Tuesday, November 2, 2010

Tosser

Barring things that won't be barred, I'll be up live blogging the mid-terms. Since this is truly boring I've availed myself of the following shortcuts:
  1. No luv, guv: I can't even spell g-u-b-e-r-n-a-t-o-r-i-a-l and am definitely not interested.
  2. No House Call: Since the House of Representatives is falling by a clear margin, there's little interest in anticipating that. I know no better than to go with the RCP consensus of 224 seats.
  3. Upper tossers toss-ups only: All seven of the RCP Senate toss-ups have Democratic incumbents. I'll call them as follows:

a. CA Boxer/Fiorini: D
b. CO Bennet/Buck: R
c. IL Gianoulias/Kirk: R
d. NV Angle/Reid: R
e. PA Sestak/Toomey: R
f. WA Murray/Rossi: R
g. WV Manchkin/Raese: D

Which, if you assume (as I do) that both parties win the seats that are at least leaning in their columns splits the caucuses 50/50. Connecticut and Nebraska will (initially at least) stay on board, making Joe Biden descend to keep the gavels blue. I have the toss-ups breaking as I do because I think that the GOP will have a turnout advantage today, which'll push their candidates outside their respective margins of error.

This is the perfect result for the Republicans, who are rewarded for being the better (more consistent, more disciplined, sharper communicators, more populist, better adapted) party over the last two years. They score the following:
  1. The power to command show trials in Congress.
  2. In the Senate Democrats, a partner to blame for obstruction (which will be handy in 2012 when little has happened.)
  3. A cornhusker option - to be used when they get momentum in pushing their agenda through the lower house. They trigger the option by enticing a Democratic with offers of shared goodwill if s/he cooperates in the Senate. This will require eight months (at least) to realise.
Some races to watch:
  1. Angle/Reid is the most sensational (and heartbreaking, on my count) race...
  2. ... followed by Boxer/Fiorini (but without the tears.)
  3. It'll still be interesting to see with what margin O'Donnell is roasted at the stake.
  4. Rasmussen/Shrum. After the latter's shrill recent remarks, I'd be keen to see whether Democracy Corpse is more or less (I'm betting less) accurate in calling the result than Rasmussen.
For those who care, this is my first misadventure as an RSS user. Time is EDT.

[16h42]
I see that Karl Rove differs with me by one seat (Washington, which he has in the blue column.) To my credit I never liked (or knew) him. A day-old post by Dick Morris paints it red.

By the way, Sage is a handy RSS aggregator, loaded as a Mozilla plugin (for Netscape and Firefox.)

[18h34]
ABC publishes a stunning exit poll showing high levels of voter dissatisfaction. 73% dissatisfied with the way that the federal government is working; two in three believe the stimulus hasn't helped; 62% believe the country is headed in the wrong track, etc. So now we no that the angry people have come to play. The next thing to find is turnout data, when we can see if they're large numbers of angryfolk. That's what my 50/50 hinges on.

[22h18]
I wake from a peaceful sleep. It's hard to read results when you're yawning. None of the tossups have declared, but with partial results it looks as if I'm coming unstuck in Illionois.

[22h19]
Seven minutes ago, Dick Morris left a podcast. "PA and Il continue to trend in our direction, though we trail in each." Then he talks about the the shrinking Republican minority in each, and concludes "who knows what's gonna happen there, but we're looking alright." MSNBC exit polling describes an older more conservative electorate.

NBC is calling the House 237 to 198.

[22h22]
Morris is on the verge of conceding Pennsylvania. This is weird as RCP has it 50/50 with 80% of the votes in. That sounds like a Republican advantage, as they dominate the late-reporting countryside.

[22h56]
The world awaits Jon Boehner's victory speech. Morris has retracted his concession, and now agrees with me about the outcome in PA and IL. All the polls have closed now. The inauguration of Jerry Brown (at last, and again) looms.

[23h06]
Russ Feingold passes away quietly.

[23:29]
This is officially bigger than '94.

[23h45]
Heartache. Boehner the crybaby cracks up during his victory speech. At one point in the jerk-and-sniff his wife responds with laughter. Barbara Boxer wins in California. This means that the Democrats have won both the Senate toss-ups I said they would. All they need do now is to lose the remainder.

[23h46]
In Pennsylvania Toomey comes through the hoop.

