Pelosi Will Betray California Because It is the Smart Move

The Republican Senate and the Democratic House will betray the states that are electorally safe. This will be the smart move. They will try to put extra money and programs into the battleground states.

States like California will be even used to fund legislation to benefit the battleground states.

This political looting could be prevented. The political gridlock could prevent deals from being made. The Senate and House might cancel each other out. They would not want to let the other to look good in the battleground states.

Here is a paraphrasing of a relevant dialog from the Godfather.

Tom Hagen – Do you know who will betray you?
Michael Corleone – Tessio.
Tom Hagen – I always thought it would have been Clemenza.
Michael Corleone – Its the smart move. Tessio was always smarter.

California does have some battleground house districts in the Central Valley. The Central Valley is getting $3.5 billion of federal money for a segment of high-speed rail. This was given to them in a 2010 spending bill.

However, the high-speed rail is becoming more and more of an obvious embarrassment. The money will be allowed to be clawed back. There will be some money that is placed back into the Central Valley in a new program. It will probably be a lot less money. More money has to go to Florida, Ohio and other more important states.

There will be some pretend arguments for programs for the safe states. There will also be some programs that spread the money all around the country relatively evenly.

The Ethanol program does not make sense technologically or economically. However, it does benefit Iowa and Kansas. The states that come up earliest in the presidential campaign.

Background and Context

Based upon an angry but likely representative comment for some people, I have to explain some motivation and perspective. Why is a future and technology focused site having any talk of politics or geopolitics? What is the motivation? The political battles are so intense that there is intense suspicion and reaction to everything.

Spock Was Too Emotional, I am Not Kidding

I am a passionate futurist geek and data nerd. I think I am fairly self-aware, but I know that where I am not self-aware then I will not know it. I know blind spot exists. People will call other people nerds or vulcans. Most of those people are amateur vulcans. I can compartmentalize like Sarek. Spock is half-human and really quite emotional. As I said, I am a super-nerd. Below I will go into some detail. Many will say whoa too much information. You see I am a little self-aware. I am passionate about being dispassionate and I am aware of the irony.

The D vs R question does have some relevance. But emotions are for hyoo-mahns. (On purpose mispronunciation of human. A deeply nerdy joke from DS9 and some other scifi.)

Condensing My Logic Above With Generalization About the Logical Approach

I stated a logical case above. I tried to be entertaining.

First separate from any emotion about D or R. It is NY Yankees vs Boston Red Sox. It is Coke vs Pepsi. It is Ali vs Frasier. Picking horse race winners. Two sides have a contest and they are trying to win. There are rules and forces.

What is the nature of the contest?

Where is the disagreement? Do the parties care more about the ten main battleground states? Is the political focus on 2020 already now? The next election is always the focus. This is like politics 101.

Is 2020 the most important thing for the two parties in the USA. 2020 is the next election. I thought these things would be obvious and everyone would say well of course. I forgot that most people do not pay attention to the mechanics.

Look at all of the political election race websites. Fivethirtyeight.com was famous because they accurately predicted almost all races in 2012.

There is solid D, solid R, likely D, likely R, leaning D, leaning R and tossup.

Many millions and sometimes billions of dollars are spent during the campaign and most gets spent in the tossup or leaning states.

If we are always in campaign mode, then resources, programs and money go into tossup and leaning areas. The closest contests get the focus.

Then voila, the logic of resource management says the smart move is to not only put more into the close areas but to take from the solid areas to put more into the close battles.

Another analogy. The smart general might move more soldiers and tanks to where the closest and toughest battles are. He would not keep forces in areas he has already conquered.

Here I Go Deep- But My Motivations and Integrity Was Challenged

I look at the data and predictions. for predictions do not get distracted by good and bad or right and wrong. Those are important questions but are tangents to what will happen.

The most accurate predictor of political events seems to be mathematician Bruce Bueno de Mesquita. He looks at a particular question of politics or geopolitics.

He tallies up the interested parties and looks at what they are willing to do get their way. He has to be able to honestly look at what groups really want and what they are willing to do to get it.

Bruce can apparently get 90+% accuracy on questions important to the CIA. What will happen in Iran, Noth Korea etc…

This means his methods work. It also means seemingly complex political and geopolitical outcomes can be highly predictability. Part of this is like being able to parse how much of human intelligence is from DNA and how much is from education and wealth and other factors. You have to parse the Nature and Nurture questions down and perform tests. Identifying factors. Parsing how much comes from which source. Determining how much each contributes.

