Retail Archaeology asks 'What Is Going On At Staples?' A tale of the Retail Apocalypse

Change of plans — instead of the next installment of my examination of the Emmy nominees, I'm shifting to the Retail Apocalypse with Erik of Retail Archaeology asking What Is Going On At Staples?

In this episode of Retail Archaeology we take a look at Staples.

Mitt Romney was on the board of directors? At least the involvement of Bain Capital didn't result in Staples suffering the fates of KB Toys and Toys R Us. Instead, it might be Sycamore Partners who could be another example of private equity contributing to the continuation of the Retail Apocalypse, although that shoe may not drop for Staples until 2029. May I still be blogging then.

That's a wrap for the Retail Apocalypse today. Come back tomorrow as I plan on posting an entry about the nominees for Outstanding Documentary or Nonfiction Special at the Creative Arts Emmy Awards. Stay tuned.

'The Daily Show,' Seth Meyers, and James Corden take more closer looks at the State of the Union and Twitter hearings

I'm not done taking closer looks at the State of the Union Address from Seth Meyers and others. For a change of pace, I'm beginning with MTG Screams "Liar!" as Biden Delivers State of the Union Address | The Daily Show with Chelsea Handler as guest host.

President Biden delivers the State of the Union address and gets heckled by Republicans. Plus, Mitt Romney has a heated exchange with George Santos, and the Twitter hearings address Chrissy Teigen's insults directed at Donald Trump.

I miss Samantha Bee, but Handler's breezy style makes for a good short-term substitute for Bee and her unique perspective.

For a more investigative approach, I return to Seth Meyers for Greene and Boebert Unravel at Twitter Hearing While Biden Gloats About SOTU: A Closer Look.

Seth takes a closer look at President Biden making a point of focusing on kitchen table issues during his State of the Union address while House Republicans like Marjorie Taylor Greene focused on things like why Twitter censored Hunter Biden's Nudes.

Seeing Greene together with Lauren Boebert reminds me of this meme that my friend Nonnie9999 made for me.


Given what both of them sounded like at the hearing and what Greene sounded and looked like at the State of the Union, that cartoon strikes me as about right.

I close with "The Late, Late Show" declaring that The State of Our Union Is Pretty Weird.

Gordon Ramsay is on the show tonight and that always puts us in a great mood. But that good mood becomes testy when James and his producers squabble over some calendar math. In the news, LeBron and President Joe Biden broke records. And James gives a State of the Union recap, including Mitt Romney's exchange with George Santos, Kyrsten Sinema's bowtie pasta look and lots of booing.

On the one hand, this clip shows the lack of focus that discourages me from using Corden's clips. On the other hand, what he and his writers planned reinforced the points made in the clip from "The Daily Show": more people cared about LeBron James beating Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's record than the State of the Union, Mitt Romney dissed George Santos, who deserved it, whatever Romney said, and Kyrsten Sinema dressed to draw attention to herself. On balance, it was worth embedding.

I've had enough of the State of the Union. Let's see if I can blog about something else tomorrow. Stay tuned.

Company Man on the decline of KB Toys, a tale of the Retail Apocalypse

Very early in my coverage of the Retail Apocalypse, I wrote "Oh, look, Bain Capital is involved with a failed toy store chain. Where have I seen that before?" in response to my first post about Toys R Us closing. I'm returning to the topic with Company Man's The Decline of KB Toys...What Happened?

I used to love going to KB Toys. It was the nations largest chain of toy stores located primarily in malls. This video talks about the circumstances that led to their multiple bankruptcies and ultimate closure.

Company Man Mike managed to make one of his trademark thorough yet succinct summary histories of a company. My only quibble is his not mentioning Mitt Romney's involvement in Bain Capital at the time, but that wasn't necessary to tell the tale of how private equity has been gutting retail, as much as it's been a pet peeve of mine. Speaking of which, I wish Strategic Marks luck in reviving KB Toys and the other defunct retail brands it owns. I have fond memories of going on shopping trips with my mom to many of them.

Stay tuned for two serious holidays, World Kindness Day and World Diabetes Day.

Orrin Hatch retires, not the first time I've seen him leave

Last month, I wrote about John Conyers resigning and Sander Levin retiring.  Today, it's MSNBC reporting Utah Senator Orrin Hatch Announces He Will Retire At End Of Term.

The Utah Republican, who has served four decades in the Senate, made the announcement in a video posted to Twitter. Will his empty seat pave the wave for Mitt Romney? NBC’s Katy Tur and Politico’s Jake Sherman discuss.

Yes, Mitt Romney is one of the reasons I care about this news, as Romney was born and raised in Michigan. I even wrote about his high school years in Willard Scissorhands, the Barber of Severe, although I promise not to call him that should he run, win, and oppose Trump from inside the G.O.P.

MSNBC also asked Will Mitt Romney Run For Senate?

Mitt Romney has made it known he’s interested in the Utah Senate seat and polling has been favorable for him in the state.

I'll let the Magic 8 Ball sum up the answer.


In case anyone wonders who the likely Democratic nominee will be, Steve Kornacki showed her name on his screen -- Jenny Wilson, who came in second in the poll.  That's the candidate I expect my middle sister, who lives in Utah, would vote for.  As for likely primary challengers to Romney, pay attention to Mia Love, a U.S. Representative.  She's the kind of candidate both Trump and Steve Bannon would support against Romney.  A name that wasn't up there but might run would be the now retired Jason Chaffetz, who might be induced to throw his hat into the ring, especially if Love does not.

