Unfavorable ratings, bimodality, competence, and realty

A recent article said, “Trump is viewed unfavorably by 67 percent of Americans overall.  Big whoop.  The authors would like you to believe that somehow translates into an element of undesirability or an inability to beat the opposition.

WRONG!

Ratings of unfavorability measure a candidate’s clarity, and are NOT indicative of their popularity or their ability to defeat the opposing party’s candidate. Clarity heightens bimodality, which in turn raises the percentage of those who swear they would vote against a candidate. Meanwhile, candidates who are unclear on the issues have a much lower disapproval rating.
 
What actually MATTERS is three-fold:
 
1. Do they have both the education and experience to fix the problems facing our country, and the leadership skills to forge the path to success?
 
2. Do they have the savvy to know what works vs the idealism to try what they think will work (but probably won’t)?  Idealism never solved any problem, and never will.  It has, however, lead many nations down the primrose path to destruction.
3.  Will their supporting votes (the only ones that matter) be enough to beat the supporting votes of the opposition?
For some reason, a number of blitheringly idiotic people continue to highlight Trump’s unfavorability rating as if it had anything to do with reality.  If our country had a bimodal voting system, where you could cast one positive vote for the candidate of your choice as well as a negative vote against the candidate you think would be the worst in office, then unfavorability ratings would matter.
Since our voting system involves only one positive vote, however, unfavorable ratings simply do not matter.
Get over it.

Did Ben Carson Lie About A West Point “Scholarship?”

Question:  Did Carson lie about being offered a “full scholarship” to West Point?

Evidence (according to Politico):

1.  In his book, “Gifted Hands,” Carson describes a 1969 meeting with Gen. William Westmoreland — fresh off four years of directing the U.S. military strategy in Vietnam — that Carson said resulted in being offered a “full scholarship” to West Point.

2.  Carson’s campaign admitted that the former neurosurgeon not only fabricated the story of his acceptance into the prestigious military academy, but he never actually applied. This concession came after Politico obtained evidence from a West Point spokesperson that the academy has no record of Carson’s application or his admission — calling into question a key piece of the presidential hopeful’s personal history.

3.  “Dr. Carson was the top ROTC student in the city of Detroit,” Barry Bennett, Carson’s campaign manager, told Politico. “In that Ben Carsonrole he was invited to meet General Westmoreland. He believes it was at a banquet. He can’t remember with specificity their brief conversation but it centered around Dr. Carson’s performance as ROTC city executive officer.  He was introduced to folks from West Point by his ROTC supervisors,” Bennett continued in his email to Politico. “They told him they could help him get an appointment based on his grades and performance in ROTC. He considered it but in the end did not seek admission.”

My take on it:  To a young individual who does not fully understand the appointment system to the U.S. service academies, being told West Pointby folks at West Point that they can help you obtain an appointment can certainly seem like you’re being told that you’ve been offered a scholarship.  Obtaining an appointment, however, is only half the process.  You must still be selected by board.  If Carson was indeed the top ROTC student in the city of Detroit with high grades, however, then changes were high that he’d have been selected — IF he could obtain an actual appointment, which is NOT an easy accomplishment.

3.  The West Point spokesperson told Politico it’s entirely possible that Westmoreland spoke to the 17-year-old Carson and perhaps encouraged the young ROTC student to consider applying to the academy. However, Politico questions whether that fabled encounter with the famous general even took place.

Although Politico tends to have a Republican tilt, it sounds to me like the media is seeking to shed light on the principle danger of electing Carson to the White House:  He’s way out of his league.  Whether or not he actually lied or was simply sharing his inexperienced perspective using terms he know is beside the point.  He walked into this landmine.  He’s a newbie stumbling along, ready to stumble headlong into numerous political traps.  Is that the kind of leader our country needs in these dangerous times?  Don’t get me wrong, as he is by no means “stupid,” and I do admire his religious convictions.  The world of medicine, however, is not a suitable training ground for becoming the leader of the most powerful country in the world.  Combined with his pension for refusing to see the Constitution for what it is, word for word, I really don’t think he’s the right man for the job.

Ben Carson just doesn’t have what it takes to navigate the tough political landscape of Washington D.C., much less the world at large.

Trump, on the other hand, does have what it takes, not only with respect to politics, but also with respect to business, and if you haven’t figured it out, yet, America survives and thrives on its global economic and business ties.

Donald Trump, Megyn Kelly, Roger Ailes and Fox News

FYI, people.  Stop listening to mainstream media.  They LIE.  Why did Megyn Kelly asked Donald Trump such pointed questions?  Because her boss and the CEO and Chairman of Fox News, Roger Ailes, ordered her to do so.  Ailes told Trump before the debates that he’d be treated “fairly,” yet Megyn’s comment was clearly a low blow.  The Don countered well,so Ailes is making it personal, pulling out all stops to discredit Trump, even if it means violating news reporting ethics.  It’s a well-known fact that Ailes is a longtime friend of journalist and media personality Barbara Walters, one of the most profound liberals in news throughout the last thirty years.

That’s not to say that Ailes is a liberal.  Far from it.  In 1987 and 1988, Ailes was credited (along with Lee Atwater) with guiding George H. W. Bush to victory in the Republican primaries and the later come-from-behind victory over Michael Dukakis. Ailes scripted and (with Sig Rogich) produced the “Revolving Door” ad, as well as all of Bush’s broadcast spots in the primary and general-election campaigns (Source:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Ailes#Political_consulting).

However, Ailes is first and foremost an insanely rich businessman who can’t stop doing what he does best:  Amassing wealth.  Ailes is credited with the “Orchestra Pit Theory” regarding sensationalist political coverage in the news media, which originated with his quip:  “If you have two guys on a stage and one guy says, ‘I have a solution to the Middle East problem,’ and the other guy falls in the orchestra pit, who do you think is going to be on the evening news?”

Ailes’ order to Megyn Kelly was to make Trump fall into the proverbial orchestra pit.  Although it certainly made the evening news, it backfired for Ailes and his plan to discredit Trump, who did a decent job of turning things back on Megyn’s question while showcasing his principle strength:  Leadership.

In the meantime, Fox News remains one of the most neutral and objective news shows on television today.  This is substantiated by the fact that it’s also the most watched news programs, particularly by unaffiliated voters.

Thus, when I say, “stop listening to mainstream media,” I’m not saying “don’t watch Fox News.”  I’m saying, “take everything with a grain of salt,” along with “do some research — know the back story.”  It took me all of ten minutes to uncover the back story provided above.