We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
I have been waiting for final results on the 2004 election at the county level before writing about them, but Brian beat me to it. The map at Freedom and Whisky is an early one with a number of ugly black holes for incomplete returns. Yesterday’s USAToday map is marked ‘final’ and has very little politicus incognito.
If you flip back and forth between the USAToday 2004 and 2000 Presidential election by county maps, you will see small but significant differences. The ‘Yankee’ vote is going more and more solidly Democrat. Counties north of New York City are becoming bedroom and retirement communities, a part of Greater Boston and Greater New York. New Hampshire in particular has been solidly colonized by New York City. Notice that almost all the State of New York went Republican and perhaps would have been carried by Bush but for the huge Democratic majority in New York City.
The rest of the country appears to show the Republican vote is growing in virtually all of the non-Urban counties. There is a significant decrease in blue-dominant areas in the non-New England States.
Also of interest is the Princeton map. While less dramatic, it is probably of more importance to an election campaign team as it shows much more clearly where the 2008 battle ground areas will be.
I would love to see this re-done as a pseudo-topographic map, and I’d love to see it for 2000 as well. That would give us a much improved view of long term trends. While blue usually does mean depth in such maps, that may annoy the more oversensitive amongst the bluish, so we will perhaps need both blue-deepest and red-deepest maps to avoid offending a victimized minority.
I agree with Virginia Postrel and Tim Worstall, and no doubt with plenty of others, that it is a nice giggle that 7-Eleven had the best on-the-day polling for that Presidential Election they had in the USA the other day. 7-Eleven coffee purchasers that day were asked to choose between Bush cups and Kerry cups, and it went Bush: just over 51; Kerry: just under 49, which was better than anyone else seems to have done on the day.
Is this the first time 7-Eleven have tried doing this? And, crucially, did they announce a rolling score throughout the day? If they do announce the score throughout the day (and I suggest that they should next time if they did not do it this time – see below), and if the news gets out big that they did well with their coffee cup polling this time around, the story will not end there, because the next step will be for political fanatics to drink gallons and gallons of 7-Eleven coffee on the day of the next election, in order to influence the 7-Eleven results. The fanatics will not, I think, necessarily buy coffee in the cups of their own team, because if their guy is reckoned to be well ahead, they might want to make the race seem closer than it is, to get all of their vote out and win bigger. Then again, they might drink gallons of their own guy’s cups of coffee, to demoralise the opposition vote, and to say to it: you have lost, there is no point in you voting. It depends on what time of day the various Karl Roves reckon their voters and the other guy’s voters will be voting.
If 7-Eleven do as I suggest, they will either (a) get the result spot on, again, or (b) get it totally wrong but sell an extra billion gallons of coffee. Win-win.
Just to cast a slightly different view in to the frenzy of commentaries here about the election in the USA…
Sorry but I cannot see how the election of George Bush, a big government right-statist, shows that the the so-called ‘right’ differs that much from the McGovern/Mondale/Kerry view in reality. Fetishizing the differences between the two, which is particularly strange when viewed from overseas, does not change the fact the underpinning meta-contexts are pretty similar when you add it all up. Sure, the Republicans will probably not do something idiotic like try to emulate Britain’s nightmarish socialist healthcare system whereas that is exactly what many in the Democratic party want… but how many government departments is Bush going to simply wind up in order to roll back the state? The argument between the two parties is how much to turn the ratchet of the state’s encroachment into civil society, not whether or not to actually turn the ratchet around to face the other way.
Economic and technological reality will eventually break the regulatory statism of both left and right: party politicos will follow, not lead that process, but please, just keep in mind the only real good thing about Dubya winning is that we get to give all manner of sanctamonius lefties an aneurism, and whilst taunting the collectivist left because the collectivist right won is indeed great fun, it is little more that a minor blood sport that will soon loose its appeal as Leviathan gets more corpulent by the day as both left and right shovel more severed bits of civil society into its maw… the defeat of the ghastly Kerry by the ever so slightly less ghastly Bush was hardly the victory of the forces of light over darkness.
This observation by Big Trunk at Powerline certainly took the shine off of my morning:
When the electorate rejected George McGovern in 1972 and Walter Mondale in 1984, it did so on each occasion by a margin of roughly 20 percent. The McGovern/Mondale/Kerry view of the United States has made enormous inroads in the past twenty years. It is less than three percent short of a majority and the trendline seems to be moving in its favor. Shouldn’t we be asking what we need to do to roll it back before it crosses over to majority status?
President Jacques Chirac, who has just rushed to the military hospital in Clamart to be at Yasser Arafat’s bedside, took time off to pen a letter to his American colleague. My translation [handwritten bits in bold]:
Mister President, Dear George
In the name of France and in my personal name, I wish to express to you my most hearty congratulations for your re-election to the Presidency of the United States of America.