So far, I've mentioned two reasons for my interest, Romney replacing Hatch and my family's connection to Utah.  The third is this WXYZ news segment, Bill Bonds confronts Utah Senator Orrin Hatch in 1991 interview, which I watched live.

Legendary WXYZ-TV anchorman Bill Bonds confronts Utah Senator Orrin Hatch in this interview from October 1991. Hatch stormed away from the camera after being pressed by Bond on leaked documents.

Like I wrote in the title, this isn't the first time I've seen Hatch leave.  This time, don't go away mad, Senator, just go away.

Matt Taibbi on KB Toys

I concluded Matt Taibbi and Mike Lofgren are on the same page about the global rich with this programming note.

Taibbi has more to say about Romney and his wealth. In particular, he has a very succinct take-down of what Bain Capital did to KB Toys. I plan on excerpting that in a future entry.

Since the election will be over in a few hours, making this story much less newsworthy, and Bain's mismanagement of KB Toys has been a pet peeve of mine, it's time to post this before it turns into a pumpkin. Follow over the jump for the relevant excerpt from Greed and Debt: The True Story of Mitt Romney and Bain Capital.

Debates by proxy on science and energy plus other election news from Overnight News Digest

Time for the last compilation of pre-election news from campuses on the campaign trail collected in Overnight News Digest on Daily Kos.


I'll begin with this pair of articles from Overnight News Digest: Science Saturday (2012 Nobel Prizes edition) about the two major party candidates' planks on energy, environment, and space. I was planning on making these a centerpiece of a response to Kunstler's kvetching on his blog about how the major party candidates were ignoring the real problems of the country. Instead, I used the minor party debate as a reply that someone, if not Obama and Romney, was attempting to do what Kunstler wanted.

Firist, Arizona State University asks Whose science and tech platform is better?
October 6, 2012

As the election nears, much focus is dedicated to the presidential campaign platforms on the economy and the federal budget. Both candidates publicly champion the advancement of science and technology, and recognize scientific progress as a cornerstone of the American economy and way of life. However, minimal attention is given to the specifics of the science and tech platforms.

ASU physicist and author Lawrence Krauss is helping to draw attention to these specifics via a two-part series on Future Tense at Slate magazine.

The first article, Bombing the Test, touches on climate change and the environment, with the majority focused on the current state of the United States' nuclear weapon arsenal and missile defense.
...
In a second piece, Krauss asks, “Whose Space Exploration Policy Is Better—Obama’s or Romney’s?"

As a scientist, environmentalist, and space enthusiast, the answers to these questions are quite important to me, although if the GOP were serious about any of them, they'd have nominated either Huntsman or Gingrich, who has a clear, consistent, but wrong platform on energy, an interest in science, and a love of space exploration. Even so, he would still have made it easy for me to vote for Obama.

The energy debate, which was hidden inside Slate's explanation of the dueling positions of the major parties, became more explicit in this piece from the University of Colorado, Denver: Students speak their mind in energy policy debate
Natural gas production also a hot topic at third annual Energy Moving Forward forum
By Chris Casey
October 12, 2012

DENVER -- Just hours before the vice presidential candidates sparred in a lively debate on Thursday night, barely touching on energy policy, an equally spirited discussion struck on that very topic, courtesy of the third annual Energy Moving Forward forum.

A panel exchanged partisan blows in "The Future We Want: Student Perspectives on Energy Policy and its Ramifications," part of the half-day conference held in the Terrace Room at the University of Colorado Denver. About 200 business professionals attended.
...
The Republican side criticized President Obama's "all-of-the-above" energy policy, saying it obstructs oil and gas production with unnecessary regulations and squanders largess on the renewables sector. The Democrats argued that renewables are the energy of the future and that leaving energy regulation to individual states muddles accountability and imperils the environment.

That last paragraph pretty much sums up the debate. I'm on the Democrats' side on this one, while I think the Republicans are being a bunch of fossil fools. Just the same it's worth reading the rest of the report to see the talking points and supporting details of both sides.

Follow over the jump for two more stories from Overnight News Digest: Science Saturday (Sandy's aftermath edition), including press releases about a book describing the psychology of extremism and a hotline for people who think they've been denied the right or opportunity to vote.

The state of the presidential contest 11/4/12

Here's what I wrote about the state of the race in last night's Overnight News Digest: Science Saturday (Sandy's aftermath edition) on Daily Kos.

As of November 3rd, the presidential swing states are Colorado, Florida, North Carolina, and Virginia, while the states with competitive races for the U.S. Senate are Arizona, Indiana, Montana, Nevada, and Wisconsin. Since my previous report last week, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, and Ohio have moved out of the competitive presidential state category with an 80+% chance of an Obama victory, while North Carolina has moved in with a 20+% possiblity of an Obama win. Also, Wisconsin has been added to the competitive Senate category because Tammy Baldwin now has less than an 80% chance of being elected.

Since I wrote that, the state of the presidential contest has already changed, as Nate Silver calculated Obama's chances of winning New Hampshire dropping from just over 80% to just under, 79.4%. That's the bad news. The good news is that his chances of winning Colorado increased to over 60% (68%) and Virginia his odds went up to over 70% (71%). A week ago, he had less than 60% odds of winning Colorado and just over a 50% probablity of winning the Old Dominion. Things are moving fast, and I wouldn't discount the effect of Sandy on the polling.

Speaking of Virginia, here is an article about the latest polling in the state, courtesy of the University of Virginia.

Obama and Kaine Ahead in Central Virginia, U.Va. Poll Finds
November 1, 2012

With less than a week remaining before Election Day, the University of Virginia’s Jefferson Area Community Survey shows Democrats Barack Obama and Tim Kaine holding substantial leads among registered voters in the greater Charlottesville area.

