A-list Hollywood actors in Elizabeth Olsen

and Paul Bettany, put them in a (popular, at the moment) period setting, in a

(also super popular at the moment) story, and hype the ever-loving heck out of it and you have Disney+’s WandaVision.

I promise no real spoilers in the following review.

The First of Two Episodes

Normally, I don’t mind a story/show/series taking a moment, a few episodes even, to set itself up, build its world, and show you the path its planning on following. The thing is, when a story does that, it still has to kinda let you know something.

Now two episodes in, and only nine episodes total planned for this series, they still haven’t told me even what I’m watching. And what they have shown me isn’t making a lot of compelling sense.

The above trailer shows you the final, climax scene of the first episode with a trailer-appropriate level of misdirection, the dinner scene. That scene, in which Wanda Maximoff (Olsen) and Vision (Bettany) have Vision’s boss Mr. Hart (veteran character actor Fred Melamed) and his wife (That 70’s Show‘s Debra Jo Rupp) for a folly-filled boss-comes-to-dinner scene worthy of I Love Lucy leaves you wondering…do I want more of this?

It was obvious that writer Jac Schaeffer and director Matt Shakman were trying to create a tense, disturbing, almost horror-quality scene behind the façade of the Lucille-and-Ricky-esque humor that didn’t quite work, but the end result was an episode ending that left me (and my wife, The Midwest Gal) simply confused.

Also, in stark contrast to what the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) has been producing since 2008’s Iron Man, which has been carefully crafted, with every character’s actions making at least some degree of sense (or intentional nonsense), the scene with Wanda making dinner, when she literally possesses the ability to conjure items out of thin air (as the next trailer shows with their wedding rings), simply doesn’t make sense within its own context.

That strikes me as lazy writing.

The Second of Two Episodes

The second episode was slightly more compelling, but still missing a key element of what is clearly a fish-out-of-water setup…the fish struggling to breathe.

But where the first episode was all about I Love Lucy, this one is all about I Dream of Jeannie. From what I’ve read, this is the theme of WandaVision, paying homage to various classic television shows in each episode.

As the trailer clearly shows, there is a random beekeeper standing in the middle of the road, clock radios trying to talk to Wanda, and some slightly growing concern as to the nature of the situation, I still find myself more confused than the two hero characters, who according to the releases about the show exist in the modern day (the show, despite appearances to the contrary, takes place after the events of 2019’s Avengers: Endgame) finding themselves in 1950s suburban New Jersey.

At least I think it’s New Jersey.

So, the ending of this one at least gives you some sort of a clue that this is an actual MCU-relevant story, but still, leaves a lot of story left to be told and only seven more episodes to tell it.

Going by the trailers, this show will get more interesting. But I shouldn’t have to rely on the trailers to tell me that.

Here’s What WandaVision Gets Right So Far

The imagination of this show is top notch. For a time in our storytelling history where re-makes and sequels are all the rage, the originality of this technically-not-100-percent-original story is high. Placing two of Marvel Comics’ most powerful superheroes in period TV show settings to try and tell a series-length story is clever.

And the showrunners have really gone above and beyond to pay attention to the detail in the period settings. They’ve been so successful at it, that a cross-section of comic book geeks and mid-century-modern furniture aficionados started drooling over an (apparently very rare and desirable) 60s-vintage Broyhill Brasilia console spotted in the background of a scene in the trailers in this Reddit thread.

As a guy that does PR for a living, I gotta admit…that’s some top-notch PR work there.

Furthermore, the acting so far is on point. The aforementioned Olsen, Bettany, Melamed, and Rupp deserve recognition for their roles so far. Additionally, Kathryn Hahn’s Agnes is a perfect, sitcom-style annoying/nosy neighbor. I don’t like her character, but I’m pretty sure that’s the point. She’s not evil, she’s not a bad guy (at least not yet), but she is the embodiment of every sitcom-neighbor TV trope, and plays that role so well.

However, there’s a real risk in what WandaVision is doing. Specifically, they’re pushing this show hard toward an 18-35-year-old demographic with sitcom callbacks to shows we simply don’t know, and definitely (as a demographic) don’t appreciate or feel much nostalgia for.