[0h05 - the next day]
Pumpkin time, and the Senate Democrats get to 50. In a devastating blow to Republicans, Dick Morris goes to bed.

[0h20]
As predicted Senator Obama's vacated seat goes to a Republican.

[0h37]
Harry Reid defies fate (and me) retaining his position at the Senate's helm. The fat laddie has sung. In a few hours we return for final tally.

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Next week

My opinions have been outsourced (but not to China). This from STRATFOR

We are a week away from the 2010 U.S. midterm elections. The outcome is already locked in. Whether the Republicans take the House or the Senate is almost immaterial. It is almost certain that the dynamics of American domestic politics will change. The Democrats will lose their ability to impose cloture in the Senate and thereby shut off debate. Whether they lose the House or not, the Democrats will lose the ability to pass legislation at the will of the House Democratic leadership. The large majority held by the Democrats will be gone, and party discipline will not be strong enough (it never is) to prevent some defections.

Should the Republicans win an overwhelming victory in both houses next week, they will still not have the votes to override presidential vetoes. Therefore they will not be able to legislate unilaterally, and if any legislation is to be passed it will have to be the result of negotiations between the president and the Republican Congressional leadership. Thus, whether the Democrats do better than expected or the Republicans win a massive victory, the practical result will be the same.

I'm freeboot, and I support this message.

Friday, August 6, 2010

We sue history

Following the successful repeal of Proposition 8, the confirmation of the fourth woman on the SCOTUS, and other stuff I can't recall, we (i.e. me) here at truecents are considering cashing in on the bouyance of the US courts by suing history. You heard right. We're taking Time (not the magazine, but the fourth dimension itself) to court for violating our sacred truecents IP by unfolding as predicted. In our Inauguration Special we warned that:
Unraveling: Obama's juggernaut-of-rivals will give way to a more focussed, coherent, administration. The peripheral elements (like Paul Volker) will give way to the core, so that within two years the administration will look a lot more trim. If this is well managed (gently picking off the elements one-by-one), it will herald an unremarkable transition from a campaign of transformative insurgence to a conservative administration. If it's poorly managed it could spark divisive revenge from the outgunned rivals. Either way, the implementors of Clinton's triangulation will reintroduce centreism as the animating theme of the adminstration. This time, the chastening effect of the economic fallout will double the conservatising impulse.

Greg Craig was damply squiby, but with Christina Romer's resignation the portents are clearer. This bit of deepthroatery from Hotline
"She doesn't feel that she has a direct line to the president. She would be giving different advice than Larry Summers [director of the National Economic Council], who does have a direct line to the president."
And you thought Bill was dead...

Friday, May 7, 2010

Florida comes to Whitehall

Dear readers, you've been let down. Apologies to the thousands of surfers fruitlessly coming here for first sight of Gordon Brown's demise. I'd recommend the Guardian liveblog instead.

This morning the Ghosts of Gerhard Schroeder and Al Gore jet into the UK to buddy-up to the (outgoing?) prime minister.

Brown's strategy now is to convince the Liberal Democrats that their best shot ever is to work together on a tight package of reforms (electoral, immigration and Trident) over a two year period. As time marches on Brown's fortunes improve.

In contrast, a delay - even a two-year one - may cost Cameron his party leadership. This was his election to lose, and he may well have done this. So his strategy now is to appeal to public sentiment, by getting the papers to describe him as the victor, and ingrain the narrative that Brown's exit is inevitable.

The optimal Lib Dem strategy is to cave in to Labour. It's a game-changing trajectory for their party, without the costs of incumbency. Also, they won't be rewarded for the "noble" recognition of the Conservative victory.

Although it could go either way:

1. Conservative/Unionist coalition. [40%]
2. Labour/LibDem coalition. [30%]
3. Conservative minority government. [30%]

Monday, April 12, 2010

Crossover

Today marks a special day, as Obama's presidential approval shows a negative spread for the first time since the Gallup organisation started taking his pulse. The pale green thumbs down line has broken through the dark green thumbs up curve, evincing the first negative week since polling began. The result reflects a rolling average of three-day polls.

