There Were Primaries Last Night

I'm going to lead with irony.

For your consideration, West Virginia Republican State Senator Robert Karnes, an implacable foe of unions, who said that the teachers' strike in his state, "I can’t say that it will have zero effect, but I don’t think it’ll have any significant effect because, more often than not, they probably weren’t voting on the Republican side of the aisle anyways."

He was turfed out yesterday:

Labor activists, it turns out, know how to get involved on the Republican side of the aisle, too. Karnes was facing a primary challenge from fellow Republican Delegate Bill Hamilton, who beat him, with all the votes counted, 5,787 to 3,749. It was a blowout.

Oh Snap.

It was generally not a good night for former Republicans running as Democrats, anti-abortion politicians:

Tuesday’s primaries featured the crucial state of Pennsylvania plus a smattering of contests in the not-so-crucial states of Nebraska, Idaho, and Oregon.



………

But it’s clear the party is moving in a leftward direction, with even the most mainstream new Democratic candidates on the scene embracing views that would have been extremely daring five or 10 years ago. They are also simply riding positive momentum from the national political environment and — in the specific state of Pennsylvania, though not nationally — from some newly favorable district boundaries.

………

A real sign of the shifting winds of American politics came from the victory of a pair of first-time candidates backed by the Democratic Socialists of America who knocked off two incumbent state legislators from a well-established Pittsburgh political family.
Both Dom and Paul Costa, the incumbent losers, were on the conservative side of modern Democratic Party politics but also seemingly well-entrenched.
Instead, they lost — to Sara Innamorato, a 32-year-old nonprofit manager and former Apple retail store worker, and Summer Lee, a 2015 graduate of the Howard University School of Law. Their wins are ideological victories for the left but also reflect basic demographic dynamics. Women, and especially younger women and women with college degrees, are the core of the anti-Trump political mobilization, and candidates who can mirror and channel that specific demographic are well-positioned to win Democratic primaries this cycle.

………


By contrast to the Innamorato and Lee wins, Bernie Sanders endorsed Rich Lazer in the PA-5 primary, and Sanders and his Our Revolution organization invested heavily in Gregory Edwards’s campaign in PA-7.

Edwards ended up losing to a former Allentown solicitor named Susan Wild who ran with the support of Emily’s List, which works to get pro–abortion rights Democratic women elected to office. (The third candidate, longtime Northampton County District Attorney John Morganelli — an anti-abortion, anti-immigrant Trump supporter — would have been a very awkward fit for the House Democratic caucus.) And Lazer came up short against Mary Gay Scanlon.

………

It’s rare to see an incumbent lieutenant governor attract vigorous primary challenges, but Mike Stack managed to land himself in an unusual sweet spot. Scandals related to his spending and treatment of state employees weren’t bad enough to drive him from office in disgrace but did cost him the confidence of the state party (Gov. Wolf hasn’t endorsed him for reelection) and drew a number of challengers into the race.

The winner is John Fetterman, the heavily tattooed mayor of the small town of Braddock outside Pittsburgh. He was also challenged by Nina Ahmad, a physician and former deputy mayor of Philadelphia. The two challengers were both avatars of competing visions of the future of the Democratic Party, with Fetterman emblematic of a back-to-the-future drive to connect with the white working class and Ahmad representing a vision of a diverse party firmly grounded in the classes of professionals and social service providers.

Fetterman ran for Senate in 2016 as a kind of Berniecrat (though without really garnering support from Sanders himself) and surprised observers by pulling 20 percent of the vote against two much better-known opponents. This won himself a reputation as a charismatic figure and potential rising star.

………

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee does not endorse primary candidates, per se, but it does maintain a roster of Red to Blue program members who are considered the party’s best prospects for flipping seats. It sometimes adds people to Red to Blue before nominations have been settled.

………

But Brad Ashford, who served one term in the US House of Representatives from the Omaha-based second district, has not had it so lucky. Ashford, a moderate who used to be a Republican state legislator and who ran for Omaha mayor as a nonpartisan independent, fits the DCCC recruiting model perfectly.

Local progressives rallied instead behind Kara Eastman, a more conventional liberal who runs a nonprofit called the Omaha Healthy Kids Alliance. In national politics, she secured support from Justice Democrats and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee.

Despite running a platform of single-payer health care and a $15-per-hour minimum wage, Eastman didn’t snag an Our Revolution endorsement (likely because she backed Clinton in 2016) but also didn’t secure support from Emily’s List or NARAL. They overlooked Ashford’s past as an anti-abortion state legislator in favor of his solidly pro-abortion rights record during his two years in the House.

The race was incredibly close (and hadn’t yet been called at press time [It's been called, Eastman won by about 1%]), a fact that doesn’t bode well for the DCCC’s top choices.

