The Risky Business of Foretelling the Future

Predicting the future is a risky business, but one that gives us respite from the tedious everyday.  It is a trip into speculation and “I told you so” territory.

I start my journey with the following assumption. 

In a democracy, we often choose winners to counterweight their predecessors alleged lack of results or in opposition to them.  It has been suggested that the reason Trump won was Obama’s dismal performance. We elected Obama because we opposed vehemently Bush II’s performance. We selected Bush II to contravene Bill Clinton’s personal excesses. I could continue the list all the way back to FDR.

My point is that politics is a game of action-reaction. The pendulum has a way of swinging widely based on voters' reaction to actions taken by the incumbent administration. The larger the swing, the more likely we are to oscillate from one extreme to the other.

It looks to me that elections are guided by what has been called lagging indicators (rear view mirror) from the economy, war and peace, jobs, and so on. In a sense we look back at mistakes and choose someone who we anticipate might fix them. We rarely choose someone because of his or her views on issues affecting future generations. We prefer politicians who are good plumbers, you know, good at fixing leaks.  I recall two occasions when a president energized us about the future. JFK told us that we could go to the Moon in ten years, and we did. Wilson told us that the formation of the League of Nations would prevent future wars, but it did not. Maybe there have been others, but I don’t recall.

Scenario

It is 2033! 

The prior year (2032) we held the presidential elections. The Democrats won handily. For the first time we elected a woman as our president, and a woman of color to boot. Voters had enough of 16 years of Republican rule. It was time to change. The voters chose a progressive and liberal agenda over a conservative one. Voters also gave the new president’s party control of both houses of Congress.

Reflecting the mood of the country, the president’s cabinet is composed exclusively of women, LGBT, brown or black, most under the age of 45. Lower level positions will be assigned in such a way as to reduce, and eventually eliminate, perceived white privilege.

The new president has been in her job for about a year. Much turmoil and instability have marked her first year in office. Pent-up resentment and a sense of urgency have resulted in new laws and initiatives. The reaction from the right has been strident.   

New Laws

Congress has passed a flurry of laws to satisfy the progressives'  hunger. Here are the most significant laws passed during the first year:

·      Gun Legislation – all guns have been outlawed. Citizens are urged to turn them in voluntarily or face confiscation. Violators could be imprisoned for up to five years, Citizens can rent and still use guns at shooting ranges.

·      Immigration – all illegal immigrants have been given amnesty. The country has opted for open borders. Anyone can come to the U.S. to live if they do not have a criminal record.  Immigrants will be entitled to vote after one-year residency.

·      Healthcare – Congress has voted for a single payer system. No one will go without coverage. High earners will pay for the lower earners. No one shall be without insurance coverage. Immigrants will receive coverage upon arrival.

·      Energy – the use of coal and drilling for oil is outlawed starting 2020. All new cars will be electric starting 2040. All buildings and residences are required to install solar panels or face large fines by 2040. In Chicago and other windy cities, all residents will be required to take advantage of the wind by installing wind-propelled energy generation systems.

·      College Loans – Congress has forgiven all such loans. The outstanding debt will be repaid by increased corporate and high earners' taxes. New college loans will be made available upon demand without obligation to repay them.

·      Inheritance Tax – Congress has passed a law designed to tax estates valued at more than $ 15 million dollars at 75% rate. This law will singlehandedly reduce the number of super rich Americans.

·      Living Wage – Americans will be entitled to earn a minimum wage that enables them to live in the State in which they reside. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) will compute the actual rates semi-annually for each State. In 2035 California, for example,  the minimum wage rate will jump to $ 50 per hour while in Mississippi it will grow to $ 15 per hour.

Unfinished Business

The agenda for the remaining three years is an ambitious one. The intent is to radically transform America to an all-inclusive, diverse, and egalitarian society where society’s needs supersede the individual’s.  In particular, new laws will be enacted in the remaining years of the legislature to:

·      Reduce the size of the military so that funds can be redirected toward social programs

·      Disarm the police and implement a quota system for arrests in order to prevent profiling and police shootings

·      Punish non-PC language that offends anyone with jail time  

·      Legalize drugs starting with pot immediately

·      Expunge drug convictions and allow ex-convicts to vote

·      Establish price controls on drug companies

·      Require all employers with 50 or more employees to establish works councils so that union members can participate in the running of a company

·      Depopulate our prison system of  low level offenders

·      Establish clear boundaries around the role and practice of religion  

·      Expand the Supreme Court from 9 to 15 to break the conservative majority of 7 to 2 after the retirement of  liberal justices Ginsburg and Breyer, and the replacement of Thomas and Kennedy with young conservative judges

Reactions by Republicans

The reactions have been predictable and vehement. Fear that these changes will forever change their way of life, many have embarked on resisting at all cost.

