The Great Dipshit American War (in Iran)

Over the past week, my country has decided, foolishly, to attack Iran for reasons. What those reasons are, or what our goals are supposed to be, are entirely unclear. For certain, Iran has been involved in terrorism, its government is repressive and awful, and it is deeply unpopular in many parts of Iran as a whole. In fact, I first started using Twitter because Twitter was the best place to follow news of the Green Revolution during Obama's Administration.

But even during the Green Revolution, everyone with half a brain realized that American involvement in the Revolution was counter-productive. Iranians are patriots to their own country - a country, mind you, whose history goes back antiquity - and any outside influence in their politics would be seen negatively. And unlike a country like Iraq, who was dominated by one person and one family, the Iranian regime is deep, and has support in the rural areas of the country. 

The other aspect of why an invasion of Iran was never considered was because Iran, unlike Iraq or Afghanistan, is not completely an international pariah. While Iran certainly is not on friendly terms with a number of countries, there are countries out there that are willing to prop up the regime with material support. Specifically, Russia and the PRC have both stated that they will provide material support to Iran. And Russia has also apparently provided intelligence to Iran. In contrast, Iraq and Afghanistan were so isolated that no one (except for Pakistan to some degree) was willing to assist them when the US came knocking.

Now, this sort of material support is much more important than you may think. From what we have seen over the past 70 years of modern warfare is that smaller entities can survive the onslaught of superpowers if they can get material support from outside powers. The Russo-Ukraininian War that continues to rage has lasted as long as it has because Ukraine has been able to receive material support from Europe and the US (until Trump). The Soviet Afghan War lasted for 12 years, in part because of American material support. North Vietnam won the US Vietnamese War, in part, because it received material support from the Soviet Union and the PRC. And the Korean War, famously, was all but won until McArthur threatened the PRC. 

In other words, what every power has to do when bringing war is to make sure that the state it chooses to invade to be sufficiently cut-off from other powers. For the US, the fact that most countries in Latin America are too far from Russia or the PRC is useful in allowing the US to invade those countries with relative impunity. But anytime the US, or any other power, ends up invading a country that is willing and able to provide material support, the invaded country has the opportunity to wear down its invaders.

What's more, invading Iran itself has its own challenges. Its terrain is mountainous and it has a large population of over 93 million people. There are population centers, but the populations in those centers tends to be the most anti-regime. So, attacks on those population centers will only serve to turn those populations against invaders.

But of course, that's exactly what the US is doing. Worst yet, the military managed a decapitation strike, but killed the old guy (Khamenei) who was most likely to seek a quick end, and didn't follow up with an immediate invasion to use the chaos to its advantage. And, of course, the reliance on a decapitation strike also indicates the lack of understanding of how Iran works as a regime. Khamenei wasn't so much a dictator, as he was the aging head of an authoritarian regime. He wasn't the CEO, or COO, he was the Chairman of the Board. Iran is a complicated country, and it has a complicated government. 

Now, the new Supreme Leader is Khamenei's kid, who's (naturally) younger, more capable on running the day-to-day, and is now out for vengeance. As is the rest of the country because we didn't just kill Khamenei, but we bombed an elementary school for girls. All the while, our allies in Europe see every horror broadcast to them. 

But there's more - as we now see - Iran is eminently capable of disrupting oil production in the Middle East. So long as Iran can affect shipments out of the Strait of Hormuz, it can drive up oil prices. This benefits Russia (who relies on oil exports to float its economy), and it benefits China, who has invested heavily in renewable energy. In the meantime, those of us in the US are going to be hit with all the "fun" of a supply side shock - stagflation. All of these horrors should have been immediately obvious to anyone who's studied modern history and can read a fucking map. Neither of which are Trump's strong points.

Of course, it is entirely possible that Trump, finally understanding the risk caused by his idiocy, will stop short of a complete invasion. But the damage caused already will reverberate through the American economy and foreign policy for decades. 

That's why I can this the Great Dipshit American War. Because only a total dipshit would have gotten us into this mess in the first place. And Donald Trump is absolutely that dipshit.

Lastly, do I think that this war was caused by Trump's need to distract us from the Epstein Files? Yes and no. Trump needed a war, for certain. But this particular action was probably directed by Hegseth and Netanyahu, who talked Trump into this. Hegseth believes that the war will hasten the Rapture (which is not a thing, by the way), and Netanyahu needs Israel to remain in a state of war lest he be removed from office and sent off to prison for gross corruption. 

The Shocking Win that Wasn't Particularly Shocking

 In what some would classify as a surprise, Zohran Mamdani was elected yesterday as Mayor of New York. Mamdani is a Democratic Socialist (so part of Bernie Sanders' party, though Mamdani ran as a Democrat), espoused a whole raft of progressive and socialist policy plans, and has been public with his support for Palestine. His opponents included the former Governor of New York, Andrew Cuomo, and the head of the Guardian Angels (a pseudo-vigilante/neighborhood watch group), Curtis Silwa. The current Mayor, Eric Adams, dropped out of the race a few months before the election as he is generally despised.

Now, as someone from Southern California, and as someone who has young children, I haven't really  followed the election in NYC all that closely. But my general take away is really this - if you take away Mamdani's ethnicity (Indian, born in Uganda, and Muslim) - there really isn't anything shocking about this election. With one exception that I will get into.

Here's why it wasn't that shocking. Mamdani's views and policies were based around the idea of making NYC more affordable and making public services more efficient. That's basic bread and butter stuff, and the anti-rich tilt he had is bound to be popular in a modern era where the gap between the wealthy and everyone else grows more and more each day. But rather than being just a policy guy, Mamdani is also a capable communicator. He's telegenic, and can deliver speeches with the same kind of emotional punch as Barack Obama. And not surprisingly, his campaign, knowing that Mamdani was their best asset, utilized social media, particularly short videos on TikTock, etc., to get his message out. So, Mamdani not only had a message that resonated with New Yorkers, but he also had an effective communication methodology. 

In contrast, his opponents neither had a good policy message for voters, nor were they particularly good at communicating those messages. Silwa, the Republican in the race, had a message that New Yorkers appreciated for its eccentricity, but not for the actual policies he espoused. 

Cuomo, meanwhile, ran a campaign on his experience, which makes sense on paper (he is the former Governor, after all, and was Secretary of Transportation under Clinton), but only allowed Mamdani to attack Cuomo on his failures while Governor. And as Cuomo had to resign in disgrace but a few years ago, there was a lot to attack. And Mamdani attacked that record savagely in every debate.

The only wildcard in the race were the plutocrats and billionaires who poured millions of dollars into the campaign on Cuomo's behalf. Meanwhile, Fox News devoted so much attention to the race, that people in Kentucky were contacting state and local officials IN KENTUCKY asking how to vote in the Mayoral elections in NYC. 

But all that attention - from the President (who endorsed Cuomo) on down - only existed to try to reverse the flow of gravity. And, in fact, it likely strengthened Mamdani's message, because Mamdani's campaign suddenly became part of the overall narrative of the 2025 elections (which almost uniformly went against Trump). It's in that context that I learned about this race. 

And it is because of that broader context that this local election provides consequences for the country as a whole. Let me give you one example: the Senate Minority Leader, Chuck Schumer, pointedly refused to endorse in this race, even though he represents New York in the Senate, is a resident of NYC, and Mamdani was the nominee of the Democratic Party (and was also featured in one of the Democratic Party's hype videos it aired yesterday), and was way ahead in all the polling. By every metric, Schumer's refusal to do endorse in this race was a disaster for him. The kind of disaster that could easily lead to a well-funded primary challenger. To stave off this outcome, Schumer will have to take a harder line in the negotiations on reopening the government.

Moreover, other Senators who favor fighting over caving to the GOP's demands on the budget can argue that yesterday's elections show that Trump and the Shutdown are highly unpopular (Trump recognizes this as well). Which means the Democratic Senators, for once, may not cave. Wonders will never cease, I know.

CalExit Part 2

Upon the election of Donald J. Trump for his first disastrous term, one idea that floated around was the secession of California from the Union. I wrote about it at the time here. Ultimately, the idea went nowhere because Californians are extremely patriotic people, and were at the core of the Democratic Party. Heck, Kamala Harris was Joe Biden's VP.

Now, 8 and half years later, as Trump 2.0 appears to be an even greater disaster than his first term, I am left to wonder about CalExit. There is a ballot initiative for secession which I believe is up for a vote in November of 2028. As things are currently going, I can see that ballot initiative doing better than most people expect.

And zooming out from the everyday politics, one thing we can see is that the history of American secession movements are quite strange. Secession movements happen in places that are far from are outside of the political centers, tend to generate a lot of tax revenue, and don't see that revenue come back in the form of beneficial spending. For example, Lombardy and Venezio were the major sources of tax revenue for the Hapsburg Empire in the early 19th Century. 1/3 of the total tax revenue for the entire Empire came from those regions. Ethnically, linguistically, and culturally, these regions were distinct from Vienna, and so the secession movements were not surprising. Similarly, the secession movements in Ireland, the 13 Colonies of the United States, Kashmir, the Soviet Republics, and most other secession movements follow the same pattern.

In the US, the secession by the Confederate states was so strange because rather than being far from the center of power, slave states literally surrounded Washington, D.C., and Southern politicians played prominent roles in American politics throughout the political history of the United States. And Southern states were tax generators, federal spending was so low in the Antebellum period that there was no significant tax burden from the federal government anywhere. So, it really was all about slavery.