I've heard reports that the so-called professionals at the DNC and te DCCC are concerned.

F%$# them.

Also, for those candidates who won despite meddling:  I suggest that they take this personally when the Beltway incompetents come around looking for support in a few months or a few years.

Economics Update

It's jobless Thursday, and initial claims fell back to what seems to be its sweet-spot, 473,000, with the less volatile 4-week moving average rising by 3250 to 486,750, and continuing claims falling by 62,000 to 4.46 million, though emergency claims, which are not counted as continuing, rose by 268,000 to 5.86 million, so we are still seeing a jobless non-recovery, with initial claims about 100,000 more than what would be required for a recovery in the job market.

In real estate, foreclosures fell, but delinquencies rose in the 2^nd quarter, which likely indicates that people are still doing worse, but the various moratoria, as well as what Atrios accurately calls the, "Treasury's predatory lending program," aka HAMP, is pushing the problem down the road.

Oh, and the Dow is below 10K again, which means nothing in the greater scheme of things.

Economics Update

Unemployment Claims 2008-Present

---

Things aren't getting better, they are just running out of people to lay off.
H/t The Washington Independent.

It's jobless Thursday, and initial unemployment claims are back in the 450K-480K "sweet" spot, with initial claims rising 13,000 to 462K, the 4 week moving average rising 2¼K to 459,000, though both continuing and emergency claims fell.

Seeing as how the number really needs to be below 300,000 for any meaningful recovery in jobs, we remain in a bad place.

In non-existent inflation land, we saw producer prices rise 0.4% in September, though that was largely on food, the core rate was 0.1%, and the price of imports fell by 0.3%, even as the trade deficit rose.

I would note here to all the free trade fetishists, we have a deflation problem in our economy right now, and most of it is being imported.

Meanwhile, the us dollar has fallen to a low for the year.

It's Jobless Thursday

And the initial claims numbers show no signs of recovery in the job market, with initial claims remaining excessively high, at 422,000, though the 4-week moving average did fall by 14K to 425,500, and continuing and emergency/extended claims were basically flat.

So, the employment numbers are crap, and stuck in a no-recovery "sweet spot," and it looks like the real estate market is still crashing, a rebound in manufacturing would take years for the capital to be assembled and constructed, and we still have Wall Street sitting athwart our economy, extracting its unearned vigorish that saps both resources and intellect from productive activity.

Economics Update

Click for full size

---

The paradox of thrift continues

It's jobless Thursday, and initial unemployment claims fell out of the 450K-485K sweet spot that they have been bouncing around in for most of the year. Initial claims fell by 11,000 to 445,000, better than forecast, with the 4-week moving average falling by 3,000 to 455,750, with continuing claims falling by 48,000 to 4.46 million, and emergency claims rising by 257K to 5.14 million.

So fewer people are losing work, but hiring has not picked, so overall unemployment has increased (257K - 48K - 11K = 198K more people collecting unemployment).

We also had good news on the retail front, with better than expected same store retail sales in September, though I am unclear how consumers are financing this, since wages are stagnant, and consumer credit fell in August. (See graph pr0n)

I guess that it could be that people took out their credit cards more in September, and that the conflicting figures are simply the result of month to month changes.

In Europe, both the Bank of England and the ECB held rates steady, and the BoE says that it will continue quantitative easing (printing money).

ECB bank president Jean-Claude Trichet went further full inflation idiot in statement to the press, tut-tutting other central banks easing moves, andstating that the ECB will be, "gradually phase out its non-standard liquidity measures."

Yes, we are seeing more pronouncements from the pain caucus about austerity, and the most vocal of these folks, Tory PM David Cameron, has apparently succeeded in pushing UK house prices down by 3.6% in the month of September.

Note that I am not talking about a -3.6% annual rate, I am talking about a £6,000 drop in home prices in just that month. (!)
UK home prices -3.6% in a month (!)

Pay Per View Review

Well, we got around to seeing yet another movie on PPV, Thor (2011).

Chris Hemsworth … Thor
Natalie Portman … Jane Foster
Tom Hiddleston … Loki
Anthony Hopkins … Odin
Stellan Skarsgård … Erik Selvig
Kat Dennings … Darcy Lewis
Clark Gregg … Agent Coulson
Idris Elba … Heimdall
Colm Feore … King Laufey
Ray Stevenson … Volstagg
Tadanobu Asano … Hogun
Josh Dallas … Fandral
Jaimie Alexander … Sif
Rene Russo … Frigga
Adriana Barraza … Isabel Alvarez

This really isn't a film. It's a lead-in to the upcoming Avengers movie. Barely worth it as PPV, but I'm really glad I didn't drop 40+ dollars on a movie tickets for the family, and lord knows what on drinks and snacks.

