A Trump-Machado Weigh Off

During the debate Hillary Clinton criticized Donald Trump for calling the 1996 Miss Universe winner, Alicia Machado, "Miss Piggy." Instead of letting this go, Trump went on the warpath the next day. Calling in to Fox News he kept repeating, like a broken record, that her weight was a "real problem, a real problem."

Okay, let's have a look at this "problem."

When Machado gained weight during her reign as Miss Universe, Trump got angry. He said she ballooned up to "160, 170 lbs." She says she gained 10-20 lbs. Other articles say she gained 40 lbs.

So instead of bickering about numbers, let's take a look at the photographic evidence. Here's a photo from the workout that Trump actually invited reporters to, in order to embarrass Machado into losing weight. This was from the time when Trump called her "Miss Piggy."

Now, does that woman look grossly overweight? No. She's jumping rope, and looks completely normal. In this one workout she probably burned more calories than Donald Trump has burned since college, when he reportedly stopped exercising because he thinks exercise will kill you. The most exercise he gets these days is waddling from his golf cart to his limousine.

Now, let's have a look at Donald Trump. He usually wears suits, which are specially constructed to obscure men's weight problems. But there are pictures of him cheating at golf wearing golf clothes, so this is the best we can do.

To put it politely, Trump is a porker. When he went on the Dr. Oz show, Trump claimed to be 6'3" and 236 lbs. Not surprisingly, Trump lied about his height: he's actually 6'2", based on previous reports and comparisons between Trump's height an numerous other people whose heights we do know for sure.

The lie about the height is important. If you go to your favorite BMI (body mass index) calculator and enter Trump's claimed height and weight of 6'3" and 236 lbs, it comes out to 29.5, or overweight. If you input Trump's actual height, 6'2", it comes out 30.3: obese.

Trump's weight has variously been reported as high as 251 and 267 lbs, though his doctor claims Trump has lost 15 lbs in the last year. Sure, that's possible.

Weight is a very touchy issue. Human bodies evolved to store as much fat as possible as a hedge against starvation. This helped our ancestors on the plains of Africa and the ice-bound reaches of northern Europe. But it plays hell with our metabolism in calorie-rich modern America. It's really hard to keep weight off if you're under stress, not getting enough sleep or exercise, traveling, and eating fast food. (Various chemicals introduced into the environment that simulate estrogens and other hormones are also playing a role in the epidemic of obesity the Western world faces.)

So I try not to judge people by their weight, especially when they're trying their hardest to do all the right things. But Donald Trump isn't trying: he doesn't exercise, he doesn't get enough sleep, and he eats junk food. He's fat because he loves to eat and just sits around.

In other words, he's doing the same thing that he accused Alicia Machado of. Now, you might say, Trump isn't trying to be Miss Universe, he's running for president. Trump's campaign keeps bringing up questions of Clinton's health and stamina.

There are numerous studies that indicate exercise improve brain function and memory. It's not a coincidence that both Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama were quite diligent in making sure they get enough exercise.

With Trump so obese and sedentary, he is just not going to be as mentally sharp as someone who exercsies, and he is at a much higher risk of heart attack and stroke.

But, like the pig calling the hen fat, he still has the gall to this day to complain about Alicia Machado's weight problems.

I think one final picture, the cover of next week's New Yorker, explains everything there is to know about Donald Trump:

"Miss Congeniality"

When Teenagers Run For President...

...this happens...

 

Where Trump represents the anger, hateful and fear filled bombast of the right wing blogger/commenter, Johnson represents the other part of that particular personality...zero command of facts....a spine made of jelly...unable to comport themselves in venues with live human beings.

A recent discussion on Facebook with a friend of mine who is a Johnson supporter informed me that he had no problem with this lack of knowledge. In fact, he thought it was a badge of honor because he doesn't have any respect for any world leader so why should he know their names?

More than anything else, this election has exposed a part of our electorate that merely wants to tear the whole playhouse done merely due to ideological spite. Like Mr. Johnson here, they don't care about knowledge or facts. They just want "Not Someone Who Threatens My Own Sense Of Self Worth" in office.

Trump on Coke

I turned to my son during the debate and wondered the same thing. Of course, speculation about this stuff is ludicrous and has no basis in reality. But isn't that what this election is about? Trump is doing well because he tells lies and people believe it. Everyone believes the stereotype about coke users (sniffing alot, meglomania, bluster, and then crashing) whether it's true or not so Dean doubling down on this makes sense given the current political, environment.