One of my goals is being able to make the right predictions. What will happen? This means being able to split between where technology, technological capability, politics, economics, demographics, environment and science are more important and how the forces factor.

There needs to be a simplification. You can make the case that all of those points matter. However, there are timeframes and dominant forces. If you do not correctly identify the top two dominant forces then you will be wrong. The dynamics of the top two categories of force can usually tell what will happen. What some could think is a technological subject such as high-speed rail is actually about politics, legal, project economics and engineering execution and competence. What gets chosen for a technological project is mainly about who gets paid-off. However, some technology or business with superior technology can be more profitable. They would then have more money to pay off the right decision makers.

The top part of this article about which states get money. I was explaining a prediction based upon a simple calculation of political gravity.

Spock Quote – if I let go of a hammer on a planet that has a positive gravity, I need not see it fall to know that it has in fact fallen.

I am trying to figure out where things will be in 20 years, 50 years, 100 years and 1000 years.

This is the internet so in my 26,000+ articles. There will be frequent accusations that I have the bias or emotions or motivations like other people.

My response is – like other people? Really? I usually do not pull back the curtain to show it. But that is really silly as I showed here.

Emotion and bias are sources of error.

People complain about the frequency of certain subjects. I am trying find where the real technological and economic changes are happening. Some country or people come up more frequently. They are the source of more change.

18 thoughts on “Pelosi Will Betray California Because It is the Smart Move”

  1. I can’t say what will happen. It will all come down to what is in Mueller’s Report. I do not want impeachment if the evidence and the crime is weak. I will let public opinion and the 2020 election take care of it then.

    Reply
  2. “…People complain about the frequency of certain subjects…”

    Just so you know I like the stuff you cover so frequently bringing up the stuff I like makes me happy.

    I find you cover stuff that extrapolated can make a huge difference.

    I bet you would like this short power-point by “Dennis M. Bushnell, “Future Strategic Issues/Future Warfare [Circa 2025] ” he goes over the trends of technology coming up and how they may play out. His report is not some wild eyed fanaticism it’s based on reasonable trends. Link.

    https://archive.org/details/FutureStrategicIssuesFutureWarfareCirca2025

    Page 70 gives the computing power trend and around 2025 we get human level computation for $1000. The only way that this can have no meaning is if computers go crazy with human or higher than human level computation. This idea comes from Larry Niven, Pournelle, etc. great Sci-Fi writers in the grand space opera tradition. I just don’t believe it. Every since this computer trend has been established Sci-fi has had a hard time dealing with it. Greg Egan has a great series “culture series” where the computers become partners with us but we have no assurance that this is the case.

    I think this means disorder. Every time someone gets the power to lord it over other people to do their bidding then they eventually do so. Increases in technology may just mean more violence. Not more food.

    Reply
  3. Gridlock, sure but it’s happening now even with a GOP majority. 😉 The Democrats are not going to touch impeachment, which is a third rail of politics, unless the GOP is howling for Trump’s blood too. Regarding investigations let’s just say the investigations that got suppressed are going to go forward now and they may cause some consternation amongst Trump’s hardcore deplorables but for the rest of us, not so much. In fact a few of his current lukewarm supporters might even see through Trump and be willing to vote against him in 2020.

    Why do I get a feeling this is now a politics blog…

    Reply
  4. Betraying??? Shesh. That’s a very short sighted view of the the situation. If Democrats in California help advance their agenda across the rest of the nation I’d argue that’s doing more good than simply concentrating on California only issues.

    Reply
  5. I took the liberty of converting George Washington’s Farewell address into modern day language. A couple of excerpts:

    “Lets look at some of the threats to this unity. Many of them are of a geographical nature. Self-interested people may try to stir things up and grab more power for themselves by trying to make their own region feel like the rest of the country is disrespecting it. They do this by spinning the truth and outright lying and they even make alliance with foreign powers to advance themselves at the expense of all others. We have to be watching for this kind of thing all the time, and cut it off at the knees when we detect a serious threat. If we are doing things right, no one should feel more comfortable with inviting in a foreign power, or revolting, than they would in keeping the strong sense of belonging they get from being part of the U.S. of A.”

    And:

    “I’ve already warned you that having political parties in government is a bad thing, especially if they are based on geographic areas. However, political parties in general are a very bad idea as they cause people who should be on the same side to fight with each other and become their own worst enemies.
     