Don’t get me wrong, I watched as much Nick-at-Nite as the next early-80s kid, and I still have a deep-seated fondness for Get Smart as a result, but these aren’t my shows. It’s clear from the trailers that the sitcom callbacks progress temporally as each episode goes on, but the newest era I could see in them was the 80s, and while there are plenty of shows I would recognize from that decade, the oldest amongst this demographic feels nostalgia for the 90s, and the youngest amongst that group wasn’t even born then.

But, props to the WandaVision team for taking this risk, even if it doesn’t pay off. I appreciate the taking of creative risks. It challenges me in my own creative endeavors.

As I do with my music reviews, I’ll withhold final judgment on this series until it has a chance to finish telling its story.

But right now, I feel a strange juxtaposition of disappointment (from the episodes so far) and excitement (from the trailers), that I’ll at least finish it off. Let’s hope this story stars moving, and doesn’t wait until it’s out of time.

The post WandaVision’s Opening Act is a Little Bumpy appeared first on The Midwest Guy.

imagine the future, the past, the present, in ways that don’t exist…but maybe could. Star Trek, Star

Westworld, The Expanse, and others are all worlds that,

I watch their various installments, give my own imagination a new fizz, and make me want to work on my own SciFi novel project that I’ve been working on for…ten years? I think it’s been ten years.

But the year 2020, despite being a solid, non-stop dumpster fire, has actually been a perfect 5/7 in terms of SciFi content. Three new seasons of Star Trek, a new season each of The Mandalorian, Westworld, The Expanse, are all shows I’ve been able to keep up on this year (no movies because…well…this year), and there’s more coming. But let’s talk about what has landed this year…

Westworld (HBO)

• 2020’s Season: 3
• 2020 Season Debut: March 15, 2020
• Debut Episode: “Parce Domine”
• Total Episodes: 8
• In a Nutshell: The great William Faulkner is often credited with the writing advice “murder your darlings.” Westworld‘s Season Three is what happens when you do that, but keep churning out content anyway.

I wanted Westworld‘s third season to work. They brought in Aaron Paul, after all, and I’m a huge fan of his work in Breaking Bad. Instead we ended up with…the only real clunker on this list.

The biggest problem is, Westworld‘s writers appear to have completely misunderstood who the real “star” of the show is. It’s not the increasingly psychotic Delores Abernathy [Evan Rachel Wood], it’s not the patently brilliant Maeve Millay [played by the equally brilliant Thandie Newton], it’s not the programmer-who-discovers-who-he-really-in Bernard Lowe [also played brilliantly, by Jeffrey Wright and his ubiquitous beard].

It’s the park. The world of Westworld is…the Westworld Theme Park, and all its companion experience parks (Futureworld, Shogunworld, Warworld, The Raj, etc.). And guess what is not in Season Three?

This isn’t the first time Westworld has blown everything up in hopes that the writers could pick up the pieces and reassemble them for a new season. But this is their weakest attempt at it.

The positives? Once again, a great cast puts in as great a performance as anyone could expect given the written content. Particular props to America’s favorite Frenchman, Vincent Cassel, in his convincing and sometimes terrifying portrayal of season villain Engerraund Serac.

It’s also a beautiful show. The imagery, scene decisions, and portrayal of near-future Los Angeles continues the series’ reputation for top-notch cinematograhy.

Ultimately, however, the writing and conceptualization are really a let down. But if you’ve run out of other shows to binge, and you’re a completist like I am, you could do worse.

Star Trek: Picard (CBS All Access)

• 2020’s Season: 1
• 2020 Season Debut: January 23, 2020
• Debut Episode: “Rememberance”
• Total Episodes: 10
• In a Nutshell: “Great” if you’re in need of some Star Trek: The Next Generation fan service, “okay” if you’re after a solid SciFi, or even Star Trek, story.

Star Trek: Picard is, without a doubt, the weakest entry in this year’s list of Star Trek content…and it’s still pretty decent. And by that I mean, yeah, I’d watch it again.

The biggest weakness of Picard is that its start is way too slow. Without giving too much away, the show starts off creating two examples of the thing Captain (now retired Admiral) Jean-Luc Picard [Sir Patrick Stewart] is best at: Extreme moral dilemmas. The first involves Romulans, the second involves synthetic life (more commonly referred to in Star Trek lore as “androids,” ala Lt. Commander Data [Brent Spiner], who is a central figure in this story, but in this series referred to universally as “synths”).