But looking at California in 2025, California is exactly the sort of place where a secession movement would grow. California is a net generator of taxes - meaning Californians pay $80 billion more in taxes than the state receives back in federal funding. With Trump threatening to withhold all federal funding from California (well, not all of it, as there are significant military bases here, and the federal government owns most of the top third of the state), that number will grow larger.

It's also clear that Trump's isolationist policies hurt a number of Californian businesses which rely on both foreign labor (either factories abroad, or direct hire of foreign workers), and exports. It doesn't help that Trump has also directly threatened companies like Apple. Further, Trump's policy of deporting workers who have deep ties to the community (and not the "gang members" he promised), has only served to stoke anger here. That certainly has been amplified with the arrest of the President of the SEIU, the largest and most politically active labor union in California, and the recent protests in LA, which Trump has further inflamed by nationalizing the National Guard and sending in troops.

In short, the conditions are looking more and more ripe for a significant secession movement in California. Given the tremendous importance California has for the United States as a whole, it's highly unlikely we would be let go peacefully. All of which, at the end of the day, means that the next four years in California are not going to be great. 

It's Not About Politics

 For the second time in 8 years, the United States has elected Donald Trump to be our President. This time, of course, was significantly worse, as Trump won both the popular vote and the electoral college after his former staff members stated he was a fascists, a want-to-be dictator, and who is advocating for the forced removal of people he deems to be illegal immigrants. In the meantime, the people around him are advocating for a nationwide abortion ban, but also a nationwide ban on women traveling across state lines, have taken strong anti-LGBTQ positions, and have advocated the use of the military to put down protests.

Now, I say all this because I know a lot of people have viewed this election through the lens of normal politics. And, of course you have, because media outlets like the Washington Post, the New York Times, CNN, etc., have spent the past 10 years sanitizing what Donald Trump has been saying. They correct his grammar, try to make his nonsensical statements make sense, and then utilize the "both sides" approach to make his statements sound like politics as usual. They aren't.

No, Donald Trump - or rather the people around Donald Trump - want to actually hurt people. A lot. The last time Trump was President, he scooped up people seeking to legally immigrate into the United States into camps, and tore children from their parents. Immigration lawyers were literally having to represent children as young as 18 months old in immigration proceedings. To date, not all of those kids have been reunited with their families. The reason to do this was simple - to be as cruel as possible.

So, it is not beyond the question that a President who as absolute immunity, like Trump, who no longer has people around him that will contain his worst impulses, will expand his cruelty to whomever displeases him. And, as he has shown in the past, he will take actions against the families of those who displease him.

In that sense, my despair isn't about politics. It's not about the government pursuing the wrong policies, or imposing taxes I don't like. Politics is fun, rollicking, and free-wheeling. It's backrooms and deals, and walking door to door and designing nasty hit pieces you will never use, and sign wars, and chants and songs and ribbons and buttons and America at its best. None of my despair is due to my team losing.

My despair is about the people who will be hurt. My friends who are transgender, my family members in the LGBTQ community, my neighbors whose skin color isn't the "appropriate shade," my daughters who will have no legal rights soon enough, and for my community. People are going to get hurt. Families will be torn apart, and people will be sent to prison for not fully backing Trump. My despair isn't about politics, it's based on an honest fear about the future.

For those of you who fall into the "other categories" - start making your escape plan now. At minimum, plan to get to one of the blue states. But also plan on leaving the country. If you don't already, get a passport, and save up as much cash as possible for your getting out of Dodge ASAP fund. And plan 2 or 3 different routes, just in case. 

For those of you who think you are in the clear, remember that your safety and well-being is only guaranteed if you are useful to Trump Administration. This is true for all fascist regimes. If you find yourself on the outs of what's useful for any reason, your life will be forfeit. For your sakes, I hope you remain useful or are lucky enough to not be affected. I doubt it though.

On that point, it is likely that JD Vance will attempt to kick Trump out of office by way of the 25th Amendment. When that happens, be very careful who you support. The winner of that conflict will punish the supporters of the loser.  

Going to Sicily - Rumination on Immigration and Loss (Part 7 of 7)

Understandably, my last few posts were retrospective. But here is where I want to think about the future. The contacts I made last month are the sort of contacts that would be unforgivable to forget. So, what can I do about the future?

Obviously, one of the next steps is to try and make visits to Troina and Sicily more often. As I said, flying from the midwest or NYC is definitely easier than flying out of San Diego. Luckily, I am often in Chicago thanks to my wife's family. And she wants to go to Ireland next. With Catania being a relatively short flight from Ireland, we could do both, possibly. I think she'll like Troina. As will my other daughters when they get old enough.

Next, I want to make sure that each and every person we met in Sicily knows they are welcome to come to visit us. While most of you, if you manage to come out this way, stop in New York, I would suggest you come and see me in San Diego. At minimum, you too can experience the strange sensation of traveling thousands of miles to see land that is almost exactly like the land you just left. While you are here, I owe several of you pizza and lots of drinks. Luckily, we plenty of breweries, wineries, and distilleries to assist in that endeavor. Also we have tacos, which you must try.

I also would like to help the Troinese get in contact with people here. For instance, both Southern California and inland Sicily face water shortages due to drought. And while San Diego has more than its fair share of problems, our water has been managed shockingly well. In the last bad drought, which lasted over six years, our reservoirs were at 90% capacity when the rains finally came. In addition, and this goes out to Guisy and her father, I have a friend in Elizabeth Harris who used to own several bakeries. A Cross-Atlantic cultural exchange could be mutually beneficial. Or not. But I'd love to help exchanges like that.

That's long-term of course. In the near term, I can take advantage of the fact that San Diego and Troina have similar weather and vegetation. For instance, I mentioned that we ate cookies that had a "fig" filling. That is not actually true. The filling is made from prickly pears. The kind that grow wild here and can be found in every grocery store in Southern California. I am going to make vastedda more often, and think of seeing all of you. 

Going to Sicily - Rumination on Immigration and Loss (Part 6 of 7)

 If you will note based on the title, I think I am going to stop this series as seven posts. This post will be about my visits with family, and the next post will be about my hopes for the future. 

To reiterate, my daughter and I travelled to Sicily, and flew into Catania. We managed to get some sight-seeing in, but she was very jetlagged. I, weirdly, was not. After a day in Catania, we drove out to Troina. I would not recommend anyone drive in Catania if possible, but if you do, you will know that you can handle just about anything. 

Upon checking in, I was told by the front desk that I had an appointment to meet the mayor at 11 a.m. the next day, that I should absolutely not miss it. I was also advised to contact Basilio Arona. That evening I learned that driving in Troina at night can be a bit harrowing, and managed to scrape up my rental car when driving through a too narrow corner (I had about 1/2 inch of clearance). But with the help of locals, I managed to make my way up to the square, and saw the World War 1 memorial with the names of people we were sure were relatives. 

The next day, the professor arrived. As I noted earlier, Basilio is the town's historian, and absolutely passionate about Troina and it's history. As we talked, he provided me with a booklet describing the family history, who my great-grandparents' family members were, and who were surviving members of the family. And then he confirmed that, yes, a number of my relatives died in World War 1, including my great-great-uncle. 

As an aside, the history of World War 1 makes it absolutely clear that the Italian officer core, particularly the generals, were completely incompetent and got millions of their countrymen killed. This was done through multiple FRONTAL ASSAULTS on Austrian entrenched positions IN THE ALPS. But, again, my family were peasants, and probably disposable in the minds of these incompetent buffoons. My great-great uncle died in the Battle of Caporetto.

Now, we finally made it to the Troina town center, and got to visit the mayor. Now, I had no expectations of this meeting. Having worked in politics, I assumed that it would be a photo op, and a handshake. But given my luck with mayors (hi Todd!), I should probably have expected more. What we got was a family reunion overseen by Basilio Arona and the mayor, Alfio Giachino, and the entire city council. This was a not a short meet and greet either, but a legit two hours of the mayor's time, followed by lunch, and seeing the homes of my great-grandparents. 

And while there was a language barrier, these individuals were definitely our relatives. You know how I said that my oldest daughter was the most Italian looking? As it turns out, my assumption was wrong. I saw my middle child's face in a number of my Sicilian relatives. And her eyes, and those of my youngest daughter, are definitely Troinese. 

Had the trip ended at that moment, I think I would have been happy. This was the moment of connection that all of us had traveled all the way to Sicily to have. And while we were complete aliens (my Italian pronuciation and grammar was judged highly, but my vocabulary is bad), this was a place we can go, and point to a house and say, we are from here. This is where we are from, and these are our people. A family trauma that has begun to heal.

But, of course, we did more while in Troina. As it turns out, one of my cousins and his daughter own a bakery called "La Bonta del Fornaio" - which translates to "The bounty of the oven." On Saturday evening we went to the bakery to meet with our cousins and try the local delicacies. Of particular note were the cookies made with a "fig" filling (more on that in the next post), and cannoli made with a baked shell instead of a fried shell. Absolutely delicious. 

We also had pizza at the bakery. I mention this in a separate paragraph because I did not grow up near my grandparents and didn't get to see them that often when I was growing up. So, the one lasting memory I have of my grandmother was her making pizza on Christmas Eve. This was the family tradition of making and eating pizza every year on Christmas Eve, and so, what could be more fitting for a meeting with her relatives than eating pizza? But interestingly enough, the pizza we ate at the bakery is a completely different style from the pizza she made. And like those of us who grew up in the United States only speaking English, and our cousins only speaking Italian, the crossing of distance has not ended all barriers. But we're closer now than we have been in some time.

The next day, we met with more relatives. This time, it was the grandchildren of my great-grandmother's favorite sister, who my great grandmother named my grandmother after. Here again, we were struck by familial resemblances. Our cousin Elvira was a dead ringer for my great aunt Marie, and her grandchildren (who were with us) immediately started bawling at seeing someone who looked just like their grandmother. 