    These parties tend to try to dominate each other and are often motivated by revenge. Eventually, one may get too far ahead of the other. This tends to cause people looking for security to place too much power in one person, who then tends to become a tyrant, or else paves the way for one.”

    Reply
  6. The sooner California goes completely bankrupt, the better. Apparently, for Californians, Venezuela is too far away to serve as an example. Once California has it’s coming lesson, I hope it will renounce socialism, embrace fiscal responsibility, and once again have a sizable middle class.

    Reply
  7. Personal prediction: the next two years see small victories in terms of legislative bipartisanship (e.g. criminal justice reform) but I do not see any great betrayals of Californians in an attempt to win over voters from Ohio.

    For two years we will see endless investigations in to everything Trump did as a private citizen and as President but the point isn’t so much to find any wrongdoing so much as it is to keep the Democratic base in a frenzy and to make President Trump toxic to centrist voters who will tire of the endless miasma of possible scandal.

    The Democratic party does not see President Trump as someone to negotiate with, simply as someone to oppose.

    Reply
  8. This is just a standard principle of politics, nothing new. If your vote isn’t in play, you get ignored. I’m not at all sure why it should be controversial.

    It’s the political version of saying “water is wet”.

    Reply
  9. Makes sense. Happens to any group that doesn’t carry a threat of leaving. Look at how the Democrats take the black vote for granted, as an example.

    Reply
  10. There’s nothing new in any of this. In fact, both parties use the safe states as mere fundraising depots and nothing more.

    In the 1930s, guess where most of the New Deal money went and guess where it was allocated the least?

    Went to the then battleground states: Western states
    Least? The South, because they would vote Democrat no matter what back then.

    Reply
  11. You have observed a pattern that sometimes happens in politics. However, you are wrong that one party is more likely to do this than another. You must be very strongly motivated to favour one party if you are willing to alienate half your audience. Maybe your real goal is just to spread dissension in the U.S. Do you receive funding from the Chinese government?

    Reply
  12. Its investigation, impeachment and gridlock for the next two years. The only thing that might pass is “Sentencing Reform”.

    Reply
  13. My theory of battleground spending where the programs spend more money can be used to explain billions on ethanol or billions for putting a segment of train in the middle of nowhere.

    You say it is dumb. I could have left that in the moderation. I am willing to take criticism. Convince me or make the case to others. I will let you make the case. Enlighten me on how America works and what America is.

    Reply
  14. What does the data analysis and political analysis say. Ignore the different bias parts.
    There are solid republican , solid democrat districts or states (if you are talking about house or senate elections or governors)
    In between are likely D, likely R, leaning D, leaning R, and toss up.

    Solid D and Solid R having polling like 75-25. There is also gerrymandering.

    Logically all resources, efforts and actions would go into converting toss up, and the leaners. This is the case in the campaign. The US in a state of perpetual campaign.

    I am making no case as to whether R or D is preferrable or where there should be other options. The monopoly of the two parties is in both their interests.

    The article above is based upon deduction. I did try to say it in as entertaining a way as a nerd can come up with. I try to be honest with myself. I know this is a failing effort. I try to share honest insights but I know many people do not want to hear it.

    It is my site, I occasionally want to share mainly data based or logical deductions that I think are revealing of the truth in the world (US or other countries). Maybe I get the data or logic wrong. Then Goatguy, Brett and others can let me know. I can then iterate and correct data or logic.

    Reply
  15. I stated a logical case. Where is the disagreement? Do the parties care more about the ten main battleground states. Is the political focus on 2020 already now. Is 2020 the most important thing for the two parties in the USA.

    I look at the data and predictions. for predictions do not get distracted by good and bad or right and wrong. Those are important questions but are tangents to what will happen.

    The most accurate predictor of political events seems to be mathematician Bruce Bueno de Mesquita. He looks at a particular question of politics or geopolitics.

    He tallies up the interested parties and looks at what they are willing to do get their way. He has to be able to honestly look at what groups really want and what they are willing to do to get it.

    Look at the election maps at various election tracking and forecasting sites. Realclearpolitics, fivethirtyeight.com

    https://fivethirtyeight.com/

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/house/2018_elections_house_map.html

    Reply
  16. You a state troll now, Brian? This article is dumb enough to come straight from a CCP stooge. Someone that has no idea of what America is.

    Reply

Leave a Comment