In my inauguration special I wrote
Obama's initial rating is unprecedented. This means that he'll lose points during the first year. A twenty point drop will bring him into the mid 60's, which is an attractive rating anywhere in the world. When he breaches 50-something, he has cause for concern, as no full-term president other than Regan and Johnson has managed a V-shaped rating curve. And Johnon had victory in the World War II to help him.
Foolishly, I read his 68% rating as an 86% (I won't divulge what I was smashed on at the time.) I then went on to extrapolate a twenty percent decline taking him back into the sixties. Eish! Nevertheless, the substance of what I stood stands.

I omitted to say that the shape-shifting precedents I quoted came from Gallup. You would have guessed it though, given their monopoly on polling history. I also omitted to mention what Reagan did to make a V. You (seriously) don't want to contemplate that.

As of today, according to Gallup, 45% of Americans think that Obama is doing a commendable job, while 48% believe that he isn't. The difference falls close to the poll's (3%) margin of error, so should not be interpreted with too much foreboding. It's consistent with other polls.

That this ante-blip comes hot on the heels of Healthcare reform, Start III and the unveiling of the nuclear posture is no surprise. Expect him to remain range-bound between 46% and 52% until November. This'll have the predictable effect on his involvement in marginal races.

Sunday, April 11, 2010

China, old and new

Ok, so here's a response to the recent request for me to update my predictions.

In my 2009 prediction I warned of an implosion of the Chinese bubble. I know it's next year already, but hey...

Back then I warned that "Initially, there'll be firesale attempts at prolonging the implosion." What I didn't think about was the timing of the long-awaited Renminbi de-float.

So much for old predictions, roll in the new:

1. We now know that in March China ran a trade deficit for the first time in six years. If (and only if) there are three more months of this, then China will weaken the Renminbi. The weakening may happen before the deficit reportage, as the Chinese may act on the basis of forecasts.
2. If this happens, it will be credited to the diplomatic savvy of Geithner and Obama, rather than Chinese competitiveness.

RIP(ped) ET

An email extract follows... best read from the bottom-up

Greetings

Yes, I've been running around so frantically, that I've neglected our little secret partnership. And then ET gets it in the neck, and then I'm like shiiiiiiiiiit... if only Name2 Withheld and I had done our doing, then surely the land would be all rainbow hugs instead of nazi rebirth, and then Name1 Withheld shared some thoughts with me.

When our theory was confirmed in the Saturday press, I had to drop the newspaper, and could only read it after a five-minute cool-off period. Then I was filled with regret that we didn't publish it (turning ourselves into instant rock stars), even though Name1 Withheld had off-handedly remarked about "Calling Deborah Patta." But given that, in spite off all the supervening nazism, the background story was still about some guy who gets discovered in the comfort of his own home with his face slashed, I think our near-silence was the write decision.

The reaction to this whole thing has been very revealing, and more grizzly than the murder itself. The way I see it (and partly argued last week) there are five candidate reasons why ET got it in the neck (or slightly north):

1. He was murdered on the orders of Julius Malema.
2. He was murdered as a consequence of his own brutal history.
3. He was murdered when an innocent burglary violently cascaded in typical Mzantsi fashion.
4. He was murdered in the heat of a mismanaged labour dispute.
5. He was murdered in the heat of a mismanaged sexual tryst.

In my view, I've arranged these options in increasing order of likelihood. But White South Africans latch onto the least likely explanation, largely because it melds into stereotypes of Black agency, and also because of intellectual sloth (the Malema theory is easy.)
If Juju himself were found face-down in a bowl of broth in his Sandton residence, and a pair of Afrikaans gentleman surrendered on account of it, my guess is that nobody would link it to the mobilisation of Steve Hofmeyer - even though he's been rather more pointed that JM.

tee hee
me


Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 17:05:05 +0200
Subject: ET se bumhole
From: Address Withheld
To: Address Withheld

Hi Neil

I've been grooving for the last few days on the utter genius of Name1 Withheld's theory of Eugene the Paedophile, and now I discover that you are the co-creator of said theory, so I just wished to say..... high five!

Your colleague from the Group that So Secret that it Never Meets,
Name Withheld

Friday, April 9, 2010

The longest comment of my life

This is a reply to Lucretius's first response to my Birthday Wish. It was too long to make it into the 'comments' section.

Thanks for the comment Lu.

As for your a), I can't think of a single prediction that I've got to "update" (whatever that could mean.) In the interests of honesty, I leave my posts unedited, even at the risk of later face-egg. If you wanna know what I believed at the time, it's still there verbatim.