While there were other experiences, it was these moments that stuck with me. Meeting and being with family, the irrepressible Basilio Arona, walking the streets where my ancestors walked. We are a family somewhat reunited (we still have Argentinian cousins out there).

Going to Sicily - Rumination on Immigration and Loss (Part 5 of ???)

The scene of our great return to Sicily is almost set. But there is one more important piece: social media. As much as I despise a lot of what Facebook does (installing analytics to spy on its users even when they aren't using Facebook, rigging the analytics to incite people to, in at least one instance, genocide, and whatnot), I have to admit that without the connections I made through Facebook in particular, this trip would not be nearly as successful as it was.

The lynchpin to this trip was my connection to Basilio Arona. He is the town historian for Troina, and more. If any of you reading this remember me through the Italian House days at William & Mary, Basilio reminds me a lot of Professor Triolo, but with a beard, and with a deep passion for very specific topics. 

And for Basilio, that topic is the one I've been thinking about since I visited Troina - the trauma and loss caused by the Italian diaspora at the end of the 19th Century and into the 20th Century. For a quick refresher, Italian emigration was more or less around a couple of thousand people annually until the Unification. Then it exploded. All in all something like 16 million Italians left Italy between 1880 and 1917. That diaspora did not affect all if Italy equally. Instead, most of the population who left Italy were from the former Kingdom of the Two Sicilies (which is basically southern Italy). While a good percentage of Sicilians went to the United States, just as many immigrated to Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Mexico.*

(*A quick sidenote that may only interest me: in most of the countries where there is a significant population of people of Italian descent, there are tons of restaurants that serve the local version of Italian food. That has created new cuisines, such as Italian American cuisine, Italian Argentinian cuisine, etc. But the one place where this has not really happened is in Mexico. There was an Italian restaurant in Tijuana that created the Caesar salad, but one could argue that restaurant catered to Americans. In terms of everyday cuisine, it does not appear that Italian immigrants made any impact at all).

For a city like Troina, that was isolated in the mountains, where the locals had to work together to survive, the loss of even a few people would have been traumatic. And here, over a million and a half Sicilians emigrated between 1890 and 1917 - roughly 1/4 of the overall population. And that's leaving Italy altogether. There was likely another million Sicilians who moved to Northern Italy. Not because Sicily was a bad place, but because they were destitute. And so, the trauma suffered by those immigrants and their families back home must have been devastating. It is an intergenerational trauma that my family and I share. 

That's why, for as long as I can remember, so many in my family have tried to remember where we came from, who are relatives where, what they ate (or currently eat), and what they wear. In my life, I studied Italian in college, and lived in the Italian Language House for two of my four years in hopes of catching a glimpse of what was lost. And I don't know of any member of my extended family who doesn't do the same.

Basilio's hope, through his Troinese del Mondo Facebook group (it roughly translates to "People of Troina from around the world), is to connect the immigrants who left Troina (and their descendants), with the families left behind. I joined the group about a year or so ago. In fact, Basilio's great uncle was on the same boat to the US as my great-grandparents. So, this is just as personal for him as it is for me. 

Now, I didn't quite know all this before going to Troina, but knowing how to use social media, and knowing we wanted to connect with our family in Sicily, I posted the details of the visit on the Troinese del Mondo page. My cousin Zelinda Trovato (my great-grandfather's brother's granddaughter) did me a solid and immediately acknowledged that yes, my family was from Troina. Basilio then contacted me through Facebook messenger, asking about various aspects of the family, which I responded to.

That set in motion a whole series of events of which I was completely unaware of, but got a lot of credit for. Basilio worked hard on finding out who my great-grandparents were based on the information I provided him, and then contacted the surviving family members. The mayor sent me an invite to come and visit city hall when we got in. And plans were made. In the meantime, I put together a t-shirt for the family to wear. I sent around the mark-up as a rough draft, but then everyone started ordering the t-shirts and we were off.

Going to Sicily - Rumination on Immigration and Loss (Part 4 of ???)

Okay, now onto Troina. While I could go on about Catania (a city that definitely has a strong punk/hardcore scene if my old instincts are correct), Taormina (stuck up beach town, reminiscent of La Jolla), or Siracusa (laid back beach town), these posts are all about Troina. With this post, I want to talk about the place. In the next post, it will be about the people. 

Troina, as I said before, is located in the hinterland of Sicily. It is essentially a mountain town, with its city center being the highest in Sicily. This is a part of Sicily that (until global warming) regularly got snow, that grows soft wheat instead of durum wheat, and overlooks miles and miles of countryside. Not surprisingly, medieval lords took one look at Troina and realized its utility as a fortress. For the modern era, it means that the streets are narrow and steep, and my GPS was incredibly confused all the time.

Now, a quick note on the countryside - it is shocking how similar the Sicilian countryside is to Southern California. The vegetation is ridiculously similar, partly helped by the fact that Sicilians love prickly pear cactuses and grow them commercially. And the hills and mountains all look hauntingly familiar. Per the family lore (and my godfather is the guy who actually witnessed this), my great-grandmother was completely shocked to see where her grandson was living. He was based somewhere in Southern California, and when she visited him, she looked around, shook her head, and immediately regretted not moving to California. In fact, a good part of the San Diego fishing industry came from Sicilian immigrants who (unlike my great-grandmother) had heard about San Diego's resemblance to Sicily. It was genuinely shocking to fly thousands of miles and immediately see eucalyptus and palm trees growing alongside cactuses. Oh, and also disconcerting to me lately is that the houses on the hill in my neighborhood remind me of looking out onto Troina from my hotel. 

With that being said, Troina in recent years has had two major events that drove economic activity after the great diaspora of the late 19th/early 20th Century*. The first happened after World War 2, when the Ancipa Dam was built. The Ancipa Dam, whose construction killed dozens of workers, provides electricity and water to a good chunk of Sicily - probably half the island. This work of infrastructure was obviously an enormous temporary boost to the local economy, but the biggest development was the Oasi (which I call the oasis). 

The Oasi is a hospital for children born with mental disorders and adults with dementia. Founded by a Father Luigi Ferlauto, the Oasi takes children and adults from all over Sicily, and for purposes of treatment of mental disorders. The OaThe hospital itself has a hotel attached to it so that the families of patients can visit their loved ones, and to host various conferences. 

Because we were a group of 18, we ended up staying in the at hotel, as opposed to one of the B&Bs in town. That lead to an interesting dynamic - we were giddy Americans living out our dreams of seeing our ancestral home, and catching up with relatives we hadn't seen in years, while the other guests were there visiting family members in often the worst of circumstances. By the way, if anyone reading this post was there at the time and was offended by our behavior, I apologize most sincerely.

One other thing to note about Troina - the town itself is pretty, old, and very clean. Not clean in the way that Taormina is clean*, but clean in the way that small towns are clean. The residents take pride in their town, and the whole town was virtually devoid of graffiti - something unheard of in other parts of Italy. In fact, when I mentioned on social media that Catania was a beautiful but gritty city, one of my Sicilian cousins made sure to comment that Troina was clean. And it is. Absolutely spotless.

*Part of my dislike of Taormina stems from the driver my parents hired to take us from Catania to Taormina. He was from Taormina and made several comments supportive of fascists which, given the artificiality of Taormina, makes a lot of sense.  Catania, meanwhile, reminded me of hanging out in New York City with my roommate back in the 1990s (although Catania is 1,000,000 times safer than Alphabet City), and so I am immediately appreciative of it.

Going to Sicily - Rumination on Immigration and Loss (Part 3 of ???)

With two very long posts into this rumination, it is about time that I actually get to trip to Sicily, and more specifically about Troina. Which I will do, eventually (it's my blog, so I get to do what I want). But first a word about travel planning:

Trying to plan a vacation as a lawyer is tricky because so much of an attorney's schedule is determined by other people. Judges will calendar events based on what works for them, as do other lawyers, etc. So, when a lawyer wants to take a vacation, they have to pick a time when not a lot is on calendar, and then send out a Notice to everyone that, yes, they are on vacation. However, once the tickets are purchased, etc., vacation plans are practically sacrosanct. Judges will move things around if you have a prescheduled vacation. Also, flying from Southern California to Sicily is Europe is tricky because it takes as long to get from Southern California to New York as it takes someone to fly from New York to Europe. And lastly, a lot of European airlines are absolutely scammy bastards. Almost as bad as Frontier or Spirit.

In that context, my next decision was whether I would go alone, or bring a member of my family with me. Ultimately, and after much lobbying by her, I ended up bringing my oldest daughter with me. Of my three daughters, she is the one who is the most Italian looking - olive skin, long, dark wavy hair, and dark eyes. This will be ironic shortly. Now, why I would have preferred to take the entire family, the trip was scheduled during the school year, and it made no sense to take everyone (a point my wife made clear).

Now, as far as flying goes, the airport that I flew in and out was Catania International Airport. As it turns out, Catania is the big city for eastern Sicily. I could have flown into Palermo, but that would have added an hour or so to my drive time to Troina, which, as I think about it, would not have been difficult at all. Anyway, if you are flying in from Southern California, try to cut up the flights as best as possible. Flying from San Diego to Europe is hideously expensive. But flying from Chicago or New York to Europe isn't that terrible - only slightly longer than a flight from San Diego to New York. Also, and I wasn't able to pull this off because of the days I was flying, but it looks like Turkish Airlines is the best carrier. 