While the moral dilemma around how synthetic life is treated in the Star Trek universe is nothing new (The Next Generation episode “The Drumhead” is not only the best example, but may be one of the greatest episodes of television ever created), the dilemma as presented in Picard is genuinely new, and a decent plot device.

The problem is, each of these moral dilemmas could have easily been their own story, and yet, they’re smashed together here to a weakening effect. It’s such a gigantic story they’re trying to tell in such a (relatively) short amount of screen time that things really don’t come together and start moving solidly (and effectively) forward until…about episode six or seven. That’s a serious problem when the total season is only ten episodes long. At least when it does get moving, it’s good stuff.

The other good stuff? The fan service.

Star Trek (and Star Wars…looking at you The Force Awakens) has had some serious duds when it comes to fan service, especially nostalgia. The feature film Star Trek: Generations was ho-hum, the re-rebirth of the mad, augmented despot Khan Noonien Singh (as played by one of the whitest actors ever to grace the screen, Benedict Cumberbatch…love you Ben, but this wasn’t a good role for you) in the feature Star Trek: Into Darkness was a clunker too. And don’t get me started on what is easily the worst episode of Star Trek ever made, the series finale of Enterprise where a clearly 20-years-older Commander William T. Riker [Jonathan Frakes] tries to play his 20-year-younger self.

I should do an entire article on that one, that was terrible.

But in Picard, all the character call-backs (Data, Riker, Counselor Deanna Troi [Marina Sirtis], Seven of Nine/Annika Hansen [Jeri Ryan], and even memorable one-offs like Hugh [Jonathan Del Arco], and Icheb [Manu Intiraymi]) come off…very well.

My usual problem with attempts at nostalgic fan service like these is they usually feel forced, feel shoe-horned in for attention, with little or no reason for them to exist within the confines of the story itself. But in Picard? They all feel natural. They feel like they are the right ones to play their part in the story.

Sure, Seven of Nine seemed a little…little bit forced. But her part played well, and she got to cure her past ills she experienced with her original character on Star Trek: Voyager, where she was literally sown into a skin-tight suit that served no other purpose than to accentuate her…personal attributes. But here? Leather jackets, regular jeans, normal shirt…Seven of Nine is an actual person to be appreciated as such.

So, in the end, if you’re a die hard Star Trek fan like I am, this is worth watching (assuming you already haven’t). If you’re not all that up in Star Trek, it’s still worth a try to see if it clicks with you, but no guarantees.

Star Trek: Discovery (CBS All Access)

• 2020’s Season: 3
• 2020 Season Debut: October 15, 2020
• Debut Episode: “That Hope is You, Part 1”
• Total Episodes: 13
• In a Nutshell: After a couple inconsistent seasons, Discovery is finally coming into its own, though some of the classic bumps are still there.

Star Trek: Discovery started off in 2017 as a very experimental prequel in the Star Trek universe, and has become a very very experimental sequel.

Originally starting off (timeline-wise) ten years before the events of the very original Star Trek (yes, the 1960s version with Kirk, Spock, and the gang aboard the original U.S.S. Enterprise), the premise of Season Three puts the U.S.S. Discovery 930 (930!!!) years in the future of where they were. That’s approximately the year 3185. The (previously) furthest in the future a Trek series had been placed was, oddly enough, Picard, which is set around the year 2399…786 years prior.

In this future of what had previously been one of the most optimistic depictions of the distant future in all of SciFi, the United Federation of Planets is all but dead, everyone hates what’s left of it (including one particularly surprising planet), almost all the dilithium (the fictional crystalline catalyst that makes warp speed possible) has exploded, and most of what’s left appears to be controlled by the now very powerful, and always mafia-like, Orion Syndicate.

And you thought 2020 was rough!

But hey, life still exists, so the entire mission of the U.S.S. Discovery, as it closed out in Season Two, is successful. I guess.

Here’s what I like about Discovery Season Three: It allowed the writers of this season to reset their imaginations, and create wholly new things and ideas, without having to worry so much about “canon,” and not create an entirely separate timeline like the 2009 feature film reboot did (though, the 2009 Star Trek movie is definitely solid).