In a survey conducted Oct. 2 through 31, 49 percent of registered voters said they planned to vote for Obama for president, compared to 33 percent for the Republican challenger, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. Another 8 percent were undecided, and most of the remaining 10 percent declined to state a preference. Fewer than 1 percent of voters supported other candidates and 1 percent of registered voters said that they had decided not to vote.

Similarly, 51 percent of respondents said they favored Kaine in the U.S. Senate race, compared to 32 percent for Republican George Allen and 9 percent undecided. Most of the remaining 8 percent declined to state a preference.

Nearly all of that was pre-Sandy, so maybe the effects of the Frankstorm just cemented an already existing trend. As for Kaine, Nate now gives him an 85.0% chance of winning Virginia. I got what I was hoping for when I wished that Kaine would leave Allen in the dust at their last debate.

What about Iowa, which Nate Silver thinks is even more likely to go Obama's way?

University of Iowa: Tight race
Hawkeye Poll: Presidential race close in Iowa, likely determined by ability to turn out supporters
By: University Communication and Marketing
2012.10.31

With the presidential election less than one week away, it’s still a close race in Iowa, a key swing state. Mitt Romney has a slight edge over Barack Obama among likely voters in the state, according to a University of Iowa Hawkeye Poll released today. The Hawkeye Poll is a teaching, research, and service project of the Department of Political Science in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences (CLAS).

Obama has a slight lead in Iowa among all respondents, with 42.7 percent of the vote to 41.0 percent for Romney, with 10.5 percent undecided and 5.8 percent preferring a third party candidate. Romney leads among likely voters, though, with 45.2 percent of the vote compared to 44.4 percent for Obama, with 6 percent undecided and 4.3 percent preferring a third party candidate. The margin of error for the survey of 320 Iowans is 5.6 percent.

“Our results show Romney making advances and perhaps taking the lead in Iowa, and that the race continues to be close and within the margin of error,” says Frederick Boehmke, associate professor of political science in the UI CLAS and faculty adviser of the Hawkeye Poll. “It appears that the final result will be determined by each campaign’s ability to turn out supporters and to capture the votes of those last few undecided voters.”

Nate is using the registered voter numbers from this poll, not the likely voter numbers. I'd be worried, except that there have been lots of polls since then that confirm a small but solid Obama lead in the state.

Finally, it wouldn't be a state of the contest post without a mention of the Iowa Electronic Market (IEM).

University of Iowa: Traders see status quo
Iowa Electronic Markets sees Obama winning popular vote, GOP House and Democratic Senate
By: Tom Snee
2012.10.30

Prices on the Iowa Electronic Markets’ (IEM) political prediction markets have been largely steady the last week, unmoved by the rapidly approaching Election Day or Hurricane Sandy thrashing the northeast.

As of 9 a.m. Tuesday, a contract for President Barack Obama was trading for 63.8 cents on the IEM’s Winner Take All market, which means traders believe he has a 63.8 percent probability of winning the popular vote in next week’s election. He has been trading in the 60 to 65 cent range for most of the last two weeks.

Romney, meanwhile, was trading for 38.9 cents, which means traders believe he has a 38.9 percent probability of winning the popular vote. His current price also reflects his recent trading trend.

That was Tuesday the 30th. The next day, prices started moving. Right now, the current quotes show Obama's likelihood of winning at 70-72% and getting about 51.5% of the two-party vote share. Here's the graph showing the recent price swing.


Looks like the IEM is getting back in line with Nate, whose current forecast is for an 80.5% chance of Obama winning the popular vote (this is what the IEM is forecasting, not his chances of winning the Electoral College, which Nate has at 85.1%) and earning 50.6% of the popular vote.

Speaking of Nate, I'm amazed at the meta fight over his predictions. I never thought this election would turn into a referendum on Nate Silver!

Crossposted to Daily Kos as The state of the election from last night's Overnight News Digest.

Good news for Democrats, bad news for proposals at Examiner.com

I concluded my previous entry promoting my writings on Examiner.com by noting my position on the site's leaderboard.

I'm currently ranked fifth out of 170 elections Examiners nationwide. I also got promoted to "preferred source." That's enough of an ego boost to induce me to write more during the next two weeks.

Ever since then, I've been wondering what I'd write to try to maintain my position. Last night, I finally got the combination of inspiration and opportunity--a week of heavy polling and an evening off. I responded by writing a record three articles in one sitting.

The first two articles are good news for Democrats in Michigan.

Barack Obama leads in all six polls of Michigan released this week.
Photo credit: Getty Images

Six polls show Obama ahead in Michigan

This week's polls of Michigan's voters opened with the Detroit News releasing a poll on Tuesday that showed Willard Mitt Romney within three percentage points of Barack Obama. Obama led with 47.7% to Romney's 45.0%. The previous Detroit News poll had Obama leading 49% to Romney's 42.3%.

Based on the change in their poll, the Detroit News trumpeted the result as showing that "Romney is within striking distance of Obama in Michigan" and quoted Richard Czuba of Glengariff Group Inc., who conducted the poll for the News, about the meaning of the results. "Mitt Romney's numbers … are where they would need to be if he hopes to pull off an upset next week. But the question is: Is there enough for a final push?"

According to five polls released later in the week, which reported Obama leads ranging from five percent to eight percent, the answer to Czuba's question appears to be "No."
...
To give an exclamation point to the answer of "No" to Czuba's asking if Romney would be able to catch up to Obama in Michigan, Nate Silver of the New York Times currently gives Obama a 98.5% chance of winning the state.