·      Demonstrations have bubbled up in the heartland and throughout the south. The auto industry and the many satellite vendors and suppliers have notified their workers of pending layoffs.

·      35 attorney generals have sued the federal government on the grounds that constitutional rights are being thwarted: freedom of speech, right to own guns, and violation of collective bargaining laws.

·      The same states have deployed their national guard to prevent immigrants from entering their state without prior approval by the host state. The federal government is suing these states claiming that they do not have the right to prevent free movement of goods and people.

·      Fox News has revealed that the president, while in college, smoked marijuana and drank excessively. Several men have come forth to describe trysts they had with the President in college.

·      CNN debunked reports that the President had an affair with her driver while going to Camp David. The driver has not been identified. CNN attacked the revelation as fake news.

·      Conservative students at the University of California prevented Barak Obama from speaking. One professor unleashed a foul-mouthed rejoice upon hearing of Bill Clinton’s death.

·      Ex-partner of the president accuses her of infidelity and chicanery during their seven-year relationship. He broke up with her after learning of her relationship with another woman.

·      Clubs have been organized nation-wide to resist, resist, and resist any and all actions undertaken by this administration as un-American and in violation of the constitution.

·      Fox News is pillorying the administration’s every move and criticizing each and everyone as being incompetent, corrupt, and lacking the high moral standards they demanded of their adversaries.

·      Lurid videos on the Internet question the president’s personal character and scandal-ridden background. President labels these stories as fake news.

·      Thousands of Republicans have left coastal states unable to accept what they perceive as a totalitarian shift toward Marxism.

·      The economy is not doing well. Unemployment is up and the national deficit is growing. The stock market has been tanking out of fear for the survival of the free enterprise system.

·      Ford and General Motors have sought bankruptcy protection as they shift production to electric cars and trucks. Chrysler-Fiat is shifting all car and truck production south of the border. About 250,000 auto workers are affected.

Reactions by Democrats

The response from the Democrats has been vehement as well.  They see the Republican tactics as obstruction and resistance to the orderly transfer of power. Many are calling for action:

·      All dissenters and troublemakers should be jailed after a quick summary court appearance.

·      Grass root efforts should be encouraged to take over the governorship in enough states to permit the elimination of the Electoral College in favor of national elections for President and Vice President.

·      All Democrats are encouraged to watch at least one of the two cable networks and three main media channels: CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, and NBC to prevent them from folding due to major drop in their viewership.

·      Counter demonstrations should be organized to offset the nightly spectacle of Republicans demonstrating against the incumbent administration.

·      In keeping with community organizing principles, the administration should increase recruitment of immigrants from Black or Brown countries in order to gain a voting advantage. Immigration from Europe, Australia, and other predominant white countries should be halted indefinitely.

·      Intellectuals continue to highlight the merits of a classless, more equal and just society. They remain unconvinced that those who perform more or better should receive more of the rewards. Their philosophy remains "to each according to his/her need, not his/her accomplishments."

Reality Testing

Unreal? Perhaps! Imagination has few boundaries. We are all free to imagine whatever suits our adventuresome mind. But I bet that most, if not all, of these "predictions" might come to pass.

Questions still remain. 

Will we be better off as a country or will be overwhelmed by our internal schism. 

The electorate is split and the two major parts are quickly moving into extreme territory. Each clings to its own view of America … perhaps without likelihood of reconciliation.

Why You Should Not Trust Polls

During my 30 years of consulting I designed, administered, and analyzed a variety of employee and customer surveys (polls).

 Surveying is an important and efficient method for collecting, organizing, and analyzing the input of hundreds and perhaps thousands of people. A well-designed survey will include demographic identifiers that can help you slice and dice the data. The Internet can capture, update, and report trends and findings in matter of seconds. 

 The quality of the survey results is impacted by a variety of snafus, some technical, others administrative. The most common and generic mistakes people make are:

·      Sampling.  The sample must mirror the population you are surveying. As a federal republic, we elect presidents on a state-by-state basis through the Electoral College, and not on a national referendum basis. That is why the total number of votes is trumped, no pun intended, by the cumulative results of the states. Most polls rely on fix-line phone calls. We know that millions of people have opted for the cellular route. There is no comprehensive phone listing for cell numbers. Therefore, it is easy to miss the input of folks who have chosen to abandon fix lines.