The two best performances are from Stellan Skarsgård, who does a really good job of portraying a Swede (go figure), and Kat Dennings, who embraces her inner sidekick when her wailings for her lost iPod sounds just like my daughter.

Chris Hemsworth's Thor is an affable, though rather a thick oaf, which suits the script.

Natalie Portman is winsome and smart love interest, which is kind of her sweet spot of acting.

One of the truths of these movies is that the really interesting character is the villain.  Well, not this time.  Tom Hiddleston's Loki is just weak.

I'm not sure how much of this is the script, which cannot decide whether or not he is misguided or malevolent.

Anthony Hopkins plays Anthony Hopkins playing Odin.  (Meh)

The movie takes place in two places, Earth and Asgard/Jotunheim.

The Asgard/Jotunheim bits are dull. It's stilted, and dull. At least they don't to the "thee" and "thine" bit that I remember as the speech of Asgard when I last read the comic in the 1970s.

Basically the lands of the Gods and the Frost Giants seems to be little more than an excuse for excessive CGI.

There are a couple of funny bits, some car accidents and what can only be described as a "hammer time" party.

For most of the movie, S.H.I.E.L.D. seems to be more sinister than benevolent.

Overall, I would give a 5.5 out of 10, a firm "Meh".

Pix after the break:

Great Googly Moogly!

Click for full size

---

H/t Wall Street Pit for the graph Pr0n

It's jobless Thursday, and the numbers are brutal.

It's back in the 450-485K sweet spot that it hung about for most of last year.

They expected it to fall by about 30K to around 400K, but it rose by 43,000 to 473,000, and the less volatile 4-week moving average rose by 22,250 to 431,250.

Continuing claims rose by 74,000 to 3.73 million, though emergency and extended claims fell by 42,900 to 4.12 million, though in the case of the latter, I do not know how much of this is just the "99ers" exhausting their benefits.

Obama should be running around like his hair is on fire over this report, but he should have been doing that over much of the past year with real unemployment (U-6) staying well over 15%, but because the Banksters are back to paying themselves big bonuses, no one in DC seems to give a damn.

Much more of this, and Sarah Palin will be sworn in as president the day that I make aliyah to Israel.

Tiger Beat on the Potomac Covers a Story Both Correctly, and In their own style

One of my problems with Politico, is that it a self obsessed institution preoccupied with the elevation of meaningless gossip to the status of major news. (I would note that Politico Europe actually does a decent job of covering news)

In this case however, they have found a story right in their sweet spot, the hostility of the New York Times to the Biden administration, which appears to be driven largely by the belief by the publisher of the New York Times, A.G. "Dash" Sulzverger, that Joe Biden has behaved abominably by ……… Wait for it ……… Not granting the New York Times an exclusive long form interview.

Gee corrosive narcissism much?

It should be noted that the folks at Politico make an effort to both sides this, but it's pretty clear who has their head of their ass. (Dash)

Here are some highlights (lowlights?) of the story:

………

……… On the other side, the newspaper carries its own singular obsession with the president, aggrieved over his refusal to give the paper a sit-down interview that Publisher AG Sulzberger and other top editors believe to be its birthright.

(Emphasis mine)

………

The Times’ desire for a sit-down interview with Biden by the newspaper’s White House team is no secret around the West Wing or within the D.C. bureau. Getting the president on the record with the paper of record is a top priority for publisher A.G. Sulzberger. So much so that last May, when Vice President Kamala Harris arrived at the newspaper’s midtown headquarters for an off-the-record meeting with around 40 Times journalists, Sulzberger devoted several minutes to asking her why Biden was still refusing to grant the paper — or any major newspaper — an interview. Harris, according to three people in the room that day, suggested that he contact the White House press office and later grumbled to aides about the back-and-forth being a waste of the allotted time.

………

But the pleas for an interview have gone nowhere. As Sulzberger often tells colleagues and as he and Kahn have stressed in private conversations with the administration, every modern president since Franklin Delano Roosevelt has done an interview with the Times. That, however, is an argument deemed uncompelling by Biden aides and one that, to some White House officials, smacks of entitlement. Plus, Biden has sat for interviews with only two print reporters in more than three years (Josh Boak of the Associated Press and Evan Osnos of The New Yorker, who earned Biden’s trust during a lengthy interview during the 2020 campaign that he turned into a book). He has, of course, been eager to engage with columnists he knows and trusts, two of whom happen to work at the Times. 

To be fair here, one of the, "Two of whomes happen to work at the Times," is Thomas "The Mustache of Stupidity" Friedman.  Not a good look, Joe.

