Tag Archives: 2016 US elections

A few thoughts on free public college options for all

  By

There are many ways that the very wealthy already benefit financially from U.S. government policies (which is frustrating to me), but opposing zero-tuition public colleges because rich kids might get to go to public colleges for free seems like a strange position.


What are the odds that Hillary Clinton’s implied scenario of a flood of ultra-wealthy students will suddenly decide to enroll in public universities because the tuition is free now? Won’t they overwhelmingly just continue to go to elite schools where tuition is still charged? (Just like how they tend to go to private school for K-12 even though it is freely available to them in public form.)

And, as a side note about her overall plan (means-testing plus work-study), why should the poorest kids who’ve probably had to struggle the hardest to get to college also then have to work on the side to qualify for tuition coverage under her plan? Why don’t we just make it so everyone, regardless of means, has the right to go to college for free without working in addition to concentrating on their studies — and let the chips fall where they may? Why do we have to make these policies so complicated for no apparent reason? Just offer them to everyone and whoever takes it, takes it. It’s not that expensive.

Procedurally, GOP nomination is within Trump’s reach

  By

Donald_Trump_by_Gage_Skidmore_3
“Party Rules to Streamline Race May Backfire for G.O.P.” – New York Times:

In the starkest sign of how unsettled the situation is, what once seemed unthinkable — that Mr. Trump could win the Republican nomination — is being treated by many within the Republican establishment as a serious possibility. And one reason his candidacy seems strong is a change by the party in hopes of ending the process earlier: making it possible for states to hold contests in which the winner receives all the delegates, rather than a share based on the vote, starting March 15, two weeks earlier than in the last cycle. Ten states have said they will do so.

If Mr. Trump draws one-third of the Republican primary vote, as recent polls suggest he will, that could be enough to win in a crowded field. […] With 15 candidates in the field, and Mr. Trump at the center of the action, the debates have become ratings bonanzas for the networks and drawn record-setting viewership. And many states, eager to play a more influential role, seized the opportunity to schedule their nominating contests earlier. Eight states in the conservative-dominated South, where insurgent candidates like Mr. Trump could do well, have created a Super Tuesday on March 1, when delegates must still be awarded proportionally.
[…]
After March 15, he could begin amassing all the delegates in a given state even if he carried it with only a third of the vote. And the later it gets, the harder it becomes for a lead in delegates to be overcome, with fewer state contests remaining in which trailing candidates can attempt comebacks.

 
This is why it’s always important to know and understand the rules for how delegates will be awarded. Steve Schmidt acknowledges that in the article:

“There is a bubble of delusion among Republicans and Democrats in Washington, D.C., with regard to their parties’ respective nominating processes,” Mr. Schmidt said. “There is no magic date upon which the air will come out of the Donald Trump balloon. The notion that Donald Trump cannot be the Republican nominee is completely and totally wrong.”

 
It’s worth recalling that one of the collapse factors during the 2008 Hillary Clinton campaign was due to her campaign advisers mistakenly believing delegates would be awarded differently, in her favor, early in the cycle, even if she stumbled in one or two of the early states. (Not that they expected that either, which may be why they didn’t study the rules carefully…)

Troubling

  By

I know we’re not supposed to compare people to Hitler.

But like…
when a big populist candidate says “we’re going to be looking into that”
in response to a voter asking when we can “get rid of”
a religious minority of 2.75 million people (80% of whom are citizens)
that the voter believes “want to kill us”…

it’s pretty hard not to think about how 2.96 million Jewish people in Poland in 1933 weren’t there anymore in 1950.