy-Marist poll finds that Obama looks increasingly vulnerable in next year's election, with a major... | |
| WH2012: General See also: Rating the contenders USA Today/Gallup Poll. Sept. 15-18, 2011. N=889 registered voters nationwide. Margin of error ą 4. "Suppose the election were being held today. If Barack Obama we... | |
| | |
| Sep 21, 2011 at 3:57 PM | |
Yet more Friedman 3rd party hype todayhttp://t.co/03jvJH5P Part of a long pattern http://t.co/6GF3iY7b Could be a candidate, but won't win | |
| | |
| | |
| Sep 21, 2011 at 1:35 PM | |
Hacked-up Heritage "analyst" says Clinton job growth due to '97 capital gains tax cuts http://j.mp/qP9ITu Name 1 serious analyst who agrees | |
| | |
| Sep 21, 2011 at 12:51 PM | |
RT @GrahamDavidA: RT @rebeccadana: "As a writer, Mr. Friedman is best known for his galloping assaults on Strunk and White's Rule No. 9." http://t.co/5sIpuch1 | |
Shovel-Ready Shibboleths 'That Used to Be Us: How America Fell Behind in the World It Invented and How We Can Come Back" is a landmark in American popular literature: It is the first book by Thomas L. | |
| Sep 21, 2011 at 3:11 PM | |
Compare the GOP's jawboning of the Fed http://j.mp/r6mREb to Obama's passivity, especially on Fed appointments http://j.mp/qxQeIf (PDF p. 4) | |
| | |
| http://www.dartmouth.edu/~nyha n/poli-sci-journalism.pdf | |
| Sep 21, 2011 at 12:48 PM | |
Dogs that haven't barked: Back in the mid-1990s, no one would have believed that the repeal of DADT would be such a minor issue (so far) | |
| Sep 21, 2011 at 2:18 AM | |
Will patent law become a bipartisan issue? MT @binarybits If you're an Natl. Review subscriber, don't miss my article on software patents | |
| Sep 21, 2011 at 2:15 AM | |
Missed this one last week: Ornstein and Mann on "The pitfalls of a third-party candidacy" http://j.mp/n3GDcO (via @jbplainblog) | |
| | |
| Sep 20, 2011 at 6:33 PM | |
Brutal. WH should be scared. RT @JimPethokoukis: IMF expects US economy to grow just 1.5% in 2011, 1.8% in 2012 (via @JustinWolfers) | |
| Sep 20, 2011 at 2:49 PM | |
Via @planetmoney http://j.mp/nOJhZs an amusing/bizarre European Central Book cartoon for kids on evils of inflation http://j.mp/mRMOx2 | |
The Economic Catastrophe That Germany Can't Forget : NPR For troubled European countries, the European Central Bank could be like a giant ATM. After all, the ECB has the unique ability to print unlimited amounts of euros. It could lend that money to t... | |
ECB: Cartoon on price stability for schools Teaching economics to young teenagers? Then this kit about price stability might help. It consists of an 8-minute cartoon, a pupil's leaflet, which explains price stability in simple terms, and ... | |
| Sep 20, 2011 at 1:55 PM | |
Closely related to my series on wacky government agency mascots for kids http://j.mp/nR1U1e http://j.mp/qDqLVW | |
Stimulus for government mascots! - Brendan Nyhan Back in 2006, I poked fun at silly government agency websites for kids (here, here, and here), which included feature lovable mascots such as Rex the "flashlight-toting mountain lion" from the D... | |
More wacky govt. kids mascots - Brendan Nyhan Back in February, I mocked (here and here) the silly cartoon mascots of government websites for children, which included Rex the mountain lion from the Department of Homeland Security: Herman, t... | |
| Sep 20, 2011 at 1:56 PM | |
NYT: "the harm to public health may have already been done" by Bachmann's false HPV claims http://j.mp/nEgUcS | |
| http://j.mp/nEgUcS | |
| Sep 20, 2011 at 1:35 PM | |
Roberts on @MorningEdition: Obama firing econ staff would be admission of ownership of the econ. Reality: Presidents always held responsible | |
| Sep 19, 2011 at 12:25 PM | |
Cokie Roberts on @MorningEdition: Obama needs independents to be re-elected. False! Last 3 close winners lost indies http://j.mp/onXNBg | |
