About Frank Moraes

Frank Moraes is a freelance writer and editor online and in print. He is educated as a scientist with a PhD in Atmospheric Physics. He has worked in climate science, remote sensing, throughout the computer industry, and as a college physics instructor. Find out more at About Frank Moraes.

Is Donald Trump’s Stock Falling?

Nate Silver - Trump's Falling StockThe second presidential debate on Sunday night was a strange one, with Donald Trump appearing to be on the brink of a meltdown in the first 20 to 30 minutes and then steadying himself the rest of the way. But here’s the bottom line: Based on post-debate polls, Hillary Clinton probably ended the night in a better place than she started it. And almost without question, she ended the weekend — counting the debate, the revelation on Friday of a 2005 tape in which Trump was recorded appearing to condone unwanted sexual contact against women, and the Republican reaction to the tape — in an improved position.

At times during the past two weeks, but particularly on Saturday afternoon as prominent Republicans were denouncing or unendorsing Trump one after another, it has seemed like Trump’s campaign is experiencing the political equivalent of a stock market crash. By that I mean: there’s some bad news that triggers the crash, and there’s also an element of panic and herd behavior, and it becomes hard to tell exactly which is which. At some point, the market usually finds its footing, as the stock has some fundamental value higher than zero. But it can be a long way down before it does…

In the end, your assessment of Trump’s chances comes down to the same consideration as with a falling stock: How sound are the fundamentals? Is Trump the equivalent of a beleaguered blue-chip that still has lots of hard assets? In Trump’s case, the most valuable asset is probably possession of the Republican Party ballot line, which theoretically ought to be worth something given the circumstances of the race. Or was the whole business a sort of confidence trick, which was bound to implode once people began to lose faith in it?

—Nate Silver
The Second Debate Probably Didn’t Help Trump, And He Needed Help

Elizabeth Channels Bill Pullman in Independence Day

Independence DayIn less than an hour the polls will open. Americans nationwide will join together with Americans around the world. And you will be launching the largest voting effort in the history of Americankind. We can’t be consumed by our petty differences anymore. We will be united in our common interest. Perhaps it is fate that today is the day to elect Hillary Clinton. And that once again you will be fighting the forces of fascism. Fighting tyranny, oppression, and persecution. Fighting annihilation. We are fighting for our right to live. As gay, straight, black, Asian, white, woman, transgender, immigrant or native born. For today is the day that America declared in nearly one voice “We will not go quietly into the night. We will not vanish without a fight. We are going to live on. We are going to survive. And we are going to defeat the Orange Menace!

—Elizabeth Rogers
Parody from Independence Day

Ethics, Nightmares, and Killing a Fly

FlyI had a nightmare last week — perhaps the worst that I have ever had. Like all my dreams, exactly why things were happening was muddled. But I was doing target shooting — at live human beings. There were others there watching me. They might have been coercing me, but regardless, they were fine with what I was doing. I shot a man in the right thigh and a woman in the abdomen. It was not the shooting that made the dream so horrible. It was watching the pain the two people suffered.

Everyone around me was completely disconnected from the outcome of what I had just done. Finally, I said, “Are you going to help these people?!” And they all acted as though they had been woken from a dream and started seeing to my victims. I then woke, glad to know that this bit of human cruelty was just in my mind. It was only a couple of days later that the genesis of the dream became clear to me. It all had to do with a moth that I had killed.

Killing a Fly

Usually, it isn’t moths. The truth is that I commonly kill flies. I don’t go after them, but if they get caught in my room, they drive me a little crazy. I find it almost impossible to work when a fly is buzzing around me. So I kill the fly. I’m not proud of this. I’m placing my very temporary productivity above the life of another creature. And it’s a creature that I find fascinating. In my hunting of them, I marvel at the beauty of their flight paths.

