All of the polls are moving toward Trump -- except one, which is the most accurate and the most pro-Trump (in terms of results): Rasmussen. Why?
This race is still too close to call. And while I would rather be Trump than Harris, she has a lock on the votes of women who put abortion above all other issues and who hate Trump with a burning passion. (You can hear it in Michelle Obama's anger at men who back Trump, against women's supposed wishes.)
I feel like Harris can't win -- not just because Trump has so many ways to win, but also because even if she does win, the election has been so rigged in her favor, while her performance has been so bad, that no one will accept it.
That is not to say there will be a violent rejection of the results. Rather, people -- especially men -- will quietly withdraw and insulate their lives, as much as is possible, from public life, the law, the eyes of the state. (Many do already.)
I feel a sense of optimism, partly because the prospect of a Harris win, I believe, has motivated Israel to take risks -- successfully -- to defeat its enemies. I think many others will follow that example and pursue their interest, regardless.
A Trump win would present new challenges: the task of governing will be nearly impossible. Harris would be stuck with problems largely of her party's own creation: inflation, debt, instability, crime... good luck with all that, Democrats.
Trump would be infinitely preferable, and would open new possibilities for joint investment, cultural renewal, global (yes, global) leadership... but we will also survive a Harris presidency, though it may come at a deep and lasting cost.
The story of Noah is familiar; the details, less so.
Noah is often seen as an ambivalent figure. He was righteous -- but only for his generation. What was his deficiency?
One answer suggests itself: knowing that the world was about to be flooded, he built an Ark for the animals and for his own family -- but did not try to save anyone else or to convince them to repent and change their ways (the prophet Jonah, later, would share that reluctance).
Abraham, later, would set himself apart by arguing with God -- with the Lord Himself! -- against the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, saying that they should be saved if there were enough righteous people to be found (there were not).
Still, Noah was good enough -- and sometimes, that really is sufficient to save the world. We don't need heroes every time -- just ordinary decency.
Hi all -- as I noted last month, I'm going to be closing down my Locals page, at least for tips and subscriptions -- I may keep the page up and the posts as well, but I'm no longer going to be accepting any kind of payment.
Look for cancelation in the very near future. Thank you for your support!
An interesting weekend -- one of the last of Daylight Savings Time -- in which there is much to celebrate, much to contemplate, and a bit to worry about.
The Gaza peace deal is shaky, but holding, after the living hostages returned; the shutdown is still going on, with no end in sight; the China trade war is heating up; and the confrontation with Venezuela continues to escalate.
The "No Kings" protest was a dud, despite the media's attempt to inflate it. What I find fascinating is that the Democrats have basically stolen the rhetoric and the imagery of the Tea Party protests, circa 2009. They claim they are defending the Constitution -- just like the Tea Party did.
On the one hand, this is good. How wonderful to have a political system in which both sides, bitterly opposed though they are, articulate differences through the Constitution -- and not, as in so many other countries, outside it.
On the other, this is sheer hypocrisy for the Democrats. Not only did they malign the Tea Party as ...