Larry J. Sabato's Crystal Ball » Setting the Record Straight: Correcting Myths about Independent Voters Alan I. Abramowitz, Senior Columnist July 7th, 2011 There they go again. The presidential campaign season is barely under way but already pundits and pollsters are making misleading claims about... | |
| Sep 19, 2011 at 12:24 PM | |
More independents think global warming is occurring, but those who don't have become more certain in their beliefs http://j.mp/ovEvOK | |
Global Warming: Is Polarization a Good Thing? Joe Romm is already on this, but I too note an important new poll from Stanford showing the public is shifting into the pro-global warming camp…or at least, the not-particularly-radical center o... | |
| Sep 19, 2011 at 11:37 AM | |
Everyone's a pundit MT @MysteryPollster 19% less likely to support Perry b/c "Ponzi" but 37% say will "hurt... chances" http://t.co/kT21aLuo | |
Perry "Ponzi Scheme" Remark Doesn't Faze Most Republicans PRINCETON, NJ -- Texas Gov. and presidential candidate Rick Perry's comments on Social Security, which include calling it a "Ponzi scheme," appear to be a non-issue for most Republicans. However... | |
| Sep 17, 2011 at 12:55 AM | |
Difference is underlying fundamentals are vastly less favorable MT @RyanLizza Obama story fall 2011 looks remarkably similar to fall 2007 | |
| Sep 17, 2011 at 12:17 AM | |
RT @jeffzeleny: How does Obama's 43% approval compare? At this point, Carter 31, Reagan 46, GHWB, 70, Clinton 48, GWB 52. NYT Poll: http://t.co/FNhiHoGp | |
| | |
| Sep 17, 2011 at 12:15 AM | |
I'll believe it when I see it - hype every cycle RT @benpolitico: C Todd thinks Perry-Obama will invite a 3rd candidate http://t.co/Mbs6wtpH | |
Chuck Todd: If Perry wins nomination, expect a 3rd party challenge Appearing on Tony Kornheiser's ESPN radio show Wednesday, NBC News' Chief White House Correspondent Chuck Todd predicted that if Rick Perry wins the Republican nomination, a "semi-credible indep... | |
| Sep 16, 2011 at 2:55 PM | |
Democrats' performance in the 2010 election doesn't look as bad in comparative perspective - look at Hungary & Ireland! http://j.mp/qfkeo6 | |
Enik Rising: The economy and the vote: It ain't just America Seen in this light, the Democrats here in the U.S. only underperformed very slightly. | |
| Sep 16, 2011 at 2:53 PM | |
2010 prediction: Obama's staff will be blamed for his problems http://j.mp/c9Fe3v Carville 2011: Fire the staff! http://j.mp/pwCepT | |
| | |
What should the White House do? Panic! - CNN.com By James Carville, CNN Contributor updated 11:05 AM EST, Sun September 18, 2011 Editor's note: James Carville is a Democratic strategist who serves as a political contributor for CNN, appearing ... | |
| Sep 16, 2011 at 2:50 PM | |











Like Thomas Friedman, I wish there were some politicians who stood for "proposals that match the scale of our debt problem." Unfortunately, that would be a very unpopular position. Most of us are in denial over the magnitude of the deficit.
Given today's federal tax rates, commitments and predilictions, a realisic estimate is that going forward the federal government will continue to spend around 50% more than it collects. To match the scale of the problem would require something like:
1. Cut all federal spending by 50%.
Or:
2. Increase FICA payments and all federal taxes and assessments by 33%.
Or, split the difference:
3. Cut all federal spending by 25% and increase all revenues by 17%.
Friedman calls the Tea Parties "radical." Can you imagine what he'd call a proposal that really matched the scale of our debt problem?
P.S. I believe Friedman actually meant the "deficit problem", not the "debt problem". In order to cut down the national debt, the federal government would have to run budget surpluses. That would require even larger spending cuts and/or tax increases than those above.