In addition to details about the five polls, I also include some data from Epic-MRA showing that there is a small enthusiasm gap among Republicans, not Democrats, here in Michigan. Gee, that wasn't supposed to be the narrative this year.

Follow over the jump for news about Debbie Stabenow and the ballot initiatives.

The importance of the Latino vote from Purdue University and Nate Silver

In the spirit of ABC News panel on presidential debates, Rock the Vote in Madison, Wisconsin, today and Last U.S. Senate debate in Virginia tonight plus state of the race, here are two more press release about elections I included in the tip jar of Overnight News Digest: Science Saturday (2012 Nobel Prizes edition), followed by what Nate Silver had to say about this topic on Saturday.

Purdue University: Prof: Latino electorate largest ever; yet expect influence from those not voting
October 10, 2012

WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind. — The large Latino electorate is expected to play a key role in this year's presidential election, but so will the influence of Latinos who don't have U.S. voting rights, says a Purdue University political science expert.

"Voting is just one way actors in a democratic society can make a difference, and interest in politics and party politics comes well before naturalization," says James McCann, a professor of political science who is leading a large study to follow Latino interest and civic engagement in recent presidential elections. "We see a lot of civic interest before someone acquires voting rights, and it's important to track this too. Just like economists track aspects of the undocumented workforce, we need to gauge and model similar effects in politics."

His research focuses on Latinos who don't have citizens' rights. About 40 percent of Latino adults in the United States are noncitizens, and the Pew Hispanic Center recently reported that a record 24 million Latinos are eligible to vote.

Purdue University: Prof: Democratic Party will capture Latino vote in 2012
October 8, 2012

WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind. — The 2012 presidential election will solidify the Latino electorate's support for one party, says a Purdue University political science professor.

"The Republican Party made some strides with the Latino electorate when George W. Bush ran for office because he was from the southwest and understood the Latino culture, but Republican candidates have been losing ground since then," says James McCann, professor of political science who focuses on public opinion and Latino political participation. "The discourse during this year's Republican primary contests, as the potential nominees competed for support among grassroots activists, was alienating to many Latino voters. Mitt Romney's statement about 'self-deportation' for immigrants set a very negative tone that can alienate Latino voters."

The Latino electorate favored Democratic candidate Barack Obama in the 2008 election when he won 67 percent of the vote and the Republican candidate received 31 percent. McCann says he expects that gap to grow even more this election.

The Latino vote is becoming important enough that Nate Silver devoted a major portion of a post to the topic: Oct. 13: Arizona and the Spanish-Speaking Vote. Follow over the jump for the relevant excerpt.

ABC News panel on presidential debates

In last night's Overnight News Digest: Science Saturday (2012 Nobel Prizes edition) on Daily Kos, I included this press release in the tip jar.

University of Virginia: U.Va. Miller Center, ABC ‘This Week’ Team To Air Discussion of Presidential Debates October 10, 2012

A special edition of ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos,” produced with the University of Virginia’s Miller Center, will air this Sunday and focus on the question, “Do Presidential Debates Change Elections?”

Panelists are scheduled to include:

• Newt Gingrich, 2012 Republican presidential candidate
• Chris Dodd, 2008 Democratic presidential candidate
• Martha Raddatz, moderator of Thursday’s vice presidential debate between Joe Biden and Paul Ryan
• Richard Norton Smith, presidential historian
• Donna Brazile, campaign manager for Al Gore’s 2000 campaign
• George Will, Pulitzer Prize-winning commentator

Broadcast before a live studio audience at the Newseum in Washington, D.C., the program will be moderated by ABC News Chief White House Correspondent Jake Tapper.

That program has now been broadcast. Follow over the jump for the segments of This Week that composed that special roundtable.

WXYZ thinks Michigan is being left out, then Ryan and Ann Romney visit

WXYZ asks "Why aren't the candidates spending money or time in MI?"


The answer to the question is that Michigan has not been competitive for most of this year, even after Willard's the Rat's improved standing in the polls after the debate. Advertising and campaigning here would be a waste of money better spent elsewhere.* However, Michigan isn't being completely ignored. After all, Paul Ryan made an appearance here Monday.


Ryan's visit included a rally at Oakland University, where the debate for the Michigan Republican primary was held. Much to my amusement, I received two robocalls inviting me to it. Of course, I didn't go. After watching the WXYZ report, I had no regrets.


In addition to Eddie Munster and Kid Rock rallying the troops, Ann Romney made a stop here.

Ann Romney visited familiar ground Friday afternoon when she stopped at the Franklin Cider Mill to address about 300 people supporting her husband, Mitt Romney, for president.

Romney said it was her first visit to the cider mill since she was "16 or 17" and the warm doughnuts "tasted exactly as I remember."
...
"Every fall it was our family tradition to come here," Romney said, drawing applause. "My husband and I both grew up, just not far from here."

She didn't discuss policy at the stop, which focused on Romney's ties to Michigan. His father was a governor and ran American Motors.

I drove within a mile of Franklin Cider Mill yesterday. I had no idea she had even been there until now.

So, even though there are no TV ads being run here by the two major party campaigns and Willard the Rat hasn't shown up, Michigan is not being ignored. I suppose that the Romney campaign would like to at least win Oakland County. It's my job to frustrate that desire.

*Speaking of wasting money, there is one candidate whose ads I saw on MSNBC--Gary Johnson. His ad money is wasted in Michigan because he is not on the ballot here. Thank you, Ruth Johnson. Also, the states where those advertising dollars are better spent are still Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio, and Virginia, with the addition of Wisconsin since Wednesday.