But here’s the thing: the majority of the time, I cannot kill the fly on a first blow. I have blinds, and it is generally the case that the fly will only land on the window and I will have to swat through the blind. I will then, as quickly as possible, find the fly and finish the job. As anyone who has read me for any length of time knows: I do not find death so horrible. But pain is. So I move furniture or anything else to limit the fly’s pain. (And yes: it’s life.)

Wounding a Moth

But when I was down at my sister’s a few weeks ago, I badly wounded a moth. But it crawled away below a heavy piece of furniture. I couldn’t finish the job. Had it been my house, things would have been different. But my sister dragged me away. She was, I suppose like normal people, indifferent to the plight of this poor moth. But it has haunted me.

I’ll admit: I likely empathize too much with these creatures. But I know that my life really is no more important than theirs. My concern about pain may be laudable (or laughable). But I wish I were better. I wish I were a Jain monk, not willing to knowingly hurt a fly. But I’m too selfish. And moths and flies are hardly the limit to my selfishness. I love chickens but have no problem eating them.

It’s hard to live an ethical life. I deserved that nightmare.

Live Blog: Second Presidential Debate 2016

Second Presidential Debate 2016Welcome to the second presidential debate! Unlike many, I don’t expect this debate to be all that good. But part of it is just that I am a partisan. I want Clinton to do well. But even more than that, I constantly worry that if Trump does okay, the media will turn it into “great” and “a game changer.” I take nothing for granted in this election. Trump could still be our next president.

I do have an irrational fear, though. It goes like this: the Republican Party forces Trump out, runs Paul Ryan, and given there has been little attention paid to him recently, he wins. This will not happen, however. First, it would be hard for the Republican Party to organize. If they did, there are still a number of states where the electoral votes would have to go to Trump regardless. So it would be a virtual impossibility that the Trump substitute would win. It would all end in the courts. But if you want to be frightened, you can meditate on the Republicans’ willingness to steal an election via the courts.

How the Second Presidential Debate Will Go

My guess is that Trump is going to try to take the high road in this debate. He’s done his apology. And now he’s going to move on. The whole thing was 11 years ago. He was but a child — barely 59 years old! Regardless, it is the past and he is focused on the future. And a few dozen other platitudes that I could send your way. And to be honest, I think that that Clinton would be wise to let him. The damage has been done. Let’s move on to the next Trump outrage. That’s not to say she should let it go completely. But I don’t think it is a good idea to overplay this.

And it isn’t like Clinton has nothing to fear. Wikileaks just posted a bunch of Clinton email messages that provide information about some of the things she said at talks given to big banks on Wall Street. It doesn’t look that damning. But Clinton hasn’t been great in addressing these kind of vague allegations. What I find amazing is that anyone could look at her and Trump together and think, “Well obviously we can trust Trump!”

There are two things that make me confident about the debate. First is that Hillary Clinton is amazingly good, despite her muddled answers on email and speeches. And she has a great team. And I know that they’ve come at this debate from all angles. So if humble Trump shows up, Clinton will know what to do. If combative Trump shows up, ditto. And so on.

Second, Trump really is like a toddler. The debate is 90 minutes long. He has a hard time sitting still that long. And he really doesn’t have more than 5 minutes of material that isn’t about how great he is. So even if he does okay for the first 30 minutes, by 60 minutes, he will be cranky, and by 85 minutes, he will be Alec Baldwin:

And Away We Go!

That’s all I have to say for now. It’s hard living through this election. I think it is very important. And it doesn’t matter whether the eventual president is Trump or some other Republican, it will be a catastrophe. So I take this all quite seriously, which is why I have to drink to get through them. Although I plan not to drink as much as I did last time.

Now on with the second presidential debate!

Odd Words: Brannigan

Zapp BranniganPage 32 of The New York Times Everyday Reader’s Dictionary of Misunderstood, Misused, and Mispronounced Words: Revised Edition didn’t have much to work with. But at least we had “brannigan.”

Beyond Brannigan

There were a couple of words today that reminded me of Donald Trump. One is today’s word itself. But there are other things like bravado and bray. I especially think of “bray” when I watch Trump. Bravado is obvious.