Also, once you get to Sicily, the hotels and restaurants are well-priced. Granted, I didn't stay in Taormina during the height of tourism, but I was typically paying less than 100 euros a night for a hotel, and the meals would easily cost three times as much in the States. Also, I used booking.com to great effect in finding hotels. The first place I stayed was within tripping distance of five different restaurants, and maybe two blocks from the cathedral in Catania. The last place I stayed was within walking distance of the airport (we had an early flight).

One other point to be made - if you rent a car, get the supplemental insurance. I had numerous harrowing experiences while driving in Sicily - caused by the poor infrastructure and urban planning. I sort of wish my cousin and her husband could have made it to Sicily just to see what a modern urban planner would have thought of these cities. At the same time, I feel like I can face anything because I drove in Catania. 

Going to Sicily - Rumination on Immigration and Loss (Part 2 of ???)

In the last post, which was basically prologue, I discussed my keen interest in reconnecting with my family's history and how that played into going to Sicily. With this post, I think I should introduce you to a few names and characters.

First, my great-grandfather was named Fortunato Trovato, who was born in 1880 in the town of Troina, in the province of Enna, on the island of Sicily. As discussed before, Troina is the Italian version of its original name in Sicilian, or Traina. For those of you who don't speak Italian or Sicilian, the name "Fortunato" translates as lucky, which my great-grandfather certainly was not. In addition to being one of those Troinese so poor that he had to leave Sicily, my great-grandfather died young-ish in some sort of industrial accident. He was an incredibly kind man, who loved his children (my grandmother and her siblings), and was the light touch as far as discipline in the family. By all accounts, he was a really good guy.

His wife, and my great-grandmother was Giuseppa Schinocca (pronounced skin-oh-ka), also born in Troina in 1883. She was Fortunato's second wife, as his first wife and child died very young (again, my great-grandfather's name was painfully ironic). Where the accounts of my great-grandfather all paint him as a kind-hearted man, the accounts of my great-grandmother were of her indomitability. She was the disciplinarian of the kids (who used to hide until my great-grandfather came home), and when her husband died, my great-grandmother worked her ass off to provide for her many children. Not only that, but she would send whatever spare money she had back to her family in Sicily. When her children were grown, she traveled. First, back home to Sicily, by herself, in her 60s. Then she visited her grandchildren, including my godfather when he was stationed in California (something I will discuss later). 

These were the parents of my grandmother, Rose Trovato. Her husband, my grandfather, is James Treglio. Unlike the Trovato family history, the Treglio family history is murky thanks to name changes and annoyingly bad record-keeping by Italian authorities. Also, some bad handwriting by immigration authorities in New York. And apparently a sign-maker in New Jersey who wasn't diligent about spelling.

All this belies the fact that the Italian side of my family were peasants. Names and birth records weren't important to the Italian authorities because my great-grandparents weren't important. They weren't farmers, they were farm laborers, and day laborers, and whatever else you they could be. My great-grandfather's home (recently renovated) is now on the market for 20,000 Euro, and has one window. For the entire multifloor unit. 

In the United States, though, the children and grandchildren of Fortunato and Giuseppa Trovato are not peasants. We are scientists, teachers, dentists, lawyers, economists, architects, financial planners, FBI agents, lobbyists, and we broke through a few years ago with our first actual M.D. It's such that, as my father told me, even though his mother did not graduate from high school, when he got his Ph.D. in plasma physics, the family sort of yawned. He wasn't the first to go to college, and by that time, he wasn't even the first to get an advanced degree in the sciences. 

And so we, the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of the ironically named Fortunato Trovato, and the indomitable Guiseppa Schinocca, traveled to the city fortress of Troina, the heart of the Norman Conquest of Sicily. 

Going to Sicily - Rumination on Immigration and Loss (Part 1 of ???)

Just under 30 days ago, my daughter and I took the trip of my lifetime - we traveled to Italy. Not just to any part of Italy, like Florence or Lake Cuomo or the Vatican, but we went to Sicily. The part of Sicily where my great-grandparents lived, and where they had to leave due to abject poverty. More specifically, they were from the commune of Troina, a city built on top of a mountain in the Sicilian countryside which was the heart of the Norman conquest of Sicily, and was the site of the most important battle in Sicily during WW2. 

But it wasn't world history that drew me to Troina, it was trying to reconnect with a place that was lost to me and my family. As someone who grew up in San Diego, 3,000 miles away from my extended family in New Jersey, any snippet of family history was interesting to me, as the people my parents would speak of were people I would see once a year, at best. In the meantime, our traditions and food were touchstones to a distant past.

I remember in eighth grade doing a family research project - one in which we researched our family tree, and learning the various names of ancestors and whatnot - meeting with a researcher of family names who was able to provide backgrounds on the varying names to all the other kids in the class, but to him, my last name was a mystery. And that describes a lot of my Italian heritage - a complete and utter mystery. I knew my dad was Italian, and I sure as heck looked Italian, but was there more to it than that?

As I grew older, my research methods got better - at one point in time, 60% of my job was online research and I am still quite good at it - and I began to look for the places I had heard about through family lore. While one side of the Italian family was wreathed in secrecy, the Sicilian side seemed easier. They were from the town of Traina. They left in the early 1900s, and my great-grandmother went back there for a trip to visit family after WW2, and found her sisters living better than she did.

But that created a new barrier for me. The name Traina does not appear on any map. But there was a town called Troina. It was in the right part of Sicily, and when I looked up the most common surnames, I found that 20% of the town had the same last name as my grandmother's family. Jackpot. As it turns out, Troina is the Italian translation of the Sicilian Traina (something that I didn't realize until the very last day of my visit).

The next step back to Troina came when my cousins, one of whom was working as a photographer in Egypt during the Iraq War, travelled to Troina to get documents to potentially become Italian citizens. When they (and my aunt and uncle) went to Troina we got confirmation that Traina was Troina, and they met with cousins who shared pictures my great-grandmother left with them back in the 1950s.

In addition to old pictures, we were able to gather the story about my great-grandparents. My great-grandfather was exceptionally poor, and had to make the choice between staying in the town he was born in, grew up in, and built a life in, and watching his family starve to death. In fact, the dividing line between my great-grandfather (the ironically named Fortunato) and his brother, Francesco, was a donkey. Francesco owned a donkey, and knew he could be hired to haul things. My great-grandfather did not. So off to America he went, along with my indomitable great-grandmother, Giuseppa, and their oldest daughter (and my great-aunt) Lena.

From that point on, I did everything I could to learn about Troina. I learned about the Oasis (the town's largest employer) which treats children with mental disabilities, and how the town has survived when other similar towns have died. Through the contacts my cousins made, I used social media to connect with distant cousins and joined Facebook groups to connect with people I never met, who live in a town I had never seen. 

When Troina started offering homes for 1 Euro, I scoured the website and dreamed. (Quick note on that: as a practical matter, the 1 Euro thing doesn't make that much sense because the fully refurbished homes are relatively inexpensive anyway). I could return to the town my great-grandparents had to leave.

So, when my father and his cousins decided to go to Troina for a family reunion, I had to join them. 

NOTE: Based on this prologue, I suspect this blog post will be rather long, so I've decided to split it into parts. 

The Election Without A Narrative

It's been awhile since my last post, and while Facebook considers my occasional ramblings as spam, I'm still here. Bu though I last published a post maybe 2 months ago, the complexion of the Presidential race has changed so substantially that it's hard to overstate what has happened. The Biden-Trump rematch is gone, in it's place, it is now Harris v. Trump. 

And while there is plenty to be said about the Harris/Walz campaign, and that it has been pitch-perfect for the past month, there is something that sticks out to me that I haven't seen as clearly articulated in other sources. Namely, there is a Democratic candidate in Harris who doesn't have a narrative. The last time we saw this was in 2008 (more on that later). 

But before we get into the 2008/2024 comparison, let me explain what I mean by a narrative. A narrative is what is essentially a fatal flaw, or rather, a perceived fatal flaw, that develops around a Democratic politician. For Bill Clinton, the flaw was his penchant for sleeping with women not his wife. And while he absolutely cheated on Secretary Clinton, his ability to sell anyone anything overcame any perceived weakness. Unfortunately, other candidates were not so capable: Al Gore was a "exaggerator," John Kerry was a "flip-flopper," Secretary Clinton had her "email scandal," and Joe Biden was too old.

While these narratives are generally full of shit, they were close enough to the truth that when something came around to prove the narrative - Kerry saying "I voted for it before I voted against it" comes to mind - the press could jump onto the narrative as proof that the narrative was not bullshit. These narratives were often created over years of quiet and not so quiet statements made by Republican media that bubbled up over time. Corporate media would pick up on the narrative and start treating it as real, even if utter bullshit.

In the past 32 years, the only candidate who really never had a narrative that corporate media supported was Barack Obama. The natural focus of the narratives put out by right-wingers was Obama as someone outside the norm, but those were so openly racist (Trump's birtherism in particular), that corporate media shied away. McCain came close to establishing a narrative of Obama the inexperienced, as I've written in the past, but he blew it with the Sarah Palin pick, and with his abject panic during the financial crisis.

That is until now. Going into the debate with Trump, the narrative built by Trump's campaign over the past four years is that Biden was too old to be President. And unfortunately, Biden's debate performance fit that narrative to the T. But with Biden dropping out, and Kamala Harris stepping in, all the work that the Trump campaign put into hitting Biden is all for naught.