As for your b), regular Trucenteers will know that new remarks do arise in the foolness of time. Patience please.

I challenge you to pinpoint the shortcomings of my predictions. You haven't explicitly done this, so let's trawl through your hints:

1: "You... portrayed [Obama] as a useless sap".
Untrue. As far back as Jan 2009 I wrote "Obama won't be considered one of the worst." I presaged the triangulation we're now witnessing by writing that he'd pick his battles selectively, largely ditching his liberal base. You can read that on the blog post.

2: "Obama is now empowered by the biggest domestic policy coup of the past several decades". It's the biggest social security overhaul over that period, but I'm not sure that it's the biggest domestic policy coup. Bush's tax cuts and the domestic implications of his Iraq war probably are bigger (coup's don't always have happy consequences.) Nevertheless, in my inauguration special I wrote that "When Obama leaves office a remarkable number of Americans will have remarkably enhanced access to medical care. This will be the single biggest acheivement of his presidency." Following the Scott Brown coup I wrote that passage of the Senate Bill was the second likeliest path to healthcare reform. That happened. I gave failure only 5%. Failure didn't happen. I've nothing to revise. It's remarkable to see supposed progressives cheer at the federalisation of Mitt Romney's healthcare policy, but that's a good thing as it presages a move away from the contention that Republicans are inherently incapable of "progressive" reform.

3: "Obama is tough with Israel". Show me the tractor tracks. All the Israeli violations of international law that were in place in Jan 2009 still are. Settlement building (and the concomitant theft of land) continue apace. Obama's toughness (disregarding the finger wagging rhetoric) is measured by the fact that Israel still receives more US aid than the combined aid receipts to the rest of the world. Much of which finances the very settlement building that Obama supposedly is "getting tough" about. Meantime he continues to regard the despot Abbas (whose term of office expired years ago, and must therefor rank as a dictator.) The reason for that is that he's echoing Bush's view that a friendly and unaccountable despot is preferable to a democratically elected Hamas. Again, this is consistent with everything I've written before.


4: "Climate legislation in the mix". Dunno what you mean by that, but the legislation has been bogged down for a year now. I'd like to see it before I cheer it. Meanwhile, the arctic reserve is half-open for drilling. During the campaign this was a no-go area, but as has been pointed out before (not by me) it's okay for Barry to lie before elections.

5: "Nuclear weapons coup with Russia". Presumably the coup you refer to relates to the fact that he's renewed the expired SALT treaty four months after the expiry date. That's not some sort of revolutionary accomplishment. It's his job. As for the broader context, see my recent remarks about the posture.

6: "Financial legislation reform moving". You don't seem to care in what direction it's moving. Healthcare "reform" was really good for insurance companies. There's every indication that financial reform is gonna be great for Obama's Wall Street backers.

7: "Obama's an increasingly wily triangulator". Again, I predicted this not only after Scott Brown, but way back on inauguration day. It's funny how triangulation has now become a mark of progressive virtue.

It's also clear that there is (and always has been) a worrying conjunction between disregard for substance and outright double-standard. For the Obamaphiles, whatever the great man accomplishes is progress. If conservatives do the same things earlier (Romney on healthcare, Reagan on SALT, Bush/McCain on arctic drilling, Wall Street on Wall Street) it's regress.

A tale of two postures

One (and only one) of these gets a Nobel prize:

1: "We will develop nuclear capacity, but we'll use it only for energy generation. We'll develop neither offensive nor defensive military nuclear capacity, and (consequently) we won't engage either offensively or defensively with nuclear weapons, ever. And you have nothing but our word for that."

2: "We maintain and develop nuclear capacity, which we'll use partly for energy generation. We'll maintain both offensive and defensive military nuclear capacity, which we'll engage only defensively, and only in certain instances. And you have nothing but our word for that."

What would Alfred do?

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Crappy Birthday, Barry!

On the surprisingly solemn anniversary of the second coming, it's time to take stock. Some observations:

1. Waxwingsworkwonders: The cries of failure, while warranted, are overdone. The cool thing about being Icarus is that your version of crashing corresponds with (many) other people's versions of soaring.

2. It's a Truecents World: Our skepticism (see the truecents Inauguration Special) has now become mainstream. It's very gratifying to start as a wet-blanket and morph into an oracle. Today the cheerleading Guardian asks "Where did it all go wrong?"