On top of that, though I know not all Star Trek fans will agree, Season Three has started to return to the Roddenberry roots of the franchise, returning to a focus on exploration (though in a new context), social parable (some of the reasons the Federation fell apart would sound familiar to anyone alive the past couple years), and minority representation.

That last part goes beyond series leader Commander Michael Burnham [Sonequa Martin-Green], both the first black woman, first adoptee/orphan, and first non-captain to be the focus of a Star Trek series. In this season, the reveal of the trill-joined human Adira Tal [Blu del Barrio – who is genuinely non-binary] as the first non-binary character in the franchise, and the immediate acceptance of their gender-neutral they/their pronouns, was another advanced first for Star Trek, going beyond engineer/chief mycologist Paul Stamets [Anthony Rapp] and Dr. Hugh Culber [Wilson Cruz] as the first committed same-sex couple in Star Trek.

The bumps? Sometimes the visual effects are too good, almost distracting from the story as it unfolds before you. While the characters already mentioned are well developed, a good chunk of the Discovery’s bridge crew, normally the “core” of any Star Trek cast, are almost entirely anonymous. At one point they seemed to try and get helmswoman Lt. Keyla Detmer [Emily Coutts] a PTSD angle that…seems to have kinda fizzled out. Some of the “future” elements incorporated into this season (like the Discovery’s newly detachable warp nacells) just…don’t make sense. And the “spore drive,” the Discovery’s instant-travel party piece, still annoys me, though at least there’s an element of usefulness to it this season.

While this season won’t complete until this coming January, so far, it’s been a solid story, told well, with well-made visuals, and great use of the former Empress of the Terran Empire, Phillippa Georgiou [Michelle Yeoh].

Star Trek: Lower Decks (CBS All Access)

• 2020’s Season: 1
• 2020 Season Debut: August 6, 2020
• Debut Episode: “Second Contact”
• Total Episodes: 10
• In a Nutshell: Lower Decks had all the makings of a bomb: a goofy-looking Star Trek cartoon intended to be a comedy. But with brilliant writing, great artistry, and a genuine reverence for the source material, this Star Trek spoof wasn’t just hilarious, it was better than it had any right to be. It’s not just good SciFi…it’s a great TV show.

Aboard the most-unmemorably-named U.S.S. Cerritos, the camera crew takes the turbolift down from the bridge, into the bowels of the Federation starship that takes responsibility for second contact with newly-discovered alien species. You know, the ones who go in, fill out the reams of bureaucratic paperwork, sees if they have any diseases that could spread to extant Federation species, cleans up any diplomatic messes the first contact ship may have made.

Fun stuff, right?

But focused on good-hearted, intentional underachiever Beckett Mariner [Tawny Newsome], her anal-retentive, brown-nose bunkmate Brad Boimler [Jack Quaid], starry-eyed ship newcomer D’Vana Tendi [Noël Wells], and engineering-genius-seeking-confidence Sam Rutherford [Eugene Cordero], the dysfunctional friend group style of show hasn’t been this funny (to me, at least) since Seinfeld.

One of the best, most anti-Star Trek episodes, was the fourth episode, “Moist Vessel.” The premise? Captain Carol Freeman [Dawnn Lewis] decides her best strategy of getting Ensign Mariner to request a transfer off the Cerritos is…to promote her, which gives her responsibilities that Mariner really wants nothing to do with. She’s a coaster, man.

However, the relationship between Mariner and Freeman (without spoiling anything) reveals the other strength of Lower Decks: its heart. The character building, the relationship building, the chemistry between the show’s voice actors, and the ways they are portrayed in animation, make this a series worth watching more than once.

Also, the cameos are top notch. Whether they’re well known actors from outside Star Trek like Haley Joel Osment and Jack McBrayer, or long time Star Trek favorites like J.G. Hertzler and John de Lancie, everything is done well with an eye toward both the story and genuine silliness.

One warning, though. Wait until the kids are in bed before turning this one on. The humor, while copious in quantity and presented in kid-friendly-looking animation, tends to veer into the adult realm.