That leaves Harris. So far, there doesn't appear to be any overarching "scandal" or narrative surrounding Harris. Maybe that she laughs too much, or too flighty? But if that's the case, Harris' steely acceptance speech demonstrated that her persona of being the cool aunt is a mask hiding the prosecutor. She may weep after turning an enemy into glass, but she'll still turn an enemy into glass. Of that, I have no doubt. And so any attacks on that basis would only serve to draw out the prosecutor within. And those moments in the acceptance speech where the prosecutor came out were some of her strongest moments.

To that end, there doesn't seem to be an overarching way to attack Harris. It's possible that the attack will come from the lack of details for her economic policies (but Trump also lacks for details), or the fact that she has yet to give an interview to the press, but those are easily solved going forward. No, I don't think there ever will be a narrative of attack in this election. And that's interesting to me.

How about that debate. . .

 Last night was apparently a shitshow. I say apparently because, as the parent of young children, I did not get to watch much of last night's debate. But from what little of the debate I saw, and from the reactions I've seen, my best guess is that Biden managed to confirm the worst fears of many of his supporters while Trump was given free rein from CNN to lie his ass off.

On the last part, CNN giving Trump free rein to lie his ass off, comes as no surprise. CNN has held a number of events with Trump, and has never fact-checked the man. Nor is it surprising Trump lied repeatedly about everything - his convictions in New York are based on fraud, he was found liable of slander (lying) on at least three separate occasions, cannot operate a charity in the State of New York due to fraud, was forced to pay 100 cents on the dollar in his "settlement" involving Trump University, and has been cited as being dishonest time and time again by EVERYONE.

And sadly, it's not surprising that Biden failed to perform well last night. On one hand, he can't well refute and retort what Trump said when Trump was in fantasy land. On the other hand, he proceeded to do the one thing that Biden absolutely cannot ever do - act OLD.

In my history of watching politics, there have been two major fuck-ups by Democratic candidates at this level that compare to what Biden did last night - Howard Dean screaming at a rally, and Kerry saying "I was for it before I was against it." In both instances, Dean and Kerry managed to amplify the negative narratives about them. Dean was thought to be a bit off his rocker (untrue), and Kerry's narrative was that he was a flip-flopper. Neither narrative was fair, but both existed.

Biden being old is equally an unfair narrative. After all Trump is almost as old as Biden, and is most likely incontinent (according to sources). Plus, there is no indication he has Alzheimer's (unlike Reagan, who did), and he's naturally delegating work, not doing all of it himself. But it is true that Biden is the oldest President we've ever had, and that makes the criticism somewhat fair.

In saying all that, the decision to give Trump a place on stage with Biden, and then let Trump lie his ass off without any fact-checking was one of the dumbest fucking strategies in modern history. It was never going to go well, and the fact that Biden actually chose to do this means he's still listening to Democratic political insiders - who are generally the dumbest fucking people ever.

With that said, should Biden drop out? That would be incredibly difficult at this stage, and likely a recipe for disaster. For one thing, the person replacing him would almost certainly be less well known than Biden. There's no liberal media in this country, just conservative media and corporate media, so even people like Gavin Newsom aren't known outside of certain circles. That's a huge problem when running against a celebrity in Donald Trump. 

And second, there's not chance for the Party to have the kind of balancing act that every nominee goes through. After all, the Democratic Party doesn't have the messaging mechanism that the GOP has in Fox News/NewsMax/AM Radio/Sinclair Broadcasting. So, Democratic nominees have to go through a process of gathering support from all the factions of the Democratic Party. Biden is/was really good at this. Bernie Sanders is not (sorry to say). 

And, of course, that leaves open the question of Kamala Harris. Why the hell would she be passed over when she's the sitting VP? At the same time, Harris is HATED by the DC media, disliked by some progressives due to her connection to law enforcement, is a woman, and is Black. These are all things that can be ironed out over the course of a primary, but that time has long since passed.

Now you might then ask, if all of this was known, why did Biden run for reelection? My wife asks this of me a fair bit. The answer is simple - despite Biden's age, he was in the best position to beat Donald Trump. He has 100% name ID - which only he, Bernie Sanders, Hilary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Bill Clinton can claim - which again is important when running against a celebrity. Biden has also done a reasonably good job of cleaning up Trump's innumerable messes, while also dealing with the most reactionary Supreme Court in 100 years. So, he's not just the incumbent, but he's actually a fairly successful incumbent. 

For those of you doubting my last statement, at this time four years ago, the entire country was shut down from COVID, there were riots in the streets of every major city in America (and several minor cities), and we were inundated with shortages of food, toliet paper, and other essential goods. We were wearing masks and gloves to go grocery shopping, for goodness sake! And for those of you who want to argue about taxes - Trump's tax cut caused my federal taxes to jump significantly because he put a limit on the SALT deductions to give more money to billionaires. 

So, where do we go from here? I don't know. No one knows.

The Following Can All Be True

With the War in Gaza continuing to unfold over the past several months, I've seen a number of half-truths from a number of friends and erstwhile allies, and so I thought we should go over a few things that are all true. 

Israel is Essential to the Survival of the Jewish People: Before we do just about anything here, we need to recognize that a Jewish state is essential for Jewish survival. The history of Judaism after the Diaspora is one continuous cycle of Jews finding a religiously tolerant state, moving there, working their asses off to make the state work, and then for a leader or leaders to up and decide that the Jews are not welcome. Usually, a genocide then occurs. This is what happened in Egypt, Spain, England, Poland, Germany, Ukraine, France, and just about everywhere else post-Diaspora. 

Now, granted, some of the reprisals, while not entirely justified, were wholly predictable (rebellions against the Assyrians and Romans), but those are exceptions. Usually, the pattern follows what happened in Germany - Jews either emigrated into Germany, or were absorbed when Germany took parts of Poland (Poland was a religiously tolerant kingdom). Despite gross anti-Semitism, the most patriotic Germans were often Jewish. In World War 1, German Jews were more likely to volunteer to serve in the army, more likely to perform acts of bravery while in the army, and were more likely to be wounded in the line of duty than the average non-Jewish German. Despite that, the German High Command blamed the Jews for the loss in World War I, which Hitler built upon, leading to the Holocaust - one of many genocides attempted on the Jews over their history.

The way to alleviate the cycle, or prevent it from happening is to give Jews a place to run when shit starts to hit the fan. As much as I'd like that to be the United States, history suggests that we cannot be counted on in the long-term. So, Israel it is.

The Palestinians Have Been Getting the Shit End of the Stick: While Israel is absolutely necessary, we need to acknowledge the fact that people were living in the area we call Israel today when Israel was created. At the time of Israel's creation, these people would probably have referred to themselves as Arabs. But in the past 70 years of struggle, these people have a new identity and nation - Palestine. Whether that nation predated the creation of Israel or not is beside the point, these people, the Palestinians, who lost land and property when Israel was created, and who continue to lose land today, are more or less fucked. Had the powers that be (the US and Britain) started compensating Palestinians for the loss of land, we would probably be in a better situation, but that's beside the point as well. 

What we had going into 2024, particularly in the Gaza Strip, were millions of people crammed into a tiny strip of land forced to live in refugee camps. Most Gazans, in fact, lived in refugee camps, as did their parents and their grandparents. It's a fucking hellhole. I once talked with an Uber driver who had just left Gaza (this was maybe in 2016, I have no idea how he got out), and when I asked him about being there, he just cried in front of a stranger. It's that bad. And it's the American/British fuckup at the start that made it this bad (particularly the British, who controlled the area post WW1).

Hamas is a Terrorist Organization and Everyone Involved in the October 7 Attacks Deserves a Long, Slow Death: One reason Gazans have had it so rough is Hamas. Hamas managed to win an election in Gaza about 20 years ago (the locals were giving a hearty fuck-you to the PLA), and has refused to allow any elections since. As Israel has tightened the noose around Hamas, it is the people living in Gaza who were choking. But because of that noose, Hamas was becoming more and more irrelevant in Middle East politics, and so they hatched a plan, leading to the deaths of 1,500 Israeli civilians (and these were gruesome deaths). The goal of these attacks was not the downfall of Israel, it was to encourage the Israeli government to perpetuate a massacre in Gaza. That's why they killed as many as they did, and why they took the time to kill in gruesome ways - Hamas wanted Israel to scream for vengeance. The reason is that the Israelis went in hard enough, the carnage would make Israel an international pariah. 

The Israeli Government, Lead By Bibi Netanyahu was More Than Happy to Massacre Civilians in Gaza: For years now, various elements of Netanyahu's government have described Palestinians as subhuman, vermin, or worse, while encouraging Israelis in the West Bank to harass and terrorize the Palestinians off their land. Netanyahu, in fact, rejects the very idea of a two-state solution (the creation of a Palestinian state to exist next to Israel), and simply favors the removal of all Palestinians from Gaza and the West Bank. So, when the Hamas struck, the Israeli government was more than happy to return the favor.

Of course, there's a bit more to the story - the Israeli government completely and utterly fucked up, which lead to the October 7 attacks. In order to support the various Israeli settlers in their harassment campaigns, the Israeli government, despite getting clear intelligence that Hamas was up to something, pulled troops away from Gaza and into the West Bank. Hamas recognized the lack of forces in Gaza, and struck. So, the only way for Netanyahu - who, by the way, is not in prison for corruption only because he is Prime Minister - to try to maintain power was to come down hard on Gaza. Oh, and since everyone hates his ass right now, the only way to stay in power is to prolong the crisis and prevent any elections from taking place. This is, of course, an excellent example of why you don't put someone in power who needs to stay in power to avoid prison.