There were a couple of words that I didn’t know. The first was “bretelle.” That is “an ornamental shoulder strap.” No surprise that I wouldn’t know a word that had to do with fashion.

The second word was “brisance.” That is more jargon than word: “the shattering power of high explosive.” Now that I think of it — another Trump word!

But on to the chosen word:

Bran·ni·gan  noun  \bra’-ni-gən\

1. a squabble or brawl; a spree.

Date: late 19th century.

Origin: unknown, but apparently based on the last name.

Example: There might be a huge brannigan at tonight’s debate —Frank Moraes (Because, really, how to research a word like this?)

Republican Establishment Will Always Love Trump

Donald Trump - Hero of Republican EstablishmentYesterday, all hell broke loose in the political world, Trump Recorded Having Extremely Lewd Conversation About Women in 2005. As with every Trump outrage, there was much speculation about maybe this being the time he’s gone too far. Maybe this time the Republican establishment would repudiate him. And then: nothing.

But this one was clearly worse than usual. Trump spoke in some detail about trying to bed a married woman. Given that he admits to failure, it is clearly true. Then he speaks about his celebrity allowing him to get away with groping women. He says, “Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything.” Whether or not that’s true seems less clear to me. But admitting to sexual assault to impress the boys is still vile. And all it seems to have cost Trump in terms of endorsements is two little known politicians from Utah.

Republican Establishment Is Outraged!

Otherwise, what we got was a lot of outrage from the Republican establishment. Paul Ryan released a statement, “I am sickened by what I heard today. Women are to be championed and revered, not objectified. I hope Mr Trump treats this situation with the seriousness it deserves and works to demonstrate to the country that he has greater respect for women than this clip suggests.” Mitch McConnell released a similar statement, “These comments are repugnant, and unacceptable in any circumstance.” He wants Trump to “apologize directly to women and girls everywhere.”

Why such faux outrage? I think Brian Beutler summed it up nicely in this tweet:

That is: bragging about sexual assault is bad, but it’s nothing when you consider that Trump would cut taxes on the rich.

But really: the recording is, in an important sense, meaningless. We’ve had well over a year of Donald Trump running for president. We all know what kind of man he is. But more to the point: his supporters know what kind of man he is. And they don’t care. They will never care. There is roughly half the Republican base (basket of deplorables) that will vote for Trump no matter what. Even more concerning is that the Republican establishment is in agreement that tax cuts for the rich and benefit cuts for the poor more than offset anything Trump could ever do. If Trump turned out to be a serial killer, they would still support him.

Central Park Five

Meanwhile, just a day before, we learned, Donald Trump Still Thinks The Central Park Five Are Guilty. These are men who were exonerated by DNA evidence. Yet Trump just somehow knows. And he made a telling (and ironic) comment, “And the woman, so badly injured, will never be the same.” I’ve always found this kind of statement odd: there is a victim so we must punish someone regardless of their guilt! But that’s what “law and order” is all about: it’s an authoritarian approach to running a country — control through terrorism directed at the weakest members of society.

What I think is most interesting about this recording’s release is how it changes the dynamics of Sunday night’s debate (that I will be live blogging). Until the recording came out, Trump indicated that he was going to be calm and focused on policy. But last night, he released the following video statement that seems to indicate there is a new plan:

Basically: I’m sorry; but Bill Clinton is worse; and Hillary protected him!

What We Have Learned

So what have we learned? Donald Trump is a vile man? Nope: already knew that. The Republican establishment would feed all their mothers to hyenas in exchange for a reduction in the top marginal tax rate? Nope: already knew that too. That there is no shame on the right? Sorry. The whole thing is just more of the same. When exactly the three-fours of the country who aren’t deplorables will learn this, I cannot say.