The Mandalorian (Disney+)

• 2020’s Season: 2
• 2020 Season Debut: October 30, 2020
• Debut Episode: “Chapter 9: The Marshal”
• Total Episodes: 8
• In a Nutshell: Jon Favreau’s new classic Star Wars series continues to show just how much the movie writers have been phoning it in, and how great a story told in the Star Wars universe can be, whether you’re a Star Wars fan or not.

Disney+ picks up their blockbuster storyline of a lone, fanatic bounty hunter tasked with returning a 50-year-old child to a group of “enemy sorcerers” known as the Jedi to great aplomb.

You’ve likely already heard in some form or another how great this show is. It’s true. I may not say “all of it,” but by and large, all the good reviews you’ve already heard about The Mandalorian are on point. But here’s my take anyway.

First, hats (helmets?) off to Pedro Pascal, the actor behind Din Djarin’s helmet. His ability to effectively emote while having every inch of his body, head to toe, covered in armor for all but about five minutes (so far) of this season is worthy of the highest praise.

Second, the writing. Yes, storm troopers continue in their inability to hit the broad side of a barn. Yes, Moff Gideon [Giancarlo Esposito] is willfully evil to almost the point of campiness. Yes, the return of notorious bounty hunter and fellow follower of Mandalore Boba Fett [Temuera Morrison], and the live-action debut of the formerly animated Jedi Ashoka Tano [Rosario Dawson] is obvious fan service

But I’ll be damned if it doesn’t all work.

The characters are written intelligently, the situations they find themselves in make sense, the humor is at just the right level, and never once do you find yourself slapping your forehead.

The season finale is coming up soon after this gets published, so I guess there’s still a chance for that to change, but the quality of this show, especially coming from Disney, who has already screwed up the sequel trilogy of the movies (though they did knock Rogue One out of the park), is genuinely surprising.

I’m glad this show is being made, and I’m glad I’ve been able to make the time to watch it.

My only mark against it, is eight episodes is nowhere near enough.

The Expanse (Amazon Prime Video)

• 2020’s Season: 5
• 2020 Season Debut: December 15, 2020
• Debut Episode: “Exodus”
• Total Episodes: 10
• In a Nutshell: The continuation of the SciFi series based on a set of novels written by two men sharing one name may just make The Expanse my favorite SciFi franchise…not just of this year…but ever. If you haven’t started watching this show yet, I kinda envy you.

For those not familiar with The Expanse, since it isn’t as big a name as either of the Stars (Trek or Wars), it really is a fascinating vision of the future.

The skinny (not to insult any Belters who may be reading this) is, in a world set in roughly the same time frame as Star Trek: The Next Generation, man hasn’t figured out how to travel faster than light, hasn’t met any sentient alien species, but has colonized our own solar system in a very realistic way that you could very much see happening from today’s vantage point.

Mars was colonized and broke off from Earth (governed by the United Nations) and became the military and technology powerhouse of the solar system, and both Earth and Mars have colonized various planetoids, moons, and asteroids in and beyond the Asteroid Belt, extracting minerals, and treating the people who live there very poorly.

And everyone hates each other.

This fifth season, however, sees our heroic crew of the Rocinante split up (only the first three episodes have been released as of this writing) to explore some personal development.

The advent of the ring gates, which is allowing humanity to visit (and colonize…and extract from) extra-solar planets for the first time ever is wreaking havoc on Mars as its population bails out for free air, water, and proper gravity, and officially disgraced Martian Marine Bobbie Draper [Frankie Adams] and native Martian and Rocinante pilot Alex Kamal [played by the now real world disgraced Cas Anvar] are trying to track down all the high-tech military surplus that is leaving almost as fast as the people.

On the moon (now known as Luna), former UN Secretary General Crisjen Avasarala [played by the absolutely captivating personality of Shohreh Aghdashloo] is busy having her warnings of extreme terrorist attacks ignored, while both her and Belter leader-turned-“pirate” Camina Drummer [Cara Gee] are working to hunt down the perpetrator, Belter extremist Marco Inaros [Keon Alexander] who’s son, Filip [Jasai Chase Owens], is being hunted down by his estranged mother, Rocinante XO and Chief Engineer Naomi Nagata [Dominique Tipper] who wants to save him.

breathes exhaustively

Got all that? Oh, let’s not forget Rocinante Captain Jim Holden’s [Steven Strait] continued crusade to rid the solar system of any last trace of the apparently alien Protomolecule that has both killed hundreds of thousands of people and self-formed the main ring gate.