The Israeli Government is Absolutely Massacring Civilians in Gaza: Since the October 7 attacks, at least 33,899 Gazans have been killed. Israel has bombed hospitals. It has bombed areas after it told Gazan civilians to go there to be safe from bombing. Mass graves have been found in areas the IDF has raided. While the goal of these attacks is to get at Hamas, Hamas has every strategic incentive to hide among the civilian population, and Netanyahu just doesn't fucking care. Nor does his government. To claim otherwise is just silly. Hamas and the Likud are walking hand in hand in this horror. Heck, there's even evidence that some IDF members been sexually assaulting Gazans, just like Hamas did to the Israel civilians on October 7. 

American Jews Have Nothing To Do With the Massacre in Gaza: It's rather the opposite. In the eyes of AIPAC, and coming straight from the mouth of Netanyahu (who is a complete shit), "the greatest threat to Israel is the American Jewry." I once got to overhear a lobbyist from AIPAC speak with a donor, and I shit you not, that is a direct quote from him. Those were words that I will never forget. But the reasoning is simple - American Jews are looking at the situation from the same perspective as everyone else, and start clamoring for reforms.  

But this is also a time to remind everyone that "the Jews" are not a monolith. Fuck, even in Israel, they aren't a monolith. There are literally dozens of political parties and factions within Israel. To think that the American Jewry have anything to do with the slaughter in Gaza is ridiculous. In fact, it's guys like Bernie Sanders who have been calling for the removal of all American support for Israel. 

On the other hand, American Evangelicals, the sort who HAVE been supportive of Netanyahu over the years (and have "supported Israel" in the eyes of AIPAC), are much more likely to be supportive of this massacre than any Jew. So knock off the Anti-Semitism.

Banning or Arresting College Students Protesting the Massacre of Gazans is Stupid and Unproductive: I realize that it's been a long time since anyone has been in college, but people protest shit in college all the fucking time. Most of those protests consist of 20 people and are easily ignored. (Quick anecdote: when I was in college, I joined a protest against the Chinese treatment of the Tibetan people. It was utterly pathetic, as demonstrations go, but the Chinese President who was visiting Colonial Williamsburg, changed his route to avoid us.) But the moment that a protest gets treated with anything other than complete and utter apathy by college administrators, is the moment that it grows exponentially. Worse yet, administrators are not just paying attention, but are using the police to break up demonstrations, they're cancelling graduation ceremonies to prevent Muslim valedictorians from speaking, and basically waving every red flag imaginable. Now it's a fucking cause, you dipshits.

More than a few Assholes Have Used the Protests to Espouse their Anti-Semitic Views: With all that was said above, it is absolutely true that individual protestors and, in some case protest leaders, are crossing the line from "the Israel government suck" into "all Jews are evil." While I would tend to give Palestinian students a pass right now - they're probably terrified about their families back home and aren't thinking straight - the fact that others are more than willing to fall into the anti-Semitic trope of the Jewish monolith, or that Jews control the world, etc., is more than a bit troubling. Part of the reason why I'm writing this is to point out who the bad guys are here: Hamas and the Israeli government. And I think most protesters know this, and that's the message they're trying to send. Unfortunately, that can be the kind of subtle message that tends to get drowned out in a protest.

And, of course, the fact that college presidents are now cracking down on protests also lends itself to the idea of "Jewish control of the world." So, again, thanks for nothing adminstrators.

So, let's be clear - since October 7, we have had 2 bad actors in the Middle East: Gaza and the Israeli government lead by Netanyahu. There may be other bad actors, but those are the main ones. We need to acknowledge this, and then act accordingly. And for the love of God, can we stop the bullshit? 

Screaming Into the Void - Thoughts on the Ohtani Mess

Something interesting happened in baseball that doesn't have to do with play on the field. Not the Athletics complete descent into madness (maybe I'll post about that later), not the new uniforms (see through pants!), but the ongoing saga of Shohei Ohtani and his interpreter, Ippei Mizuhara. (If you know baseball, skid down to the 6th paragraph, as I'm am just giving background).

For those of you who don't know who Shohei Ohtani is, he's essentially the Japanese reincarnation of Babe Ruth. Like Ruth, Ohtani is a pitcher who can hit. In baseball, this is so rare (because pitching itself is a craft that requires hours of preparation and work that it leaves little time to do the work to hit major league pitching), that pitchers are no longer required to go to the plate and hit. Rather, both leagues now use a designated hitter to hit for the pitcher. 

And Ohtani isn't just a pitcher who can hit. He's a pitcher with ace-level stuff, and a hitter who can hit 50-60 home runs per year. In comparison, Babe Ruth might have been a better hitter, but Ohtani is a better pitcher than Ruth. Obviously, being compared to one of the legends of the sport seems extreme, but it is completely apt here. Moreover, unlike Ruth, Ohtani actually takes care of himself. 

So, when it came to free agency last year, it was no surprise that Ohtani signed an enormous contract - 10 years, $700 million. While baseball salaries are huge, no one else is anywhere near $50 million per year, much less $70 million per year. But for a guy like Ohtani, the number, while huge, seems about right. He's an ace pitcher who hits. In the history of MLB - which is a long history, mind you - there's only one other player that compares (Babe Ruth, in case you weren't paying attention).

But after the signing, a lot of weirdness came out. First, most of the money in the contract is deferred, with Ohtani being paid over the course of 30 years, not just 10. This is weird because the team that signed him (the Dodgers) are more than able to pay the money to him without deferment. Apparently, Ohtani requested the money to be deferred, which may be a tax dodge. And certainly the California Franchise Tax Board thinks so. 

Second, Ohtani announced that he was married. Given Ohtani's status as a huge celebrity in Japan (he reportedly makes over $50 million in endorsements annually in Japan), the fact that Ohtani was even dating anyone was a shock, much less being married.

Third, and the whole point of this post, Ohtani got connected to a gambling scandal. Specifically, an illegal bookmaking operation in Orange County who was under investigation by the FBI, received money from Ohtani's banking account, which violates federal law. The initial report was that Ohtani made those payments to the bookie at the request of his interpreter, Ippei Mizuhara. Actually, at the behest of the interpreter for the Los Angeles Dodger, as Mizuhara was their employee. This report was based on the statements made on Ohtani's behalf by CAA, Ohtani's sports agent.

The three problems with that statement is (1) if it was true, Ohtani would have violated federal law; (2) it looks like Ohtani used Mizuhara to place bets on his behalf to avoid MLB's prohibition on gambling; and (3) it was completely, and utterly false.

We now know that Mizuhara - who was Ohtani's friend, and more or less his gateway to the English speaking world - stole over $16 MILLION from Ohtani to cover his extensive gambling debts. Mizuhara was apparently over $40 million in debt, which he racked up in 2-4 years. He did this by literally impersonating Ohtani over the phone, and hacking Ohtani's bank application (reportedly changing the settings so Ohtani wouldn't be notified about any withdrawals from his account). Further, the reason why the initial statement was made that Ohtani paid this money to cover for Mizuhara was because Ohtani's agent ONLY TALKED TO MIZUHARA about this, and took Mizuhara at his word.

While some people are talking about Ohtani and gambling, I would like to point out one thing that's stuck in my craw since this went down: CAA RELIED ON MIZUHARA FOR ALL COMMUNICATIONS WITH OHTANI. This is the same guy who, according to the FBI (and who's about to plead guilty), REGULARLY LIED TO OHTANI ABOUT WHAT PEOPLE WERE SAYING TO HIM IN ENGLISH. Now, this is bad, in and of itself, obviously, but the bulk of these conversations occurred WHILE OHTANI WAS NEGOTIATING THE LARGEST FREE AGENT DEAL IN MLB HISTORY.

In other words, we have no idea if Ohtani actually intended on signing with the Dodgers or if he was steered there by Mizuhara - who subsequently was hired by the Dodgers at an inflated salary. We have no idea if the deferment was Ohtani's idea, or if it was Mizuhara's guilty conscience (if there is no money to steal, he can't steal it). Now granted, this issue is not nearly as sexy as gambling, but this is the sort of thing that keeps attorneys up at night. The sole use of Mizuhara for communications with Ohtani could very well be deemed malpractice. It could potentially be grounds for Ohtani to void his contract with the Dodgers. Hell, is Ohtani's contract with CAA even valid, or did Ohtani keep them on because Mizuhara told him to (rather than go to an agency that had Japanese speakers on staff)?

For those of you in the media, this is the story, not gambling. I am 1000% sure that Ohtani's lawyers (who just came onto the scene here) is taking a close look at any contract where Mizuhara took part as the negotiator. But in the meantime, journalists, LOOK INTO THE CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS WHERE MIZUHARA WAS THE INTERPRETER! Just because Mizuhara is pleading guilty does not mean this story ends.

News Flash: Democrats are Members of A Political Party

Yesterday, we saw the House Republicans blow themselves up when they threw out Kevin McCarthy as Speaker. McCarthy was done in when 8 of his Republican colleagues voted to oust him, coupled with 208 Democrats. In the aftermath, McCarthy blamed the Democrats for his ouster rather than blame the guys who brought the motion to kick his ass to the curb.

While McCarthy's statements are largely sour grapes, it is also true that he seemed genuinely shocked that the Congressional Democratic Caucus wouldn't support him. After all, he had just pushed through a clean spending bill (which he previously promised he would push through, and then tried to renege, and then blamed Democrats for its passage). Other people have expressed concern that the actions of the Democrats in the House sends Congress into chaos. 

But all that forgets the fact that Kevin McCarthy is a REPUBLICAN member of Congress. The party that put him into power is the REPUBLICAN PARTY. The members of Congress who made him Speaker of the House (after 15 votes) were REPUBLICANS. At no time did any Democrat support McCarthy. And why would they? He opened an impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden despite any evidence of any wrongdoing. And McCarthy has been a partisan weasel his entire career. Not backing McCarthy was the most obvious play for the Democrats here. In fact, if the shoe was on the other foot, any Democratic Speaker would be considered foolish for counting on Republican votes to save their ass.