Stuff for a Drama in All This, and Not a Bad Drama Either

Luigi PirandelloHe [the boy] disappears soon, you know. And the baby too. She is the first to vanish from the scene. The drama consists finally in this: when that mother re-enters my house, her family born outside of it, and shall we say superimposed on the original, ends with the death of the little girl, the tragedy of the boy, and the flight of the elder daughter. It cannot go on, because it is foreign to its surroundings. So after much torment, we three remain: I, the mother, that son. Then, owing to the disappearance of that extraneous family, we too find ourselves strange to one another. We find we are living in an atmosphere of mortal desolation which is the revenge, as he [indicating the son] scornfully said of the Demon of Experiment, that unfortunately hides in me. Thus, sir, you see when faith is lacking, it becomes impossible to create certain states of happiness, for we lack the necessary humility. Vaingloriously, we try to substitute ourselves for this faith, creating thus for the rest of the world a reality which we believe after their fashion, while, actually, it doesn’t exist. For each one of us has his own reality to be respected before God, even when it is harmful to one’s very self.

—Father in Six Characters in Search of an Author
by Luigi Pirandello (Translated by Edward Storer)

The “Hillary Would Be Losing…” Myth

Hillary Would Be LosingI’ve been hearing for months that the Republicans would win this presidential election if only they hadn’t nominated Donald Trump. I’m not completely against this line of reasoning. I had hoped from last summer that that GOP base really had no ideological bearings and so would nominate him because I thought he would be a weak candidate. But I think this idea that “Hillary would be losing to any other candidate” is just a myth. I wrote about this back in May, John Kasich Would Not Beat Hillary Clinton. Remember: Kasich is about the most “reasonable” candidate the Republicans have.

One thing that bugs me about the whole “Hillary would be losing” game is that it is just that: a game. Although I think it is based on bad reporting over decades, Hillary Clinton has very low approval numbers. So what does it even say that if the Republicans had nominated someone more popular than she that they would win this election? It’s almost a tautology: Hillary would be losing if Hillary were losing. I think what we are really supposed to take away from this is that the country is really in a Republican mood. It’s a way for conservatives and (even more) moderates to whistle past the left turn the country is taking.

The Trump Tax

What most brought this all back up for me was Vox‘s Trump Tax. This is a very silly exercise where they look at six political science models, take a weighted average, and then decide where the race should be right now. Based upon this, they think it should be Generic Republican +1.8 percentage points. Also note: the range of the models is 8 percentage points (Generic Democrat +4.0 to Generic Republican +12.0).

Will Donald Trump Win?Now, being as I’m a “fundamentals guy,” you might think I would like this approach. I do, after all, have my very own election model. Now my model is very simple. But there’s a reason for that. I’ve always thought that election models were mostly nonsense. The only thing you can really depend upon is the economic trend. The rest, I believe, is noise. It’s based upon the fact that these models are really nothing but correlations. And they are based on a very small sample size — in general, no one looks at elections before Eisenhower.

Professional “Hillary Would Be Losing”

If you really want to play the “Hillary would be losing” game, you can take it to the professional level. You can say, “If Trump weren’t so bad a candidate, the press would have spent more time picking over the Republican candidate instead of just shrugging and saying, ‘You know Trump!'” Or you can go back further and say, “If Democrats didn’t see the mess that was the Republican primary, they might have nominated someone other than Hillary.” You can play the “Hillary would be losing” game to the end of time. It means nothing.

Another thing that bugs me about all of this is exactly what a Generic Republican is. The models are based on elections when Republicans had better candidates. If it wasn’t Trump, it was going to be Ted Cruz — a man so vile even Republicans hate him. Or what about the much more likable Marco Rubio? I always thought that Hillary would have eaten him for lunch. So I’m not sure what Generic Republican tells us anymore. What my model tells us is that this election should give the Democrats a slight advantage.

So if conservatives and moderates want to make themselves feel better by playing the “Hillary would be losing” game, fine. But all it really says is that in a different universe, things would be different. And I think we can all agree on that.

Odd Words: Boustrophedon

BoustrophedonI can’t complain about Page 31 of The New York Times Everyday Reader’s Dictionary of Misunderstood, Misused, and Mispronounced Words: Revised Edition. How can you fault a page that gives you a word as great as “boustrophedon.”