I find it hilarious that everyone in the media is outraged by this. They complain that the Democrats aren't adjusting well to a non traditional campaign and then bitch like crazy when they do it.

Good Words

From a question on Quora...

From Trump’s display last night I saw the following:

• A constantly repeated thesis that American is in the worst shape of its life, using hyperbolic phrases and words designed to intensify fear (“disaster,” “terrible,” “worst ever,” “tremendous”)
• Very little discussion of plans to fix this “disaster”
• A wide variety of bold faced lies as proven real time during the debate
• An inability and lack of humility to admit to mistakes or take any ownership
• An unapologetic admittance to dodging taxes and bragging that this is “smart”
• The inability to absorb the slightest insult (of which there will be MANY as president)

With Trump I see a textbook narcissist whose ego has a thirst many of us don’t understand. Becoming president, for him, is the ultimate win purely for the fame and title. This election is unlike any other, so my methods have had to adjust from how I’ve arrived at decisions in the past. So here we go, my first blue vote.

We welcome you with open arms.

Even Better

I've been a professional in the field of education for the last thirteen years. As a result, I've become an expert on adolescent development. Over the years, my skills have been honed to understand how the teenage mind thinks and what are the best practices for engagement and enduring understandings.

Adolescents's first instinct is to rebel. They want to create their own identity that is distinct from their parents. Often times, this rebellion is emotional, irrational and mildly nihilistic. If they can't have their way, they want the whole house torn down. Another key aspect of the teenager is that they can be intellectually lazy and often rely very heavily on the works of others to make their point. This is especially true today in the age of social media and retweets.

With all of this in mind, I was not surprised at all to Kevin Baker's response to my call for an explanation of his support of a candidate who openly wants to make our country submit to the will of Vladimir Putin. Nor am I surprised at his commenters support for such a policy as well. After all, your average teenager like to cut off their nose to spite their face.

Kevin begins by claiming that he will not respond with an uberpost but does so anyway. Of course, it's nothing original from him...just one large cut and paste job of others expressing his emotions for him. In fact, they are mostly photos that demonstrate Hillary Clinton's bizarre ability to turn grown men into catty bitches bent on a "TMZ" like analysis of her. Maybe it's a mommy thing which would fit in nicely with the whole adolescent rage dealio.

Regardless, the Hilz really gets under the skin of right wing bloggers and commenters. They would rather suffer an outright fascist than admit that a Democrat...a female Democrat...would have power over them. They would rather chuck a core ideological tenet (commies are bad) then admit that Hillary Clinton would be a better president in terms of national security and free trade (another core tenet out the window as well)

I will say that I did enjoy some of the memes in the photos insofar as they clearly illustrated the evolutionary line from short wave radio broadcasts to email forwards to blogging to social media. In fact, the entire post (and the comments) also reminded me of the respondents in this video...


So, we had one long apology, fueled by adolescent behavior, for why Trump is the better candidate. I wish they would just admit that they love him. His performance in the debate last night reminded me a great deal of Kevin and his merry band of commenters. His points were filled with bullying and bluster and were largely incoherent. He couldn't sit still and seemed to lose his attention constantly. He had zero specifics on policy and relied largely on logical fallacies in his answers. In short, everything was driven by emotion.

Watching him go on last night, it became abundantly clear that, like a teenager, Trump and the people that will vote for him, just want to tear it all down. They are filled with anger, hate and fear, steadfastly refusing to accept reality. They can't bide the success of people that are far more intelligent and accomplished than they are. A sentence like this....Barack Obama was a great president with constructive policies that saved our country....ignites cognitive dissonance and sends them into a fit. Here's one that will make them feel even more like they are being physically attacked.

Hillary Clinton will be even better.

The Right Wing Blogger Nominee Fucking Tanks

If you want to see how a right wing blogger and/or commenter would do on the big stage, check out the first debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.



Donald Trump was a complete fucking disaster tonight. His chest thumping over how little debate prep he did was incredibly foolish because he LOOKED LIKE A GUY WHO DIDN'T PREPARE AT ALL. His answers were the same style of incoherent rambling one would see in a blog comments section.