So let’s just sum this up this way: If you haven’t seen any of The Expanse yet, make sure you’re stocked up on popcorn and your calendar is clear before you do. The casting is great, the writing is great, the acting is great, and the concept behind everything is fascinating.

If you’ve already caught the first four seasons, just go on in to this season. So far at least, there’s not a disappointing minute.

Full Disclosure

If any of these reviews made you want to sign up for any of these streaming video providers, please do so through the links (if available) and they’ll toss me a couple bucks, which is nice.

The post The Year 2020 in SciFi Was…Pretty Good, Actually appeared first on The Midwest Guy.

recent report by CNN Business says this holiday season is ‘make or break’ for Sears Holdings, the parent company of the Sears and Kmart retail giants. This report, apparently, filed from their “No

desk.

But something in that report stuck out that made me think something that hadn’t occurred to me before: The whole ownership and corporate power structure Sears Holdings CEO Eddie Lampert has set up should be 100 percent illegal.

Before I explain, a quick little full disclosure from me.

I used to work for Sears. I started at their (now dead) Coralville, Iowa store, and finished at their (now dead) Bloomington, Illinois store. I wasn’t a manager or anything. I worked the floor there in college, in lawn and garden in Iowa, and electronics in Illinois. It was, without a doubt, the best college job I had. Pay was good (commission), people were (mostly) good, hours weren’t bad. Sure, there were some less-than-optimal things, but on the whole, it was a positive experience. As a matter of fact, the year I started there, Sears was recognized as one of the best places in America to work! Coincidentally, my last couple months at Sears were Lampert’s first months. Lampert-led Kmart announced they would take over Sears in November 2004, and I left in December 2004.

Since then, Lampert, through his role as CEO of hedge fund management company ESL Investments (ESL standing for “Edward Scott Lampert”) announced himself as CEO of the combined company, Sears Holdings, and then proceeded to drive the combined company straight into the ground. Just Google “Sears Eddie Lampert” to be treated to literally hundreds of articles explaining his terrible management strategy, his aloofness, and his short-sighted sale of everything good about Sears ruining the company’s ability to turn itself around.

This article, however, is not about that. It’s about this one, particular line from the first linked CNN Business article:

Lampert is not offering to put up much new cash. Instead, he wants to forgive about $1.8 billion of the debt he holds from Sears.

Since Lampert has started trying to “turn around” Sears Holdings, he has relied on his ESL Investments business to buy up Sears-owned real estate.

Unlike almost any other retailer (big box or otherwise), Sears actually owned a lot of the stores and real estate their stores were located in. This is different than, say, Home Depot or Kohl’s who often have stores purpose-built by third parties, and then lease them. For a lot of Sears stores, this was a significant reduction to overhead which allowed a lot of stores (as an example, the store at Linndale Mall in Cedar Rapids, Iowa) to operate more profitably than the third-party leased stores (like the aforementioned Coralville, Iowa store).

So what Lampert started doing was “selling” the stores to himself (via ESL Investments-owned Seritage Growth Properties), and leasing them back to Sears Holdings. Since Lampert owns a majority stake in both companies, he can do this without anyone saying otherwise.

Further, when that strategy didn’t help the financial health of Sears or Kmart stores (whodathunk literally raising the rent on troubled stores wouldn’t help them?), he started loaning money directly to Sears Holdings from ESL in an effort to hold off bankruptcy.

Here’s where we get to the part that should be illegal.

When you are the CEO of a company, you have a fiduciary duty to the stockholders of your company. This was first, broadly established in the 1919 Supreme Court Case Dodge v. Ford Motor Co., and most recently reinforced in the 2010 case eBay Domestic Holdings Inc. v. Newmark.

However, when you’re the head of a hedge fund (or any institutional investment apparatus, say a mutual fund, or brokerage firm, etc.) you have a fiduciary duty to your investors.