This Article Will Not Use Boustrophedon

Truthfully, I really wanted to do a word I know really, really well: bourgeois. But maybe not, because these Odd Words articles are really more about talking about the words that I don’t use. So let me talk about “bourgeois.”

I remember knowing this word when I was very young — five years or less? It was a fun word because it sounded so weird. My sister and I would repeat, “That’s so bourgeois!” We must have heard that phrase somewhere. To us it meant more or less tasteless. I was shocked in my teens to learn the word in its proper context as a class construct.

Of course, I have to admit, that I still do have something of an attitude about middle class tastes. That doesn’t mean that I don’t have an attitude about proletariat tastes too. Much of my artistic thinking is involved with the creation of art that is both fun but challenging. The essence of bourgeois taste is that it is comfortable; it tells people that the way things are is just fine. I don’t think that.

I’m So Bourgeois!

The problem is: that is such a bourgeois way of thinking. Sure, it isn’t the standard bourgeois thinking. But it is clearly the thinking of a member of that class. And I know that if I ever find an audience for my work, it will be the bourgeoisie. Someone quite like me will say, “That’s so bourgeois!” It’s a good thing I love contradiction!

Okay, on to a truly wondrous word: boustrophedon:

Bou·stro·phe·don  noun  \bü-strə-‘fē-dän\

1. writing in which alternate lines read in opposite directions.

Date: early 17th century.

Origin: from Greek, βόδι, which means “ox,” and στροφος, which means “turn.” So: the ox turns — as in plowing a field.

Example: The inscription is believed to be older than the inscription he found in the Maruthom forest area of Kasaragod, which, he said, was boustrophedon style, and the scripts found at Edakkal in Wayanad.The Hindu

Why Conservative Christians Support Trump

Jesus Weeping - Conservative ChristiansI was really struck by a line in David Cay Johnston’s excellent The Making of Donald Trump, “Trump says he does not see any reason to seek divine forgiveness because he has done nothing wrong in his entire life, an oft-made observation so at odds with the most basic teachings of Jesus that I am at a loss to explain any religious leader embracing him.”

I understand: one of the most basic tenets of Christianity is Original Sin. So Trump calling himself a Christian should be offensive to any Christian who takes their religion seriously. But add to that a man like Trump who so clearly has sinned again God, and it makes you want to bang you head against a wall. Still, I think I can explain: religion is politics.

Earlier today, I was looking at the FiveThirtyEight polls-plus forecast for the 2016 presidential election. Trump has a 99.3 percent chance of winning Utah. I understand: Utah is a red state and you may think it is no big deal. But back in March, there was a whole lot of reporting like Kira Lerner’s Mormons Detest Donald Trump. It wasn’t alone in reporting this idea:

Mormons also have a deep memory of religious persecution, and Trump’s Islamophobia, bigotry, and rejection of Muslims is “certainly something Mormons find distasteful,” [Matt] Bowman told ThinkProgress.

Professor Bowman also said, “Trump, both in his private life and his public persona — his crassness, his affairs — all of that kind of thing offends Mormon sensibilities.”

Mormon’s Love Trump!

Real Clear Politics, however, has Trump leading Clinton by 14.7 percentage points.

I used to use the term “cultural Christian” as a pejorative. But I now tend to think that all religious (and areligious and anti-religious) belief is merely tribal signaling.

Let’s contrast Trump to Clinton for a moment. She may be something of a hawk, but she certainly isn’t a demagogue who will persecute religious minorities. She certainly seems to have lived a socially conservative life. And despite what most people seem to think, Clinton is actually quite religious — a lifetime member of the United Methodist Church.

But the Mormons of Utah aren’t swayed by this, just as conservative Christians elsewhere aren’t. And I think they are right not to be so. Because their religion isn’t about Kolob or magic underpants or any of the other silly things that Mormons are rightfully known for. As much as I may look up into the night sky a marvel at existence, that just isn’t what religion is for the vast majority of people. For them, religion is social. And that means that it is political.