His remarks on national security were all over the place and should give even the most stalwart Republican pause. This is a guy we want running our country and keeping it safe? REALLY??!!

I posted a question on Quora regarding who won and the overwhelming response was Hillary Clinton. Check out the responses!

Completely Ridiculous

Of all the pre-game debate analyses out there, Ross Douthat has the best one. I've been watching with amusement at how most of the media has been pushing the narrative that if Trump simply shows up and doesn't foam at the mouth, he wins. Douthat agrees.

The eve of the first presidential debate is a good time for that exercise, because there’s been so much gaming-out of how Trump might ambush Hillary Clinton, how he might manage expectations well enough to make a poor performance look like victory, that it’s easy to lose sight of the core truth: It will be ridiculous if Donald Trump wins these debates.

Yes, it would. Consider that this is the first time he has stood one on one with an opponent and will now have to get into specifics on policy points. No doubt his current supporters won't care what he does up there (most of them, anyway) but the undecideds (largely white, college educated voters) will most definitely care. He's going to completely tank on many answers and leave the audience wondering exactly why he was nominated given that he knows so little. This works in the GOP primary crowd where having zero intellectual capacity is a crowning achievement. It doesn't work in a general election debate.

Despite recent tightening polls, Trump is still losing this race and here's why.



Trump won't win unless he improves on these numbers.

And, as Douthat notes in his final two paragraphs, this isn't anything new.

This is not a hot take. It is a cold take, a boring take, a take that assumes that the political world, even now, is still relatively rule-bound and predictable. And if I’m wrong, if Hillary manages to throw the debates and the election to Donald Trump, it will be the last such take I offer for many years to come.

I agree and will do the same.

It's Getting Fimed

Great. Fucking. Ad.

This Hillary!

This is the Hillary that should up at the debates. She was hilarious and perfect! BTW, she taped this two weeks ago when she had pneumonia...

The Logic of Trump Voters

The next time a conservative peddles the bullshit line about how they are about facts/logic and liberals are about feelings, show them this.

And then remind them their nominee is Donald Trump...

The Avengers want you ... to vote this November

A bunch of actors who have appeared in Marvel movies got together for a video encouraging people to vote. Though I can't say I'm all that thrilled about seeing Mark Ruffalo in the buff...

Hypothesis: Why Squirrels Are So Bad at Crossing the Road

I was out riding my bike when a squirrel ran across the trail in front of me. The closer I got, the slower it ran. I was expecting it to turn around and go back the way it came, even though it was almost to the other side, but it made a final mad dash and crossed the trail.

Squirrels are legendarily bad at crossing roads. In the fall their little corpses litter the streets, almost as plentiful as dead leaves. There's even an Internet meme about how bad squirrels are at this.

You'd think they'd be good at evading cars. They can run pretty fast, and they evolved to avoid predators swooping down from the skies. But they're terrible at avoiding cars. So I got to wondering why.

When (most) people cross the road, they look both ways before they cross, then they go. Squirrels don't do this, I noticed on my ride. Their head faces forward, perpendicular to the road. Because squirrels are prey animals, their eyes are mounted on either side of their heads.

This is an advantage when you're in the middle of field, because they have a 360 degree field of view: if anything moves, they can see it and flee it.

Humans are predators, so their eyes are mounted on the front of their heads. They have a field of view of about 150 degrees. This requires us to turn our heads to do things like cross the street. This might seem like a disadvantage, but it's an advantage in this case: two eyes provide binocular vision, and therefore depth perception. This makes it much easier to estimate the distance and speed of oncoming cars or creatures.

When crossing the road, squirrels just charge out. They don't turn their heads to look with both eyes: they keep their heads pointing forward. This allows them to see traffic in both directions, but it hinders their ability to accurately gauge the distance and velocity of oncoming vehicles. They can see the cars, but they can't really tell how far away they are or how fast they're going.

Also, because squirrels have a field of view of almost 360 degrees, and not just 150, they're getting a lot more data all at once, which means more to process, which slows down decision making.

Finally, squirrels were evolved to evade predators. If a hawk is bearing down on you it's probably not a bad idea to retreat to your latest safe location.

My hypothesis, therefore, is that the combination of monocular vision, information overload and millennia of evolutionary programming have conspired to make squirrels really bad at crossing the road.