Nate Silver and others on the VP debate

Last night, I wrote that "I should post something for tonight's VP debate, but I'm not up for it right now." I'm up for it now.

Nate Silver's first read of the debate was "In Polls, Biden Gets a Hold."

News media narratives tend to group horse-race developments into one of the three basic categories: win, lose, or draw. Sometimes, however, a political event falls into the awkward middle ground between those realms.

Thursday night’s vice-presidential debate in Danville, Ky., is a potential example of this. Instant polls conducted after the debate are suggestive of something between a tie and a modest win for Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.

A CBS News-Knowledge Networks poll of undecided voters who watched the debate found 50 percent giving the advantage to Mr. Biden, 31 percent to the Republican, Representative Paul D. Ryan, and 19 percent calling the debate a tie.

A CNN poll of debate-watchers, however, had 48 percent giving the debate to Mr. Ryan, and 44 percent to Mr. Biden.

That CNN poll was among all viewers, not just among undecided voters. For a comparable sample to the CBS Snap Poll, here is a video of CNN's focus group of undecided voters.

Erin Burnett is with a Focus Group of undecided voters in Norfolk, Virginia with their reaction to the V.P. debate.

The good news for Biden is that he won when it came to beating expectations, while Ryan underperformed what the viewers expected of him. Also, Biden won the empathy question. However, Ryan won on substance. The end result was that it was a tie, with a third saying that Biden won, a third that Ryan won, and another third declaring the debate a tie. As for who won the most important prize of the night, votes, that was a tie, too, with each candidate gaining three votes.

Erin Burnett is with Focus Group of Virginia undecided voters as they review the best and worst moments of the debate.

The best thing about this debate for Biden is that his low point was on foreign policy while Ryan's was on abortion. I suspect abortion is a bigger deal for most people.

MSNBC also had a focus group. That one gave Biden a clear victory.

What about enthusiasm among already committed partisans?

The social media sentiment during the debate also seemed to flow along these lines. The liberals in my Twitter feed seemed a bit more satisfied with Mr. Biden’s performance than the conservatives were with Mr. Ryan’s, but it wasn’t a slam dunk.

That difference in enthusiasm can be seen in this WXYZ interview with the heads of Michigan's Democratic and Republican parties. Brewer is much more enthusiastic about Biden's performance than Schostak is about Ryan's.


As for how it affected me, check out this idea from Nate.

There is a plausible hypothesis, however, that some of Mr. Romney’s recent surge in the polls reflects a growing “enthusiasm gap” between Democrats and Republicans. To the extent that Mr. Biden’s performance re-energized Democratic partisans, he may have left President Obama in a slightly better position than where he started the night.

That's how I feel. I saw this debate as a clear win for Biden, and it helped me feel less panicked than I did Tuesday morning. Nate, on the other hand, isn't convinced.

My best guess: perhaps Mr. Biden can be credited with what in baseball statistics would be termed a “hold”: something a bit shy of either a win or a save and which will probably seem perfunctory with the passage of time, but which might have done his team a bit of good.

I'll take a hold over the slide of the past week, thank you very much.

Finally, I have this to say to Eddie Munster and Willard the Rat--Malarkey and stuff!

The state of the presidential contest on 10/10/12

Last Saturday, I made the following assessement in the introduction to Overnight News Digest: Science Saturday (Change in the weather edition).

Between now and the general election, Overnight News Digest: Science Saturday will highlight the research stories from the public universities in swing states for either the presidential election or competitive contests for the U.S. Senate, plus those states holding presidential or vice-presidential debates during the week. Competitive states will be determined based on the percentage chance to win at Nate Silver's FiveThirtyEight blog at the New York Times. Those that show the two major party candidates having probabilities to win between 20% and 80% inclusive will count as swing states.

As of October 6th, the presidential swing states are Colorado, Florida, Iowa, North Carolina, and Virginia, while the states with competitive races for the U.S. Senate are Arizona, Connecticut, Indiana, Massachusetts, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, and Wisconsin.

That's changed. As of last night, the presidential swing states are now Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio, and Virginia. Nevada, New Hampshire, and Ohio have moved back into the competitive column with 70-80% likelihoods of  Obama victories, while North Carolina has moved out with an estimated 80.3% chance of a Romney win. Nate Silver's latest entry reflects the new reality.

Oct. 9: Romney Erases Obama’s Convention Bounce in Forecast

Following another day of strong polling on Tuesday, Mitt Romney advanced into the best position in the FiveThirtyEight forecast since the party conventions. His chances of winning the Electoral College are now 28.8 percent in the forecast, his highest since Aug. 29. For the first time since Aug. 28, President Obama is projected to win fewer than 300 electoral votes. And Mr. Obama’s projected margin of victory in the national popular vote — 2.0 percentage points — represents the closest the race has been since June 27.

The forecast model is not quite ready to jump on board with the notion that the race has become a literal toss-up; Mr. Romney will need to maintain his bounce for a few more days, or extend it into high-quality polls of swing states, before we can be surer about that.

But we are ready to conclude that one night in Denver undid most of the advantage Mr. Obama had appeared to gain in September.

As I concluded last night's entry, it's time to get out the vote.

Debate creates a buying opportunity for Obama's stock

Last week, I taunted Willard the Rat by advising that he should buy shares in Obama. Time for an update on how that advice turned out.

First, here's what the University of Iowa had to say before the debate about the IEM's price quotes.

Obama still favored on IEM
Will today’s debate narrow gap?
By: Tom Snee
2012.10.03

President Barack Obama remains a significant favorite on the Iowa Electronic Markets (IEM) over Mitt Romney, and political observers think that today’s first debate between the two is a good chance for Romney to give some momentum to his campaign.