·      Wording. Questions need to be clear, concise, and free of desirability and double binding (two or questions in one).  This is a common problem. The words used must make sense to the respondent. Asking people to pass judgments on topics for which there is an expected (socially desirable) response leads to getting the answer you are fishing for. We saw this in the last election. Folks who supported Trump were not always willing to say so, afraid perhaps of social consequences. Asking questions with an “and” in the middle makes it tough to distinguish which of the two parts is the respondent answering. Asking folks to comment on a topic they know little about is also to be avoided.

·      Snapshots.  Surveys are snapshots in time, not the whole movie. When sequencing the snapshots, you might capture a trend, but not the final movie. There are events (October surprises, for example) that can alter the trend’s trajectory abruptly. We saw this phenomenon in action in last presidential election. On the 27^th of October Clinton was leading; on November 8^th Trump won. In the interim a variety of events took place that might have shifted enough people to the other side.

Defense Mechanisms

When the results of a survey (poll) are “hot” or “shocking”, you can anticipate one of three types of response:

·      Attack. People will criticize the questions, how they were framed or asked, or the context in which they were asked. Some will attack the credibility or the qualifications of the persons conducting the survey. Others will raise questions about the validity and/or reliability of the results. This response is typical of red-hot personalities.

·      Rationalization. People will intellectualize the findings, provide reasons for the results, and engage in what if explorations. Some will debate the statistics. It is an attempt to cool the results down in order to avoid its “hot” or controversial impact. This response is typical of cool-green personalities.

·      Whatever. A few will choose to go with the flow invoking the classical California defense mechanism of “whatever.” It is a nice way to avoid dealing with the controversy or hot potato. This response is typical of the “yellow or sunshine” personality.

Defense mechanisms are responses to a perceived threat. Unless data are cooled down, it will be hard to proceed to the “so-what” and problem-solving phase. We saw these factors in play after the 2016 presidential results. Polls predicted a certain outcome when in-fact another came out.

Mid-Term Elections

We will soon be voting for the entire House of Representatives and 1/3 of the Senate. Every week or so we are presented with poll results.  It is hard to make sense of what they mean. Some experts tell us that it will be a vote for or against Trump. Others will remind you that they will reflect the local situation.

Historically, people vote their pocketbook. The proverbial question is: Are you better off now than you where two years ago? Many will answer this question through their self-interest lens.  Am I earning more? Is my stock portfolio doing better? Am I more secure in my job? Are there more and better job opportunities? And so on.  Others will answer based on their philosophical bent. Do I like Trump’s style and personality? Are we going in the right direction? Are our values being tarnished? And so on.

It is hard to predict which side will carry more weight: economics or personal values. Most folks do not like to change horses in the proverbial mid-stream. If they perceive the country moving in the right direction, they will vote for the status quo. If they perceive that they are worse off now than they were two years ago, they will vote for the opposition party. It will be hard to show that people are not as well off economically given the passage of the tax bill, a surging economy, and a historically low unemployment rate.

The other variable is the message. Is the message uplifting and one that speaks to the voter’s concerns and needs, or is it a message concocted by party extremists pushing an agenda with which the voter does not relate? You cannot be against everything. You have to be for something.

Interesting footnote. The Democrats who upset Republicans in Alabama, Pennsylvania, and other states in the past 2-3 months interim elections look and sound more Republican that the Republicans they replaced.

We are a divided country. Red in the middle, and Blue along the West Coast and the North East. Excesses on both sides of the aisle will surely affect the final result. We are a long way from October and possible surprises.  However, we can predict that one side will rejoice, and the other will cry foul.

The Coming Out of the Deep State

I watched with interest George Stephanopoulos’ interview of ex-FBI Director James Comey on ABC Sunday night. I was disappointed. I learned nothing new about Trump. However, I did learn much about Comey. He came across to me as a pompous, self-righteous and one-dimensional man.

Comey dispenses criticism liberally on Trump (to be expected), on former President Obama (for saying publicly twice that there is “no there-there” regarding the email investigation), on former Attorney General Lynch (for suggesting he use the term “matter” when referring to the Clinton's email investigation, for Loretta Lynch’s lack of transparency), and several others including current Attorney General Sessions.