Raccoons are equally bad at crossing the road, based on the roadkill count. But their eyes are front-mounted, so they don't have the squirrels' excuse. They're just slow and fat.

Gun Nation

A candid look at the hardcore, super owner....

Happily Dancing Into The Statism They Claim To Hate

I've spent quite a bit of time over the years having discussions with right wing bloggers and commenters. I've asserted many times in those conversations that these folks were closet authoritarians, secretly wanting the statism that they claim to hate. They obviously don't want it when someone who is not completely ideologically pure is in charge (see also: most of the country).

But, boy oh boy, do they want it when someone like Donald Trumps comes along.

Check out this video.

And then take a look at this.

The quote is from Donald Trump's son but it is an official campaign ad. It's pretty much identical to Nazi Julius Streicher's children's book, The Toadstool, in which a mother explains to a son how one Jew can destroy an entire people.

Looking at the video linked above...seeing all the people cheering...looking at just how many people are supporting Trump...it's clear that I was correct.

These people want statism. And they want it REALLY BAD.

Their adolescent rage over the "elites running everything" (wahhh wahhh....I'm not smart enough.....waaaa.....waaa.....) has led them to the same place that led Nazism to Germany....Fascism to Italy....Communism to Russia...

We all should have recognized this right away when they began accusing the rest of us of pulling our nation into communism or Nazism with our "liberal ways." Generally, when these assholes accuse you of doing something, they are the ones actually doing it.

So, as they happily vote for Donald Trump on November 8th because they want a rebel who will break up the system, recognize what system they are breaking up.

More Guns, Less People

A recent study from Harvard and Northeastern University shows that gun ownership has declined in this country and the people that still do have them are buying more firearms. Half of guns owned in the US are owned by just 3 percent of the population. America’s gun stock has increased by 70m guns since 1994. At the same time, the percentage of Americans who own guns decreased slightly from 25% to 22%.

I've suspected for quite some time that gun ownership was declining. Up until this point, all I had were the many stories I have heard from colleagues, friends and family around Minnesota, Iowa and Missouri since Sandy Hook that they got rid of the their guns. The few that still have them have since bought more. My personal experience doesn't mean shit, though, so this was mere anecdata. Now we have an actual, peer reviewed study that shows this trend to be valid.

The one thing the Gun Cult needs is numbers. Remember, these are very insecure folks who feel inadequate in some way and were likely bullied at some point in their lives. The world is against them and the more guns they own, the better they feel. Having more people owning more guns fees their faux arrogance. Now that we see that the number of gun owners are dwindling, I wonder what they will say.

It's important to note that we now have a definition for someone who owns a lot of guns-the hardcore super owner. The super owner appears quite arrogant on the surface. They scoff at non gun owners and believe they are impervious to any sort of danger that a firearm brings. They also feel that everyone else out there is equally capable of owning a gun so this arrogance extends to other people...people they don't even know! It's an arrogance that is deeply rooted in emotion driven ideology (government tyranny, statism etc). Peak below the surface, however, and you see a massive inferiority complex in the hardcore super owner. They feel unempowered in the face of the fictitious enemies they have created. So, they buy more guns.

In the words of their hero and current GOP nominee...."Sad..."

Too Many Questions

Anything Goes!

This recent post in the Times regarding Donald Trump's "anything goes" precedent he has set in campaigns points out many disturbing trends. There are many salient points in the article but Mr. Martin fails to adequately note that it's the people that want someone like Donald Trump.

These are the people that are firmly in the basket of deplorables, most of whom are likely beyond help. Take, for example, this guy.

We need to turn our backs on the elites, and he's the one who has emerged as the rebel leader in that cause.

Right. Because people that are more intelligent and accomplished than us (see also: adults) should be vilified at every turn. In fact, we should just burn the whole fucking house down and act like...what age level again?.....ADOLESCENTS.

The real danger isn't really Donald Trump. It's the 40 million people who are so lacking in emotional intelligence, maturity, and intellectual capacity that they would allow their own insecurities, inferior feelings, and constant thoughts of inadequacy that they would happily vote for a sociopath for president. Are they that reckless? Are they that catty and bitchy about Hillary Clinton? Do they really understand what's at stake here? Any of you out there who has had to deal with teenagers know the answers to all these questions.

At least the media is finally waking up to the fact that they have been way too easy on Donald Trump.

Deep Fried Basket Of Deplorables

Damn!