3. Collective responsibility: This is the first anniversary not of one person's journey, but of Clinton mark II. It should be judged accordingly.

It'd be premature to call the remaining three years on the basis of the shaky first. But thin-ice diving is the truecents way...

1. The ghost of Dick Morris: Obama now (immediately, this minute) starts triangulating. The proposed bank tax was the first sign of the teabagification of his regime. It's toodeloo to hopeandchange.

2. Rabid Blue: As everyone's observed, the Blue Dogs will enter this November's election with increased panic. Ironically though, purple state senators will go canine, running on conservative themes in order to avoid the perceived Republican wave.

3. The implosion: The inaugural dreamteam disintegrates forthwith. Geithner is a likely first candidate. Emmanuel is a natural next, but he may be saved by his tenacious refusal to be killed. Then (ironically) Clinton may follow.

4. The GOP curve: To their credit, the Republicans have carried out all four key tasks prescribed in the Inauguration Special (latino fence-mending, pragmatic economic populism, candidate selection, tech savvy). In order to maintain the momentum, they have to keep the Tea Party on board. It needs to function as a grassroots movement, not a political rival. They also need to manage the chair of the RNC.

5. The rest of us: The world will be even less tractable to American foreign policy this year, than last.

As far as healthcare "reform" goes, there are four scenarios [with probability]:

  1. Pick off a Republican senator (or three) with concessions. [60%]
  2. Adopt the Christmas-eve bill in the House. [20%]
  3. Ram a merged bill through both houses in ten days. [15%]
  4. Fail. [5%]


It's gonna be a long three years.

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

The death of healthcare "reform"

As I blog, the voters of Massachusetts are enacting a breathtaking irony. By voting in a Republican senator to replace Ted Kennedy, they're indicating that the hopes of healthcare reform have died along with their staunchest defender.

Shorn of their 60-seat supermajority, Democrats have little choice but to concede heavily to Blue Dogs and tractable Republicans (like Sen Snowe), producing a version of the bill that will, as several commentators have observed, be a boon to the insurance industry.

Tonight signals a slamming of the brakes on Obama's legislative agenda. This will lead to:

1. Early triangulation by a President who'll now calculate that his party's liberal faction is worth less than the cost of appeasing it.
2. Longer negotiation cycles on further reform.
3. More aggressive cost-sensitivity in the design phase of further legislation. This is a structural conservative concession, mandated by pragmatism.
4. A muted Democratic agenda for November.

The era of Change ends in Boston this evening.

Saturday, January 16, 2010

3/3 isn't bad

I appreciate that it isn't New Years Eve anymore, but I've had even less interesting things to do with my time. As for the bubbles of which we spoke:

1. The US treasury. As I wrote BubbleWatch, the JP Morgan US government bond index had just notched an astonishing 14.3% annual return. A heroic response to the (momentary) implosion of international capitalism. The previous year's return was 9.2%, and the preceding years averaged in the neighbourhood of 3%. Sadly, my warning that "Americans will learn the meaning of the Afrikaans post New Year phenomenon bubble-las," was lost in translation (or perhaps the fact that not even my mother reads this blog.) As warned the bubbled popped with the JP Morgan index registering -3.8% - the first negative year in a decade, and the largest drawdown in the (short-assed) life of the index.

2. Barak Obama When we wrote a year ago, his Gallup rating cruised at 68%. I deferred specifics to the Inauguration Welcome, when I wrote that "Ratings are driven by public ennui, and his biggest worry is that the American public will tire of their gut-curdling ride on the credit-coaster. 50-something approval points signals a bursting of the Obama-bubble, and a retreat to normalcy." As I write, Obama has the second-lowest end-of-first-year rating at 49%. The only worse performer was Ronald Regan, who scraped to safety when an assassin's bullet punctured his lungs. I warned at the time that V-shapes don't occur in the Gallup curves (American voters don't fall back in love with their exes.) So unless something 911-esq happens, these are the doldrums for Barry O.

3. China. They're holding onto (and topping up) their T-bills for now, but all the noise about securitising drawing rights paints a picture. Growth has been positive, but well below the required 8% minimum. The country's been doing well politically, but it was an investment, not a strategic bubble. And this is looking terminal. I'm open to debate on this one, but my sincere reading is that we're over the euphoria stage.

When I feel a little less lazy, I may just write my ten for '10.