Recent history has shown that debates have a mixed record of influencing candidates’ prices on the IEM.

As of 8:30 a.m. today, Obama was trading at 77.1 cents, which means traders believe he has a 77.1 percent probability of winning the popular vote in next month’s election. Romney, meanwhile, was selling for 23.1 cents. Both of those prices are in line with their recent trends, although Romney did spike to 27 cents for a time Tuesday before settling back to his current price.

The effect so far has been to narrow the gap a bit. The market is currently forecasting a 71% chance of an Obama victory with a 53% vote share. That's actually an improvement over Friday, when Obama was trading in the mid 60s. Meanwhile, Nate Silver forecasts a 78% likelihood of an Obama win with a 51% vote share.


It looks like Willard did something a smart but unscrupulous investor would do--drive down the price of the stock he wants to invest in before buying it. Nice job, Mr. Bain. Now, can you capitalize on it? Or have you bought your own stock and hope to see it rise, or at least pump-and-dump it? If Willard the Rat believes the the following forecast, which I included in Overnight News Digest: Science Saturday (Change in the weather edition) on Daily Kos, he might actually be holding his own stock.

University of Colorado, Boulder: Updated election forecasting model still points to Romney win, University of Colorado study says
October 4, 2012

An update to an election forecasting model announced by two University of Colorado professors in August continues to project that Mitt Romney will win the 2012 presidential election.

According to their updated analysis, Romney is projected to receive 330 of the total 538 Electoral College votes. President Barack Obama is expected to receive 208 votes -- down five votes from their initial prediction -- and short of the 270 needed to win.

The new forecast by political science professors Kenneth Bickers of CU-Boulder and Michael Berry of CU Denver is based on more recent economic data than their original Aug. 22 prediction. The model itself did not change.

I wonder if their projection would be less favorable to Romney when they include last Friday's jobs report? Probably, but not enough to have Obama winning. Oh, well, Willard's loss.

Willard Scissorhands bullies Big Bird

An even bigger issue coming out of Wednesday's debate than Willard the Rat's lies and flip-flops was his promise to defund PBS. CNN asks A war on Big Bird?
 

Big Bird's feathers may have been ruffled by the presidential debate. Anderson Cooper puts the issue on the RidicuList.

In addition to this being a bone thrown to the corn pone fascists in his own party who hate public broadcasting, this was also an attempt to put the moderator Jim Lehrer in his place. In context, it was another act of domination by a bully. Willard Scissorhands strikes again!

At the time, Willard the Rat may have thought this was a real winner. It wasn't. People are even more mad about it now than they were yesterday. My take on why this blew up in Romney's face was that he ran afoul of what motivates Americans to act.

America is quite clear about its screwed up priorities­. My experience has convinced me that the surest way to get Americans to act is to mess with their entertainm­ent.

By attacking Big Bird and the rest of the cast of Sesame Street, Willard the Rat has messed with Americans' entertainment. This will not end well for him.

Mitt Romney has always been at war with Eastasia

Wednesday's debate was marked by Mitt Romney exposing the GOP's distain for its own ideas, something Newt Gingrich used against him in the primaries. As a consequence, Willard the Rat reversed himself on an entire list of his previous policy positions, more than I can list here (although Think Progress, PoliticusUSA, and Daily Kos made noble attempts at cataloging his flip-flops and outright lies). The most obvious of them was his disavowal of the tax plan he's been campaigning on for the past year. DKosTV on YouTube has the signature moment, along with some of the times he mentioned the tax plan in earlier debates and speeches.

Mitt Romney calls Mitt Romney a liar: Taxes edition
 

October debate Romney vs. Republican debate Romney

Yeah, Willard, and you've always been at war with Eastasia, too. Too bad for you that the rest of us aren't engaging in doublethink.

Consumer confidence up but mostly among Democrats

Last week had good economic news in the form of higher consumer confidence, both nationally and in a key swing state. First, the national news from the University of Michigan.

http://www.ns.umich.edu/new/multimedia/videos/20809-consumer-confidence-posts-a-significant-gain-in-september
September 28, 2012

ANN ARBOR, Mich.—Consumer confidence improved substantially in September due to more favorable prospects for the national economy, according to University of Michigan economist Richard Curtin, director of the Thomson Reuters/University of Michigan Surveys of Consumers.
...
Consumers expect the economy to create more jobs in the year ahead, according to Curtin. The overall rise in confidence was aided by higher stock prices as well as rising home values.

However, the majority of consumers still anticipate very small wage gains and expect somewhat larger price increases during the year ahead, due largely to rising food prices. This means that half of all households anticipate declining living standards as their incomes fail to keep pace with inflation.

In addition to economic growth and more jobs, consumers have become more optimistic about the real estate market. I said it looks like the housing market has bottomed, and consumers seem to believe it.

That's good news for the nation as a whole. What about the news from a key swing state, Florida?

University of Florida: UF: Florida consumer confidence hits five-year high
September 25, 2012.

GAINESVILLE, Fla. — Florida’s September consumer confidence reached a post-recession high of 79 — up three points from a revised August reading of 76, according to a monthly University of Florida survey.

“The last time Florida consumer confidence hit 79 was in October 2007,” said Chris McCarty, director of UF’s Survey Research Center in the Bureau of Economic and Business Research. “At that time, confidence was on its way down as the housing crisis was getting under way. This month’s index comes at a time when the economy is still in recovery.”

The September survey showed increases in all five components that researchers use to assess the collective economic opinion of Floridians.