What this means is, as CEO of Sears Holdings, Eddie Lampert is legally bound to make decisions based on what is best for people who own Sears Holdings stock. However, as CEO of ESL Investments, Eddie Lampert is legally bound to make decisions based on what is best for ESL investors (keeping in mind that people other than Lampert himself are invested in ESL accounts).

So what happens when those two duties diverge?

That is, what happens when the best fiduciary decision for the CEO of ESL Investments is to sell off all the profitable elements of Sears Holdings dooming the company? And what happens when the best fiduciary decision for the CEO of Sears Holdings is to hold on to those assets, and default on loans issued by ESL?

When you, as a person, have legally binding duties that are in contradiction to each other, you should be forced to either shed duties or investments. That is to say, Lampert should be forced out of all decision-making roles at Sears (not just as CEO, but chairman of the board, any board position, or any position of authority over the company), or should be required to divest from ESL, or make ESL divest from Sears.

Right now, what Lampert has done at Sears should have white-collar crime investigators at the FBI or SEC raising their eyebrows, and if what Lampert has done is legal, then Congress should change that.

Sears was in trouble before Lampert took over, that’s not in doubt. But the actions Lampert has taken at Sears has made things actively worse, while making Lampert’s personal financial position better. That has jeopardized the livelihoods of nearly 70 thousand Sears Holdings employees, and has already cost tens of thousands their jobs over the past fourteen years.

The post The Way Eddie Lampert Has Run Sears Should Be Illegal appeared first on The Midwest Guy.

an editorial penned by Rick Esenberg, head

the Republican “Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty,” he argues…badly…that Republicans are actually expanding

voting hours when they cut them in the raft of “lame-duck” bills recently signed by outgoing Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI).

This editorial requires a response. It’s so badly argued, and so flimsy in legal bases, that it’s almost unfathomable to think that it was written by a Harvard-educated attorney with nearly forty years at the bar. This is the state of Republican thought today.

Currently, Wisconsin law allows local, municipal clerks to set their own early voting availability. While not perfect, it allows local municipalities to do as much early voting as they have resources for. That said, some municipal clerks (who are in charge of elections) are part time in smaller towns, or only have a few voting machines available for early voting, or don’t have other resources to go “whole hog.”.

Conversely, places like Milwaukee and Madison, the state’s two largest cities, make extra efforts and commit their own resources to having early voting open as early as six weeks prior to election day.

In 2016, Republicans tried to nuke this arrangement, by limiting early voting to only weekdays (eliminating weekends) during two full weeks prior to the election. U.S. District Judge James Peterson, presiding for the Western District of Wisconsin (based in Madison), struck down this law.

In this most recent lame-duck law, Republicans want another bite at the same apple, while denying that’s what they’re doing.

The 2018 bill just signed into law still limits early voting to two weeks, they just add weekends back in, and back off the hour restrictions. That’s…the only difference.

They don’t provide extra resources for the rural and otherwise under-funded municipalities to be open the full two weeks, so nothing is going to change there. The only functional change this bill implements is restricting the cities and counties that were going above and beyond to serve their voters.

Esenberg disagrees. In criticizing the legal motion filed by the One Wisconsin Institute and the Wisconsin ACLU, he first accuses them of “judge shopping” by filing a motion for contempt in front of Judge Peterson, who issued the original ruling (which is still sitting in Chicago awaiting a decision from the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals), instead of filing a whole new case and being randomly assigned a new judge.

Dear Mr. Esenberg, as someone who has decades of legal experience and a Harvard sheepskin should know by now, this isn’t judge shopping (although Republican opposition to such a practice in Wisconsin would seem to be newfound). This is 1st-year Civil Procedure. Had the lawyers representing the ACLU and One Wisconsin Institute not filed such a motion in the court they did, they would be liable for legal malpractice. Esenberg assumes everyone else doesn’t know that, but if he were on the other side of the table, he would do the exact same thing because he would have to.

There is a ruling in a case about this exact same issue that looks 90 percent the same, so the attorney must file the motion with the judge who made that ruling since that particular case is still open.

The fact Mr. Fancy-Pants Harvard Lawyer can’t write an argument to support his position that doesn’t take into account stuff you learn in your first year in law school, but this non-lawyer who just fixed court computers for a few years can, shows you just how weak their position is.