All of this leads me to another point that has been floating around in my discourse for awhile - the Democratic Party is a POLITICAL PARTY. Democratic politicians are going to act like partisan politicians. Democratic Party officials are going to act like political party officials. That should be the expected thing. Because that's how normal political parties operate.

I recognize that we are in very strange times, but the weird behavior is all coming from the Republican side of the aisle. McCarthy went down because unlike all other Speakers who have held the position, McCarthy failed to keep his backbenchers in check during the session. That's on him. 

If not Trump, then Who?

The last time I blogged, I talked about how the good money was on Trump winning the nomination. And I stand by that belief because of all the potential Presidential candidates, Trump does give the GOP the best shot at beating Joe Biden because he is so good at firing up the GOP base.

But. . .the guy is facing 74 felony counts SO FAR. And he's likely to be indicted on several more felony counts related to January 6, and his shenanigans with Georgia and Michigan. That's a lot for any voter to digest. In particular, the Mar-a-Lago case is especially problematic for Trump because he is absolutely the kind of guy to pull shit like this. He can argue away the New York indictments, or the January 6th stuff as fighting for his voters, but stealing state secrets so you can show them off to your dinner guests is. . .not good. Recent polls are showing that some Republican voters are backing off of Trump. Of course, that's right now. It would not be surprising if Trump was able to turn the tide with GOP voters.

With that said, if not Trump, then who? Whoever would be selected would be a sacrificial lamb, as Trump would absolutely run as an independent and split the GOP vote (the only way he stays out of prison is if he's elected), and they would be running against an incumbent in Joe Biden. But that's not a bad thing if the goal of the candidate is to essentially clean up the GOP's reputation. Make a good showing, and the stink of Trump is gone by 2028 (and possibly by 2026).

Of those who are running, I think we can assume DeSantis will not be the nominee. It is sort of wild how Florida keeps putting up candidates who look like surefire winners (Jeb!, Rubio) only to have them flame out early, but here we are. DeSantis is running out of cash, not connecting with voters, and keeps running smack into bad press. For instance, he had to fire ANOTHER staffer for posting ANOTHER ad featuring Nazi imagery. And with his fascist tendencies, DeSantis isn't the kind of candidate who can wash off the stink.

Nikki Haley and Tim Scott are two who could. Haley was a reasonably decent governor of South Carolina, and Ambassador to the UN under Trump. Not great, but not awful. Tim Scott, also from South Carolina, fits in much the same mold. They'd get killed in the general election, but would do so with dignity and grace. 

Chris Christie, the former governor of New Jersey, and someone who sucked up to Trump in an attempt to be AG, and was denied, wouldn't be a bad choice for a sacrificial lamb, either. The media likes him, and he would pose a direct and aggressive challenge to Biden. This is the guy who destroyed Marc Rubio in a debate. Now, his past is such that he could easily be lampooned as a jackass (he once blocked off traffic to a city because the mayor refused to endorse him), but he's fast enough to stay in the game. 

Asa Hutchinson/Doug Burgum are also possibilities as nominee. In a normal world, Hutchinson would be a favorite, as he served in Congress and was a governor. A governor of a state with one of the highest murder rates in the country, but still a governor. Burgum is a governor of North Dakota which shouldn't be a state. 

Larry Elder would be, as he was in California, an enormous disaster. But it is true that he would be Trump without the indictments, payoffs to pornstars, or overt Russian mafia/intelligence connections. 

And then there's Mike Pence. He would absolutely get creamed with dignity. But he's in Ron DeSantis territory where he's got no shot. A better shot than DeSantis at this point, but not by much.

Of the bunch, if I were a GOP primary voter, I'd probably go with either Tim Scott or Chris Christie. In fact, a ticket with both Scott and Christie would lose with dignity, while also getting some shots in for 2026. 

Trump is Going to Be the GOP Nominee, and Other Observations

 Hey everyone, before I jump into this post, I do want people to know that I do still blog - but I haven't posted because my posts are usually crap, or incomplete. The joys of being a lawyer with young kids who works from home. Also, while I'm technically on Twitter (as I haven't shut down my account), I don't use it ever. You can find me at lawyerjsd@mastodon.social. Now onto your regularly scheduled programming:

As of right now, former President Donald J. Trump is facing a fuck ton of legal problems. He's under an indictment in New York State for fraud, a federal indictment for violations of the Espionage Act (ironically, the very same statute he accused Hillary Clinton of violating in 2016), has another possible federal indictment coming for his involvement in the January 6 insurrection, and possible indictments in Georgia, Nevada, and Michigan for threatening officials (amongst other things). And then we get into civil liability, including multiple lawsuits for defamation pending. It's. . .a lot. More than any Presidential candidate has ever faced during a campaign. Hell, most candidates would drop out to deal with the legal stuff.

But Trump isn't going to drop out. The fact is, Trump is probably dead to rights on the one federal indictment we know about, and is likely dead to rights on the one coming up. At his age, any time in prison likely means he's in prison for the rest of his life (and if you have seen any of the Ticktocks on federal prison life, federal prisons are not a place to be, ever). Trump's only shot at not dying in prison is to run for President, win, and then pardon himself on the federal charges. Then he can negotiate a deal on the state charges (possibly). That's his way out.

Given this fact, you might wonder whether Trump has any shot at winning anything. And well, he does. The thing about Trump is separates him from every other Republican out there, is he understands the Republican Party voter without BEING a Republican Party voter. This is a key distinction.

If you look at a guy like Ron DeSantis, or Mike Pence, who are dyed in the wool Republicans, they believe the bullshit they espouse. DeSantis believes that his fight against Wokeism is some kind of crusade and expects everyone to applaud him for it, because that's the bullshit that everyone spouts off. But aside from people who are deeply hooked into conservative media, no one gives a shit about wokeism or CRT. And they don't give a shit about drag shows, or transgendered people. They are just pissed that they are losing when other people seem to be winning.

Trump understands this innately. What were his stated policies in 2016? That his supporters would get tired of all the winning. In 2020, the GOP national platform - a document which usually spans hundreds of pages of policies - simply stated that the platform was whatever Trump said it was. And people ate that shit up. 

No other candidate can capture that kind of Id on the GOP side. DeSantis is a bully, a thug, and worst of all, someone who cares about policy. Nerd! Pence isn't going to go anywhere - the diehards were literally going to lynch him on January 6. Tim Scott and Nikki Haley are basically running for VP bonafides. Christie is running to try and get his reputation back from being Trump's errand boy. 

None of these candidates can make the case against Trump because none of them will tell Trump supporters that Trump is a loser. That he lost the 2020 election, and that he only won 2016 because the vagaries of the Electoral College. None of them can, because Trump has made the idea that he won in 2020 part of the GOP canon. Why else wouldn't the Republican Senators convict him for his actions on January 6? 

Further, every other candidate has something to lose if they stay in too long. Trump does not. The only way he avoids prison is winning. So expect him to try and pull every trick he can possibly conceive of to win. And his supporters will cheer on every attempt. In the meantime, if Trump gets elected, the people around him are planning on a wholesale takeover of government. That's if he gets elected. But nonetheless, we're once again headed for dangerous times.

Coming Out of Retirement For Roe v. Wade

Okay, it's been several years since I've actually blogged. For a short while, I thought about starting a podcast (because I'm a white guy, and that's what we do), but I couldn't figure out how you actually post audio files to be a podcast because. . .well. . .fuck, I'm old. Also, I have young kids.

But with the recent decisions of the US Supreme Court regarding Texas SB8, the law banning abortions after 6 weeks, and the recent decision allowing this law to go forward because procedurally it's weird. Let me say the following - despite what you may or may not think about abortion rights, this law, and the Supreme Court's determination that it cannot enjoin the application of this law should be terrifying to everyone. 

Here's why: as if this time, abortion rights are still technically protected by the U.S. Constitution. Had Texas utilized a traditional enforcement mechanism - criminal prosecution - the Supreme Court would have to determine whether or not abortion rights are still constitutionally protected. Since Kavanaugh is a chickenshit, and the other conservative Justices don't give a shit, the Supreme Court sidestepped the issue, stating that it cannot hear a case where private actors are tasked with enforcing the law. That's. . .actually worse than just overturning Roe.

Under the Texas statute, all abortions after being able to hear the fetal heartbeat are prohibited. That is effectively 6 weeks from the date of the woman's (or, if the person is trans or nonbinary, the child bearing person's) last period.* Anyone who induces or performs the abortion, anyone who aids or abets the abortion, and anyone who intends on aiding or abetting the abortion is liable to anyone - literally anyone in the world - for a statutory minimum damages of $10,000, plus actual damages (if they exist), and attorneys' fees and costs. If the plaintiff loses the case, they are not liable for anything. 

The scary part here is that it encourages all kinds of mischief. Give someone a ride to Planned Parenthood? That's $10,000 plus attorneys' fees and costs (likely over $10,000), even if that person doesn't get the abortion. If Google allows Texas women to conduct internet searches for "how can I get an abortion?" Google, and all of its employees, would likely be liable for aiding and abetting.** If a hospital performs a D&C post miscarriage and doesn't make it very clear that it was a miscarriage (medically known as a SPONTANEOUS ABORTION), that's $10,000 of liability for everyone in the hospital. Now, the general policy effects are horrific - typical medical services for child bearing people would be severely curtailed for fear of litigation from all over. But what's especially concerning is the fact that the Supreme Court has given tacit approval to this enforcement mechanism. 