Religion Is Politics

So when a Catholic takes Communion, they don’t actually believe that the little wafer literally turns into the the body of Jesus — even if they tell you that they do. They are just making a public statement, “This is who I am in the society of which I am part.” And this is why American protestants went from not caring about abortion in 1970 to caring about little else in 1980.

This is a fact that we liberals — especially of my generation — miss when it comes to religion. We think of Jesus as the Prince of Peace and have a very hippy conception of the man. But that’s just one Jesus. It’s one I like: guy who didn’t care about hygiene, hung out with the dregs of society, and stood for the poor. But for conservative Christians, Jesus is more like Rambo, coming back to kick some ass.

Conservative Christians Should Love Trump

So we can’t claim that our own Jesus (Especially people like me who aren’t believers anyway!) is right and that others’ are wrong. None of it matters. I used to use the term “cultural Christian” as a pejorative. But I now tend to think that all religious (and areligious and anti-religious) belief is merely tribal signaling.

Donald Trump will cut taxes on the rich. Donald Trump will make it harder to get an abortion. Donald Trump will deregulate. These are the reasons that Mormons and other conservative Christians will vote for him. Religion is politics. And it always was. Jesus said, “Blessed are the gentle, for they shall inherit the earth.” I believe modern conservative Christians are working the opposite side, “Blessed are the powerful, for they shall inherit the earth.” I think they are wrong. In fact, I think they are evil. But I think they are quite right to support Donald Trump.

Trump Is Running for Dictator Not President

The Making of Donald Trump - DictatorMany of the things Trump says he would do if elected are not within the limited powers we grant presidents. Presidents cannot unilaterally spend taxpayer money, cannot impose tariffs on foreign goods, and cannot dictate to corporations where they will invest. They also cannot expect soldiers to follow illegal orders, as Trump has said he would demand, from the use of torture — prohibited by our Constitution and the treaties that are the law of the land — to the killing of innocent civilians, notably the children of terrorists he describes as Islamic (terrorists whom I consider Muslim apostates who describe themselves in their own publications as apocalyptic believers expecting the word to end soon).

Businessmen can, as Trump often does, dismiss people and move on. Presidents do not enjoy that luxury. They must contend with ever-present forces that are not subject to their control. A president cannot dismiss a troublemaking foreign head of state, cannot order Congress to pass laws, and cannot disobey the rulings of judges — not if we are to be a free people, living subject to the rule of law that protects our individual liberties. Yet Trump makes clear that he would do all these things. His vision is, in many ways, not that of a president but of a dictator, as many others have observed in both political parties and beyond America’s borders.

—David Cay Johnston
The Making of Donald Trump

Odd Words: Borborygmus

BorborygmusI thought I might not find anything I didn’t know on Page 30 of The New York Times Everyday Reader’s Dictionary of Misunderstood, Misused, and Mispronounced Words: Revised Edition. But there was a medical word that is actually useful: borborygmus.

Beyond Borborygmus

Again with the repetition: botulin, botulinus, and botulism. To make matters worse, the definition of the first is “the toxin produced by botulinus, the cause of botulism.” So the first word defined the two that followed it. I want to pull my hair out.

There was also “boondoggle” and “boondocks.” These are wonderfully fun sounding words. Plus, it’s an excuse to listen to Billy Joe Royal doing Joe South’s “Down in the Boondocks.” South is best known for his song “Games People Play.” He also wrote “(I Never Promised You a) Rose Garden.” Yes, he was one of the greats.

Okay, enough about Joe South. Here’s borborygmus:

Bor·bo·ryg·mus  noun  \bȯr-bə-‘rig-məs\

1. the technical word for rumbling or gurgling in the stomach, a natural sound.

Date: early 18th century.

Origin: Latin, from the Greek γουργουρητό, meaning “rumbling.”

Example: Wind is like the human breath, rain like secretions, and thunder like borborygmusCh’ung Wang