Even better, especially for President Obama. Rising consumer sentiment would make people more likely to vote for him and less likely to buy into the argument that they're worse off now than they were in 2008. The Florida consumer confidence index shows that people in the Sunshine State think they're better off.

Speaking of politics, what do people's political views have to do with their economic ones? Quite a bit, actually.

Romney should buy shares in Obama

Over at Kunstler's blog, right after calling Willard the Rat "the biggest empty suit I've seen in 44 years of following politics," I noted that I had "stayed away from the presidential race this past week" here. Time to change that with a piece about my favorite political market, the Iowa Electronic Market (IEM), which has been in operation since 1988 and that I've been following since 1992, 20 years ago.

Venture Beat: Polls show a bounce – but the smart money has always been on Obama
Brent Stinski
September 18, 2012 11:00 AM

Ask people to bet on a candidate, to put down real cash on who will really win – and the smart money, for some time, has been on Obama. Certainly that’s the case at so-called prediction markets, forums where people can place bets, often with real currency, on what will happen in November. As of this writing, odds from three independently run online markets present a 65-plus percent probability that Obama will win, including odds at my own startup, Media Predict.

That’s no slam-dunk. Still, Obama has a clear lead. In fact, according to the markets, he’s had that advantage since the start of his campaign. But mainstream media only seem to be waking up to this fact in light of a recent post-convention “bounce” – endorsed by, yes, those beloved, slow, traditional polls.

Well, welcome to the party. For those who will want to remain a step ahead in this campaign, we recommend looking to the markets instead. Their message is clear and strong.

Media Predict’s 64% probability of an Obama victory is virtually identical to those furnished by other forums, such as the Iowa Electronic Markets (a real-money futures market the CFTC permits for purposes of academic research) as well as offshore gambling sites like Intrade. And there’s good reason to believe what the markets say. A 16-year retroactive study found the Iowa Electronic Markets to outperform the AP and the Gallup Polls 74% of the time when predicting presidential vote share on the eve of the election. Moreover, the study found the IEM to be almost always more accurate when predicting from 100 days away or more – a point we passed some time ago.

When I included this article in the tip jar to Overnight News Digest: Science Saturday (Streambed on Mars discovered edition) on Daily Kos, the current quotes at the IEM showed Obama with an 80.6% chance of victory and 53.7% vote share, which were almost identical to the probabilaties at Nate Silver's FiveThirtyEight blog. Since then, the two measures have diverged, particularly on the likelihood of election. The IEM now lists Obama with a 77.5% chance and a 53.9% vote share to Romney's 23.0% chance and 45% vote share. In contrast, FiveThirtyEight's forecast gives Obama a better chance of victory at 85.7% but a lower share of the vote, 51.5%. However, the shared pattern of the election forecast remains the same--a steady race until after Clint Eastwood yelled at a chair, then rapid divergence the month after that.


If I were Romney, I'd buy shares in Obama.

The Right learned all the wrong lessons from 1984

Expanding on the theme of the Republican Party having become an authoritarian movement, Paul Krugman makes a comparison to a fictional totalitarian organization in When The Inner Party Believes The Prolefeed

.The “lucky ducky” trope is clearly, obviously nonsense; equally obviously, it was originally created in an effort to dupe people who didn’t know better. It was and is what Orwell called “prolefeed”, junk aimed at the ignorant masses (ignorant by design), the people who are ready to believe at a moment’s notice that we’ve always been at war with Eastasia.

In Orwell’s vision, however, the Party – and especially the Inner Party – wasn’t supposed to consume this same tripe. It was supposed to understand the true Party agenda and vision (a boot stomping on a human face forever).

So it actually is a revelation to see Romney and friends obviously swallowing the prolefeed whole. The news here isn’t really about their lack of empathy; it’s about their raw ignorance.

While I agree with Krugman about the aptness of the comparison, I think he's wrong about the order. I think this is what a faction of the "Inner Party" wanted to believe all along, and now that they've taken over, they're now passing it out as prolefeed. I should know; I was a Republican for 22 years ending in 2000. I remember seeing this meme from the inside even back then.

Above based on a comment I left on Michigan Liberal.

Matt Taibbi and Mike Lofgren are on the same page about the global rich

Both authors see the main conflict of the near future as one between a global plutocracy and the rest of us. This is remarkable because they are from opposite ends of the political spectrum. First, Matt Taibbi, who concluded Greed and Debt: The True Story of Mitt Romney and Bain Capital with this prediction.

Romney, on the other hand, is a perfect representative of one side of the ominous cultural divide that will define the next generation, not just here in America but all over the world. Forget about the Southern strategy, blue versus red, swing states and swing voters – all of those political clichés are quaint relics of a less threatening era that is now part of our past, or soon will be. The next conflict defining us all is much more unnerving.

That conflict will be between people who live somewhere, and people who live nowhere. It will be between people who consider themselves citizens of actual countries, to which they have patriotic allegiance, and people to whom nations are meaningless, who live in a stateless global archipelago of privilege – a collection of private schools, tax havens and gated residential communities with little or no connection to the outside world.

Thanks to author Robert Frank, I have a name for this archipelago--Richistan. Bloomfield Hills is a island in the archipelago. So is Park City, Utah, and parts of the west side of Los Angeles. I'm familiar with all of them, but those are stories for another time.

Back to Taibbi.