Posted by: David in Cal | September 22, 2011 at 06:00 PM
I doubt there will be a credible third party candidate in 2012. But... I would suspect that Mitt Romney is more likely than Perry. I think the base is more likely to get energized than the moderates.
Posted by: JP | September 22, 2011 at 08:30 PM
Mooney's careless discussions of Ipsos flawed survey led to Brendan's lack of precision. The problem is confusion over definitions of terms.
It started with Ipsos strange grammar, asking whether the World’s temperature has been going up in the past 100 years. A clearer question would have asked if the temperature did go up. In their write-up, Ipsos shortened this question to whether "the earth has been warming" without specifying a time period. In fact, the
earth cooled over the last 12 years, so the specified time period is crucial. Cynics might suspect that Ipsos chose this unclear wording in order to be able to get the result they wanted.
Ipsos described the belief that the earth hasn't warmed in the last 100 years as "not believing in global warming." I think most people would interpret the phrase "belief in global warming" to mean belief that warming is occurring today and will continue.
Ipsos asked about the degree of belief that the earth warmed in the last 100 years. However, Ipsos didn't ask about the degree of belief that the earth will warm in the next 100 years. Nor did they ask how much the respondant thought the temperature would rise in the next 100 years or the degree of belief in various amounts of anticipated warming. These are two of the main areas of controversy. Their omission was unfortunate. Expensive remedies are justified only if one has a high degree of belief that we will experience a very large amount of warming.
Having been misled by Ipsos and Mooney's sloppy wording, Brendan mistakenly wrote, "More independents think global warming is occurring, but those who don't have become more certain in their beliefs." What the survey actually showed was that more independents think global warming occurred during the last 100 years, but those who don't have become more certain in their beliefs.
Posted by: David in Cal | September 22, 2011 at 09:04 PM
@David in Cal. If government spends 50% more than they collect and reduce spending by 50% this will yield a surplus, 25% of tax collections. We can use this money to send every person in America into a Basic Math Skills course.
I'm a jerk.
Posted by: JP | September 22, 2011 at 09:04 PM
Thanks JP for pointing out my error. The percentages were reversed. In order to balance the budget, the federal government would have to cut spending 33% or raise all taxes and fees by 50% or some equivalent combination.
Sorry for the error.
Posted by: David in Cal | September 22, 2011 at 09:25 PM
Dems and Reps debate whether more "stimulus" will cause inflation. However, we are already in an inflationary spiral.
Inflation in 2010 was 1.5%. So far, 2011 inflation (12/31/10 - 8/31/11) has run at an annual rate of 5.1%. That's a big jump. By comparison, Richard Nixon instituted wage and price controls (which proved to be a disaster) because US inflation was persisting above 4%.
Furthermore, it's by no means clear that further "stimulus" will add jobs. Many believe that government spending is always a burden on private industry. If this is the case, then the extra spending permitted by printing more money will harm business. And, inflation itself will harm business. Hyperinflation can bring a government. We know what hyper-inflation in post-WWI Germany led to.
IMHO the Fed is playing with fire. Their main responsibility is supposed to be preventing inflation. When the Fed tries to create inflation, it's like the fire department being used to set fires (a la Farenheit 451).
Posted by: David in Cal | September 23, 2011 at 02:37 AM
Mooney ends his global warming article by damning the "extremists". Given the article's focus on polarization, one might hope that Mooney means extremists on both sides -- those with extreme belief in Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming as well as those with extreme doubt. However, Mooney is one of the former, so he evidently means only the latter. For Mooney, the word "extremists" in effect means people who disagree with him.
Mooney's class of so-called "extremists" would include Nobel Prize winning physicist Ivar Giaever, MIT Professor Richard Lindzen, Princeton-based physicist Freeman Dyson, and many other eminent scientists. It's too bad that Mooney uses ad hominem attacks, rather than address their scientific analyses.
Posted by: David in Cal | September 25, 2011 at 12:44 PM
David in Cal is correct we need to keep the inflation monster in the jar. Just like the cartoon from the ECB told us.
Posted by: JP | September 27, 2011 at 02:19 PM