………

In Sulzberger’s view, according to two people familiar with his private comments on the subject, only an interview with a paper like the Times can verify that the 81-year-old Biden is still fit to hold the presidency. Beyond that, he has voiced concerns that Biden doing so few expansive interviews with experienced reporters could set a dangerous precedent for future administrations, according to a third person familiar with the publisher’s thinking. Sulzberger himself was part of a group from the Times that sat down with Trump, who gave the paper several interviews despite his rantings about its coverage. If Trump could do it, Sulzberger believes, so can Biden.

“All these Biden people think that the problem is Peter Baker or whatever reporter they’re mad at that day,” one Times journalist said. “It’s A.G. He’s the one who is pissed [that] Biden hasn’t done any interviews and quietly encourages all the tough reporting on his age.”

Great.  The ultimate nepo-baby in US print media is having a tantrum, because he feels disrespected.

Otis Chandler this guy ain't.

Georgia Update

Russia says that it is pulling troops out of Georgia, though Pentagon sources are disputing this.

My guess is that there is a withdrawal going on, the Russians don't want to deal with an insurgency, but that it is proceeding with all deliberate slowness.

Aviation Week has analysis of the relative success of Georgian air defense systems (Paid Subscription Required), specifically of the SU Tu-22M3, and suggest that it was shot down because of Israeli aid in upgrading the Soviet era air defense systems.

Additionally, they note that the Georgian air defense system was less sophisticated, less networked, and less automated than the Syrian one, and as such, it may have been less vulnerable to the cyber attacks that were allegedly used by the Israelis when they struck the Syrian reactor complex.

Shades of Battlestar Galactica, the new one, not the old one.

As to the Su-25 losses, they suggest that these were shoulder launched SAMs, and I agree, as the Su-25 is really a close air support aircraft, which puts them in the sweet spot of such weapons.

Get the F%$#ing Vaccine

No, I am not referring to the Covid vaccine, I am referring to the HPV vaccine. 

A historic new study out of Scotland shows the real-world impact of vaccines against the human papillomavirus: The country has detected no cases of cervical cancer in women born between 1988-1996 who were fully vaccinated against HPV between the ages of 12 and 13.

Many previous studies have shown that HPV vaccines are extremely effective in preventing cervical cancer. But the study, published on Monday in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, is the first to monitor a national cohort of women over such a long time period and find no occurrence of cervical cancer.

(Emphasis mine)

………

The authors of the Scotland study monitored the records of all women born between 1988 and 1996 who were eligible for cancer screening, about 450,000 women. Of that group, 40,000 were vaccinated between the ages of 12 and 13, and 124,000 received the vaccines at or after 14 years of age. The remaining women, nearly 300,000, were not vaccinated.

No cases of cervical cancer were found among the women who were vaccinated before they turned 14, even if they had only received one or two doses of the vaccine rather than the full, three-dose protocol. Also noteworthy is that women who received the three-dose protocol between the ages of 14 and 22 also benefited significantly. While some cases of cervical cancer were recorded in this group, the incidence (3.2 cases per 100,000 women) was two and a half times lower than among unvaccinated women (8.4 cases per 100,000 women).

………

The types of vaccine administered to the cohorts monitored in the study changed as newer ones became available, covering more types of HPV. Until 2012, the vaccine in use was the bivalent Cervarix, targeting HPV 16 and 18. Then the quadrivalent Gardasil was administered until 2023, when the nonavalent Gardasil 9 was introduced.

This is why it’s still possible that cervical cancers may still arise even in vaccinated women, caused by the HPV strains not targeted by the earlier vaccines. “There are obviously other HPV types that cause cancer,” Palmer said, noting that the current results don’t mean cases of cervical cancers, caused by less high-risk strains of HPV, won’t emerge in the analyzed cohort in the future.

It should be noted that boys as well as girls should get the vaccine for two reasons, first, it mitigates the spread of HPV, and second, HPV associated penile cancer is rather common.

It is never too late to get the shot, but the sweet spot is 9-14 years old.

Economics Update

It's jobless Thursday, and the initial jobless claims are out, initial claims down 16K to 453,000, and the less volatile 4 week moving average fell 6,250 to 458,000, a two month low, with continuing claims falling 83K to 4.46 million, and emergency claims falling 293K to 4.88 million.


Generally, the numbers are good, but still firmly in the 450-480K "sweet spot" where the numbers have lingered for most of this year.

Additionally, the revised GDP numbers have come out, and, for once, the numbers were revised up, from the truly anemic 1.6% annual rate releases last month to a (truly anemic) 1.7% annual rate.

In real estate, mortgage applications fell, despite falling rates, though the home purchase application index nosed up slightly.

In terms of the various indices out there, the Institute for Supply Management's Chicago PMI rose in September, beating estimates.

Generally a good news day for this economy, this.