I make the wish that your second mandate will be the opportunity to reinforce franco-american friendship. The ceremonies for the sixtieth anniversary of the landings paid a shining hommage to the American soldiers who fell on the Normandy beaches for our freedom and that of Europe.
It is in the spirit of dialogue, esteem and mutual respect that our co-operation, our common combat against terrorism and the action that we carry out together to promote liberty and democracy, must continue.
We cannot find satisfactory answers to the numerous challenges against which we are confronted today without a close transatlantic partnership. The United States and France are called upon to play in this an essential role. We share the ambition of assuring to the greatest number peace, security and prosperity, in the spirit of solidarity [this usually means entitlement programs in French]. I am convinced that together, we can get there.
I beg you to believe, Mister President, of the assurance of my very high opinion of you. and of my very cordial friendship
Jacques CHIRAC
I bet that was painless. Oh and I hope that the President Chirac is careful in his motorcade coming home from Clamart. That’s right next to the road junction where the OAS tried to assassinate General de Gaulle (as seen in the Day of the Jackal) in 1962. And we would not want anything to happen to Fidel Castro, Saddam Hussein and Yasser Arafat’s favourite Frenchman.
Over on Fox News website:
LATEST HEADLINES
– Official: Arafat in Coma
– Arafat Congratulates Bush
Food for thought.
You know, I generally hate to gloat but:
The mistake we all made was in getting our hopes up.
The only mistake you made?
Dismally, people asked each other how long they had stayed up the night before. “Until 4.30am,” said my friend Jim. “Long enough to start crying like a girl.”
The first email I received the following morning read: “Fucked off, dejected, our hopes have been blown to shit.”
Signed: G. Soros.
The next one read: “As REM once sang: ‘It’s the end of the world as we know it.’ Only unlike REM, I don’t feel fine.”
Such creativity. Such depth.
“There’s going to be a brain drain from this country which will leave the Red-State [Republican] morons to fend for themselves,” wrote an American on the Guardian talk-boards.
And spend their own money on themselves, to boot.
I rang my cousin in Chicago. “I’m good,” she said. “Well, no, actually, not great.” The hope thing had prospered there, too. “We thought we were going to win. Bruce Springsteen … the youth vote … ” She had to get off the line then; there were commiseration calls waiting.
It was Bruce on the line. He’s crying like a girl.
[Warning: obligatory ‘Bush is Hitler’ reference coming up]
“Ach,” says Oliver James, the clinical psychologist. “I was too depressed to even speak this morning. I thought of my late mother, who read Mein Kampf when it came out in the 1930s and thought, ‘Why doesn’t anyone see where this is leading?'”
Hmm..I recommend an intensive round of therapy.
There might be a feeling that a dirty bomb exploding in London is more likely to happen with the policies pursued by a Bush government.
Quite right. Just ask the Spanish.
This sense of powerlessness was also raised by American psychologists, who, anticipating high levels of disgruntlement among voters, were on standby yesterday to analyse the fallout.
And, today, they are being treated for depression, hysteria and suicidal tendencies.
“I am deeply ashamed to call myself American,” wrote another, while, “I’m ashamed to be English,” countered a third, in a competitive orgy of shame. Lots of people talked about powerlessness. “And that,” said one, ominously, “won’t lift until we get our own general election.”
And I bet John Kerry would still lose that one.
Naah, I was only kidding. I love to gloat really.
Not only is Kerry the ’60s candidate, but he also apparently employed a campaign strategy that would have given the election in the ’60s. If Kerry had won the same bundle of states that gave him 252 electoral votes in this election, but the states were still valued according to the Congressional apportionment based on the Census of 1960, he would have won the election, 270 electoral votes to 268. The trend since then:
1960 census (1964, 68 elections) – Kerry 270, Bush 268
1970 census (1972, 76, 80 elections) – Kerry 270, Bush 268
1980 census (1984, 88 elections) – Bush 276, Kerry 262
1990 census (1992, 96, 2000 elections) – Bush 279, Kerry 259
2000 census (2004, 08 elections) – Bush 286, Kerry 252
This is indicative of a potential long-term problem for the Democrats: they are strongest in the parts of the country that aren’t growing anymore. Even since the 2000 election (which was still based on the 1990 Census) the states Kerry won this time around are worth seven fewer electoral votes than they were worth last time.
On the other hand, maybe I should not bring up any of this, out of fear that someone will accuse Bush of stealing the election through the Census. Bush 2004: enumerated, not acclamated!
(Source for old electoral college apportionments: Statistical Abstract of the United States Table #402 – this link opens a .pdf file.)