Mitt Romney isn't blue or red. He's an archipelago man. That's a big reason that voters have been slow to warm up to him. From LBJ to Bill Clinton to George W. Bush to Sarah Palin, Americans like their politicians to sound like they're from somewhere, to be human symbols of our love affair with small towns, the girl next door, the little pink houses of Mellencamp myth. Most of those mythical American towns grew up around factories – think chocolate bars from Hershey, baseball bats from Louisville, cereals from Battle Creek. Deep down, what scares voters in both parties the most is the thought that these unique and vital places are vanishing or eroding – overrun by immigrants or the forces of globalism or both, with giant Walmarts descending like spaceships to replace the corner grocer, the family barber and the local hardware store, and 1,000 cable channels replacing the school dance and the gossip at the local diner.

Obama ran on "change" in 2008, but Mitt Romney represents a far more real and seismic shift in the American landscape. Romney is the frontman and apostle of an economic revolution, in which transactions are manufactured instead of products, wealth is generated without accompanying prosperity, and Cayman Islands partnerships are lovingly erected and nurtured while American communities fall apart. The entire purpose of the business model that Romney helped pioneer is to move money into the archipelago from the places outside it, using massive amounts of taxpayer-subsidized debt to enrich a handful of billionaires. It's a vision of society that's crazy, vicious and almost unbelievably selfish, yet it's running for president, and it has a chance of winning. Perhaps that change is coming whether we like it or not. Perhaps Mitt Romney is the best man to manage the transition. But it seems a little early to vote for that kind of wholesale surrender.

That Taibbi would write this should come as no surprise; the man has been muckraking the rich and powerful for years from a decidedly left-leaning perspective.*

What is a surprise is that Mike Lofgren, a former Republican congressional staffer with impeccable conservative credentials, says very much the same thing and got it published in The American Conservative as The Revolt of the Rich. He opens his piece with this retrospective.

At the end of the Cold War many writers predicted the decline of the traditional nation-state. Some looked at the demise of the Soviet Union and foresaw the territorial state breaking up into statelets of different ethnic, religious, or economic compositions. This happened in the Balkans, the former Czechoslovakia, and Sudan. Others predicted a weakening of the state due to the rise of Fourth Generation warfare and the inability of national armies to adapt to it. The quagmires of Iraq and Afghanistan lend credence to that theory. There have been numerous books about globalization and how it would eliminate borders. But I am unaware of a well-developed theory from that time about how the super-rich and the corporations they run would secede from the nation state.

I do not mean secession by physical withdrawal from the territory of the state, although that happens from time to time—for example, Erik Prince, who was born into a fortune, is related to the even bigger Amway fortune, and made yet another fortune as CEO of the mercenary-for-hire firm Blackwater, moved his company (renamed Xe) to the United Arab Emirates in 2011. What I mean by secession is a withdrawal into enclaves, an internal immigration, whereby the rich disconnect themselves from the civic life of the nation and from any concern about its well being except as a place to extract loot.

There may not have been well-developed theories in the social sciences to that effect in 1993, but science fiction was already on the case. Snow Crash, published in 1992, described just such a society in the early 21st Century. From the Wikipedia entry.

The story begins and ends in Los Angeles, which is no longer part of what is left of the United States. The time is not clearly specified but internal references are consistent with a date in the early 21st century. In this hypothetical reality, the federal government of the United States has ceded most of its power to private organizations and entrepreneurs. Franchising, individual sovereignty and private vehicles reign (along with drug trafficking, violent crime, and traffic congestion). Mercenary armies compete for national defense contracts while private security guards preserve the peace in gated, sovereign housing developments. Highway companies compete to attract drivers to their roads rather than the competitors', and all mail delivery is by hired courier. The remnants of government maintain authority only in isolated compounds where they transact tedious make-work that is, by and large, irrelevant to the dynamic society around them.

Much of the territory ceded by the government has been carved up into sovereign enclaves, each run by its own big business franchise (such as "Mr. Lee's Greater Hong Kong") or the various residential burbclaves (suburban enclaves). This arrangement resembles anarcho-capitalism, a theme Stephenson carries over to his next novel The Diamond Age.

Welcome to the cyberpunk future.

Back to Lofgren, who should have been reading science fiction for an idea of the post-Cold-War future.

Our plutocracy now lives like the British in colonial India: in the place and ruling it, but not of it. If one can afford private security, public safety is of no concern; if one owns a Gulfstream jet, crumbling bridges cause less apprehension—and viable public transportation doesn’t even show up on the radar screen. With private doctors on call and a chartered plane to get to the Mayo Clinic, why worry about Medicare?

Being in the country but not of it is what gives the contemporary American super-rich their quality of being abstracted and clueless. Perhaps that explains why Mitt Romney’s regular-guy anecdotes always seem a bit strained.

Ah, yes, Mitt Romney. His presence seems to be the catalyst for these analyses, as he embodies the global rich.

Lofgren sounds a more dire warning than Taibbi, who sees this as the conflict of the future. Lofgren thinks that the future is now.

But in globalized postmodern America, what if this whole vision about where order, stability, and a tolerable framework for governance come from, and who threatens those values, is inverted? What if Christopher Lasch came closer to the truth in The Revolt of the Elites, wherein he wrote, “In our time, the chief threat seems to come from those at the top of the social hierarchy, not the masses”? Lasch held that the elites—by which he meant not just the super-wealthy but also their managerial coat holders and professional apologists—were undermining the country’s promise as a constitutional republic with their prehensile greed, their asocial cultural values, and their absence of civic responsibility.

Lasch wrote that in 1995. Now, almost two decades later, the super-rich have achieved escape velocity from the gravitational pull of the very society they rule over. They have seceded from America.

Welcome to Richistan.


*Taibbi has more to say about Romney and his wealth. In particular, he has a very succinct take-down of what Bain Capital did to KB Toys.  I plan on excerpting that in a future entry.