He had no criticism for Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and others who under his watch are alleged to have engaged in actions intended to stop Trump by discrediting him. Like the fine lawyer he is, he cleverly used language to cast doubt on Trump’s actions by saying that Trump might have committed obstruction of justice. Not for a second, did Comey stop and took responsibility for the extent to which he might have contributed to the problem, other than admitting that he had leaked memos to friends who in turn leaked them to the New York Times, in violation of established FBI protocol.

My appetite whet, I embarked on a little research, thanks to the Internet. 

Most people have for some time suspected that behind the elected government there is a shadow government. It is the latter that stymies any legislation and regulation that conflict with the so-called career government employees' agenda and self-interest. It is the latter that resists change, and it is the latter than makes voters conclude that politicians say one thing, and do another.

Secret Societies

Ardent citizens have joined forces over the centuries to counterweigh the reach and role of government. One such group, the Masons, was instrumental in fueling the rebellion against the perceived exploitive rule of the British monarch over its North American colony.

Since the Middle Ages, people have joined fraternal organizations composed of folks sharing a common craft, its mythological origins, and its sacred rituals. Secret societies exist among Protestants, Catholics, and Jewish communities.

Opus Dei (the Work of God), for example, is the catholic society founded in Spain by Jose Maria Escrivia that has been instrumental over the centuries in protecting the Church’s interests in Latin America.

B’nai B’rith is the Jewish society promoting and supporting the State of Israel. 

Since their founding many societies have slowly morphed into benevolent civic organizations.

To keep outsiders out, secret societies employ passwords, handshakes, rituals, and other symbols to foil unwanted outside attention. Their names might now be perceived as innocuous but their original purpose remains crystal clear … to further members’ political and welfare interests.

The Deep State

The term has surfaced in our current political dialog “to describe influential decision making bodies within the government that are relatively permanent whose policies and long term objectives are unaffected by changing administrations.”

The Deep State draws its power from the national security and intelligence apparatus, where secrecy is a source of power. Over time it has morphed into a so-called 4^th branch of government that in many ways is autonomous from the executive branch. Many conspiracy theories surround the use of the term Deep State.

President Eisenhower was the first to call attention to this phenomenon when he alerted the nation about the danger posed by the military-industrial complex. He was afraid that the combination could lead the nation into unwise military adventures.

President Obama’s alleged lack of success in Afghanistan’s war was engineered by the defense and national security network. In fact, he was pushed into the 2009 “surge”. He also was unable to close the Guantanamo Bay Prison Camp due to the perceived influence of the Deep State.

Currently, President Trump has accused intelligence and executive branch officials of leaking information and seeding confusion in the electorate regarding his policies. Anthropologist C. August Elliott describes the rise of the shallow state as “an America where public servants now function as tugboats guiding the President’s very leaky ship through the shallows, away from a potential shipwreck.”

The Deep State phenomenon is not unique to the U.S.  Similarities in Egypt and Turkey have surfaced recently in the press as a result of the rise of the Islamic Brotherhood in both Egypt and Turkey, and the resulting coup in Egypt by the military.

Many parallels can also be traced in Europe as elected politicians are stymied in their attempts to bring about change and reform. Large and powerful unions have joined the partnership with the Deep State to prevent what they consider a roll back of hard won collective bargaining gains. As a result, much needed changes languish to the detriment of the national interest.

Parallels

Some folks see the fingerprints of the Deep State in the revelations of the Peter Strzok-Lisa Page email exchange. Others see Comey’s book tour as another attempt at checkmating a president seen unworthy or illegitimate to hold office.

Many speculate that the mainstream media has been colluding (unnamed sources) with the Deep State in attacking President Trumps’ every move and action, and by failing to unveiling not a single redeeming value in his persona or leadership style.

Many accuse Democrat members of Congress of hurting the national interest by continually lambasting Trump with accusations of collusion with the Russians to win the election. Trump's defenders point out that not a single member of Trump’s team has yet been charged with collusion. Those who have been charged are accused with crimes either dating to misdeeds prior to the election or for not being candid with the FBI.

The existence of a shadow government run by career bureaucrats is indeed a red flag. The Deep State is not a monolith. Within there are many mini Deep States with different agendas, sinister motives, and party loyalties. Some wage passive resistance to efforts by opposing groups to scuttle legislation or by opposing specific programs.

Regardless of party affiliation, the existence and influence of the Deep State is the ultimate danger faced by our democracy. The American voter has elected none of these folks. Both parties should collaborate in purging these abusers of power …