I just want to say that I am already very tired indeed of listening to US Democrats and British broadcasters drone on about how President Bush must now reach out to various people, and in particular to his defeated opponents. By this they do not merely mean that he should be polite and dignified in his moment of victory, as he has been, and as John Kerry has been in his moment of defeat. They mean that President Bush should now do what John Kerry proposed should be done (which lost Kerry the Election), instead of what he, Bush, proposed should be done (which was what won). This is a very stupid idea.
Despite that CNN keeps insisting the election was incredibly close, Bush now has exactly the cosy sofa of a mandate I have been predicting for months: good majority in the senate, four million more popular votes than his opponent, above litigation-level majorities in the electoral colleges, plus the endorsement of millions of people who do not usually vote at all, despite that nearly everyone expected increased turnout to be good for the Democrats.
The polls were, of course, wrong in a leftwards direction, as polls have been for years (see Natalie Solent), because the sound and fury of the media and liberal extremists does not make people change their minds, only encourages them to keep quiet about their allegiances so as to avoid having their tyres slashed.
But more important than all these things is the great battle against terrorism that has just been resoundingly won. Every Islamist from Arafat to Bin Laden wanted America to reject its president and vote for the relatively antiwar John Kerry. Anti-Americans everywhere were hoping that the U.S. people would either retreat in fear from the Middle East, or pretend that the “nuisance” did not exist. As the anti-Bush candidate, Kerry would have been the anti-American-values president, standing for ambivalence, appeasement and, in the eyes of Islamism, weakness.
It did not happen. Americans recognised the threat, and voted to continue fighting it. They stood by the Afghan and Iraqi people, waiting for hours in queues in the rain to register their support for George W. Bush and the moral imperative he has vowed to enact. The biggest voter turnout in American history has refused to be cowed by terrorism. And when terrorism fails to terrorise, it has lost.
Perhaps now, for the first time since 9/11, we can begin to hope that an end to this war may be within our distant sights. In any case, the world is safer now than it has been since Al Qaeda launched war on America a little over three years ago. And for that we can afford a few extra sighs of relief between our conservative/ anti-liberal victory toasts.
Dear Michael,
Although things are hectic at my end, as I am sure you can imagine, I wanted to take time out to thank you for your part in my success. Difficult times make for difficult decisions and in the final analysis, the buck stops on my desk. As a result I am not surprised that Rummie, Condi and I have taken flak over Iraq and in retrospect we might have done some things differently.
But thanks to you, many people became so polarized that in the end, millions decided that no matter what they thought of me, the chance to give you one in the eye was all that really mattered. I mean, that loathsome dissembling lard ass shtick of yours is just amazing!
So thanks, I couldn’t have done it without you! Oh, and when you see Noam next, tell him I will also be sending him a few ‘kees’ of that great jerky to thank him for what he did too.
You guys are the best!
Yours faithfully,
George W.
The following item was passed to us via our secret underground network of samizdatistas and has struck me as both so true and so humorous I simply must share it with you. It is purportedly written by George Carlin, a comedian whom I greatly admired in the seventies. It does indeed read like Carlin patter. If anyone has definitive information on the source, please let us know. George or not, I love it, so here it is.
YES, I’M A BAD AMERICAN
by George Carlin
I Am Your Worst Nightmare. I am a BAD American. I am George Carlin.
I believe the money I make belongs to me and my family, not some mid level governmental functionary, be it Democratic or Republican!
I think owning a gun doesn’t make you a killer; it makes you a smart American.
I think being a minority does not make you noble or victimized, and does not entitle you to anything.
I believe that if you are selling me a Big Mac, try to do it in English.
I think fireworks should be legal on the 4th of July.
I think that being a student doesn’t give you any more enlightenment than working at Blockbuster. In fact, if your parents are footing the bill to put your pansy self through 4 years plus of college, you haven’t begun to be enlightened.
I believe everyone has a right to pray to his or her God when and where they want to.
My heroes are John Wayne, Babe Ruth, Roy Rogers, and whoever cancelled Jerry Springer.
I don’t hate the rich. I don’t pity the poor.
I know wrestling is fake and I don’t waste my time arguing about it.
I’ve never owned a slave, or was a slave, I didn’t wander forty years In the desert after getting chased out of Egypt. I haven’t burned any witches or been persecuted by the Turks and neither have you! So, shut up already.
I want to know which church is it exactly where the Reverend Jesse Jackson practices, where he gets his money, and why he is always part of the problem and not the solution. Can I get an AMEN on that one?
I think the cops have every right to shoot your sorry tail if you’re running from them.
I also think they have the right to pull you over if you’re breaking the law, regardless of what color you are.
I think if you are too stupid to know how a ballot works, I don’t want you deciding who should be running the most powerful nation in the world for the next four years.
If this makes me a BAD American, then yes, I’m a BAD American.
If you are a BAD American too, please forward this to everyone you know.
We need our country back!
ED: The consensus so far is that this is not George Carlin’s work. I still like it though!
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