That's because if this enforcement mechanism is allowed to stand, then any state could take away constitutional rights (and remember, abortion is still technically a constitutional right) by utilizing this enforcement mechanism. California, for instance, could ban all criticism of Gavin Newsom and even allow people to sue others for intending to criticize Gavin Newsom. Missouri could ban the practice of Mormonism, and allow random people to sue people for practicing Mormonism, intending to practice Mormonism, or aiding and abetting people intending on practicing Mormonism. Hell, a state could outright ban Black people from voting so long as they use this mechanism.

In other words, by punting on the question of whether abortion is a constitutionally protected activity based on this enforcement mechanism, the Supreme Court just opened the door for states to take away every other Constitutionally protected right. Now, you could say that when this issue does come up in the future for the First Amendment, or whatnot, that the Supreme Court will decide differently. And that's certainly possible, but the Supreme Court doesn't hear every case - the lower courts do. And all of them will be bound by this decision. 

And there's more - the Supreme Court just held that to pursue a case in federal court, whether under diversity jurisdiction or not, the plaintiff has to plead and prove concrete harm - that the harm alleged in the complaint resulted in the loss of money or property, or in the loss of a substantive right. What this means for Texas is that all of the cases will be held strictly in Texas state courts until after the Texas Supreme Court hears the case. Similarly, any bounty statute of the sort Texas has implemented found in any other state would never see the inside of a federal courthouse until, maybe, the Supreme Court decided to hear the case. Now, for a state like California, that's not terrible as the Courts here are pretty good. But in other states? 

The long and short of it is that this Court is looking to do real damage to the rule of law in this country and we're just at the beginning. 

*Just as an aside: the earliest a person would ever know they're pregnant is four and a half weeks after her last period, and even then, only if she's taking a pregnancy test every single day. Even then, the tests at that stage are completely unreliable. For the vast majority of women, they aren't aware that they're pregnant until week 5 or 6, so this effectively bans all abortion. 

**If I were Google's General Counsel, I would be EXTREMELY concerned about this eventuality. 

The 2020 Election Early Retrospective

 Yeah, it's been awhile since I last blogged, but I was fighting with a 3 year old over. . .everything. Ugh. Anyway, as of this morning, here are my general thoughts:

It Looks Like Biden Will Win. . .

As of right now, Joe Biden appears poised to win the Presidency. He's up in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Arizona, and looking promising in Pennsylvania and Georgia. He will most likely get over 300 electoral votes. While we can get into the some of the disappointment below, the thing to keep in mind is that Biden actually managed to pull off the victory. That's not a small feat given that Trump raised over $1 billion, blew threw it, and then utilized every portion of the federal government he controls to help his reelection. Our tax dollars funded much of his campaign, including the Republican National Convention being held on the grounds of the White House. That's. . .pretty fucking amazing. 

And if you look at the electoral history of presidential elections, what Biden did last night (assuming he pulls off the win), is even more amazing. Incumbent presidents get the benefit of the doubt - meaning that when someone who's undecided steps into the voting booth and votes, they tend to vote for the guy in office. That makes the job of the challenger incredibly hard, and that goes double for Presidential elections. In the past 90 years of Presidential elections, only three (if the numbers hold) Presidents have lost a reelection campaign: Jimmy Carter, George H.W. Bush, and Donald Trump. 

What's also amazing about the potential win is that Joe Biden is not the transformative figure that Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton were. He doesn't represent a watershed change in the Democratic Party - he is a Party insider. It is pretty clear to me is that Biden fits with the mood of the non-Trump voters. He was somber, and more than any other candidate I've ever seen, could understand the grief that a lot of people are feeling right now. And his campaign in that regard was pitch-perfect.

But It Wasn't A Landslide

If you look at the fundamentals of Donald Trump's Administration, it's pretty clear that, at least as domestic policies go, Donald Trump was the worst President of my lifetime. I would have said George W. Bush, but Bush got a fair bit of (EXTREMELY BAD) legislation passed. The only major piece of legislation passed in the past four years was a tax cut for the rich - and a major tax increase for middle class families, by the way. That's it. Everything else Trump has done has been by executive fiat. Now, unlike Bush, he hasn't gotten us into 2-3 foreign wars, but he fucked up the COVID-19 response, and 230,000 people have died.

In that context, it's little wonder that QANON developed with the underlying premise that this is all a facade of nonwork, and that behind the scenes, any day now, Trump is going to arrest all the sexual predators. For those of you who are wondering, Trump is not going to do any of that. He used to walk into the dressing rooms of Miss Teen USA to ogle teenage girls dressing. He doesn't give a shit about sex trafficking, and never has. 

And, in fact, Trump doesn't have any positions whatsoever - except for taking away the protections for people with preexisting conditions from the ACA. Nor does the Republican Party. Their platform was literally, "whatever Mr. Trump says it is." I'm paraphrasing, but I'm not joking. Look it up.

Despite all of his craziness, his rampant corruption, the fact that women are being forcibly sterilized at the Border, the fact that he orphaned hundreds of refugee kids, the fact that he bungled a pandemic so badly my daughter will probably never see her kindergarten classroom, Donald Trump almost won reelection. In fact, he got more votes in 2020 than he did in 2016. Now, again, some of that is the incumbent effect, but the deeper issue is that we have a divide in this country that is based largely on the types and sources of information we receive. As a result, it's like we as a country live in two different worlds. That's really, really, bad.

In fact, it's untenable. How can policies be discussed or considered when there's no agreement on what the underlying problem is? Or what's actually going on? How can you ever come to some agreement? As an attorney, I negotiate settlements all the time and I've learned something - the Parties have to be on the same page. Right now, we're nowhere near the same book.

To give you an example, take COVID-19. While we're still learning about this disease, we know that it is transmitted through the air, that it causes hospitalization in 15% of all reported cases, and it causes death in 2.75% of all cases. We know this because of the numbers put out by Johns Hopkins and the CDC, among others. Now, there might be some variation in the death toll, but we generally know that it kills anywhere from 1-5% of those who get the disease. Over 230,000 Americans have died from it. But you look on Facebook, and there are a variety of conspiracy theories regarding Fauci, or that doctors get paid more money for COVID*, and suddenly dealing with the pandemic becomes political. We can't agree on what needs to be done because 50% of the population doesn't believe that COVID-19 is at all dangerous, despite the fact that 1,000 people a day are dying.

A big part of that is the fact that we have two types of media in this country - corporate media (CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS) and conservative media (Fox, etc.). Corporate media just wants to sell advertising, and advertisers want to sell people stuff. Conservative media wants to sell itself, and push conservative ideals. In that context, people never really got a full understanding of how corrupt and ugly the Trump Administration really was. And in the meantime, Facebook gives special privileges to the Daily Wire, a conservative outlet, and wave after wave of conspiracy theories hit the public. In the meantime, there are dozens of examples of corporate media normalizing Trump's behavior.

Democrats, meanwhile, are hardly free from blame. Pelosi and the House Democrats stopped investigating and stopped putting in the work necessary to push Democratic messages to the forefront. When Obama wore a tan suit, that's all the GOP and conservative media could talk about for WEEKS. When Trump was found to be taking bribes, or paying $750 in taxes for 2016 and 2017, or when it was discovered he has a secret Chinese bank account, or when it was found that the DHS has an unlicensed doctor ripping out the uteruses of women in immigrant camps against their will, no one put in the work to get that story onto the front page of the New York Times for as long as possible. For that reason, I hope Pelosi steps down as the Speaker of the House. She isn't up to the task.

The long and short of it is, we're going to be dealing with this for a long time. Trump isn't the cause of this breakdown, he's a symptom of a larger rot. My guess is that we'll see Trump, or a Trumpist run for President in 2024, and win the GOP nomination. My worry is that the next one will be a little bit smarter, a little bit more disciplined, and a little bit less obvious in their authoritarian impulses. 

One Note Regarding Bernie Sanders

I've seen a fair number of people online (okay, on Twitter), who say that Sanders would've beaten Trump by a larger vote share. I disagree with this sentiment for a variety of reasons. First and foremost, Bernie Sanders' 2020 campaign apparatus was. . .bad. Going into 2020, Bernie Sanders had a solid core of support, a fundraising base that was unrivaled, and voter data for every voter in the 2016 Democratic primaries. He had every advantage, and never increased his base. I just don't see how Sanders could have pulled off a win.

That said, could a more progressive candidate have done a better job, or won by a larger margin? Possibly. Biden ran a very good campaign, but he was intentionally vague on certain things in order to maintain as large of a tent as possible. But since polling is absolutely fucked, who knows.

Polling is Fucked

As with 2016, the 2020 polling showed a Democratic wave election, and then flipped to a much closer one. While some people assert ulterior motives to pollsters, the issue here is voter screens, and how they're done. Think of it this way, if you call 1000 numbers at random, you are going to get a fair number of people who probably can't vote. You will also get a fair number of people who don't vote, and then you'll get likely voters. Of those, the likely voters are going to be the most valuable because their opinions will translate into actual votes.

But figuring out who the likely voters are in 2020 was a nightmare. Both Parties have shown a tremendous ability to get out their voters to the polls, with Donald Trump's campaign seemingly able to do this at a better rate than the Democrats in places like Florida, North Carolina, and Texas. While voter suppression is a real thing, more people actually voted for Trump this time around than in 2016, and no one expected their votes. That's either the result of good GOTV, or good fraud. 

Either way, the end result is that polling is now broken. I don't know how you fix this. The best bet is probably to stick with polling aggregators like fivethirtyeight.com, but even then, things are tricky.