Second, in yet another Republican round of “who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?” Esenberg argues their bill expands early voting. Apparently, one of Esenberg’s paralegals needs to write him a memo on how “two weeks” is “less than six weeks.” Maybe then they can write him another memo explaining how “telling people they can do what they can already do now without providing extra resources to accomplish it” means rural counties are going to have the same result.

Third, he complains how taking the matter to the same judge (which, as I’ve already explained, is exactly what must happen) “unduly complicates the matter.” However, if you read through his whole editorial, and count how many times he complains about the “Madison judge,” it makes you wonder just what other options there are.

Well, the only other option is to file…with a different Madison (federal) judge, since the lawsuit is against the State of Wisconsin, whose capital is in…wait for it…Madison. The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin is chiefed by the aforementioned Judge Peterson, an Obama appointee, while also being home to Judge William Conley (another Obama appointee) and Judge Barbara Brandriff Crabb (a Carter appointee). Who would Esenberg rather appear before?

Now, none of this is to opine on the legal merits of the actual motion filed, nor the law it was filed against. But if this is the best argument that Republicans like Esenberg can put forth in support of their law, might I recommend not wagering your life savings on a Republican-favoring ruling.

The post Wisconsin Republicans think they’re doing you a favor by cutting early voting appeared first on The Midwest Guy.

pharmacy with fast delivery buy prednisolone with the lowest prices today in the

Silver is a talented man.  Talented enough that what started out as a political statistics blog, FiveThirtyEight.com, has been bought and sold and expanded

fooled with a few times since its inception during the 2008 election.

His schtick, for lack of a better phrase, involves taking polling data, applying a bunch of additional statistical data to it (e.g. how far from the final election result each polling “house” tends to be, what the demographics and past voting performance in a particular state/district have been, what broader polling data can tell us about narrow questions, etc.).

The problem is, most people take a look at the “probability” percentages he assigns any outcome, and go into immediate excitement or despair.  So let me break down what Nate is telling you about Tuesday’s election:

Think of his probabilities as the sides on a die

Right now, according to Nate, Republicans have a 4-in-5 chance of holding the Senate, and Democrats have a 7-in-8 chance of taking the House.  What does that mean, exactly?

The easiest way to think about this is, for the Senate, take a 5-sided die (yes, I checked, they exist), and color four of those sides red.  Then take an 8-sided die (again, yes), and color 7 of those sides blue for the House.

You still have to roll the die.

That’s how probability works.  Selecting the number of chances, the number of chances each outcome has, and then taking the chance.

The Democrats have a slightly better chance of winning the Senate than Donald Trump did of winning the Electoral Vote while losing the Popular Vote

In 2016, the final probability Nate calculated for Donald Trump winning the election without taking the Popular Vote was 10.5%.

That…doesn’t sound like a lot, does it?  Well, tell that to President Trump.

70 percent doesn’t mean squat

If you look at Nate’s ratings of various races, 70 percent (or thereabouts) probability comes up in a lot of races.  That’s roughly the point at which a “normal polling error” (that is, an error the size of a poll’s “margin of error”) can throw it the other way.

If you want to think of something as, more-or-less, “certain,” that race needs to be north of 90 percent in Nate’s ratings.  But…

85 percent tends to mean multiple things have to go wrong

And Democrats are sitting at 87 percent probability, as of this writing, to take the House.  There are still scenarios where Republicans hold on (Nate explains all this here) but it would take an unusual polling error for it to happen.

Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski may become the most powerful politicians in America for the next couple years

If all goes exactly as Nate predicts, down to even the slight advantages (and it wouldn’t be the first time), we’re looking at a 50-50 split in the Senate, with the Vice President casting votes constantly.

That means Republican Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, the last real “independent-minded” Republicans left in the body, will be calling all the shots.  If Republicans want to get anything passed, they will not be able to lose a single vote (as the Vice President only votes in the event of a tie).

And, if Nate hits 100 percent again, Democrats are looking at losing North Dakota, while picking up Arizona and Nevada.  Republican efforts to pick off any other Democrats, including in Indiana, Missouri, Florida, West Virginia, and Montana, will come up short…again…if Nate hits 100 percent.

If there is a systemic polling error, Democrats have the momentum

Let’s get something out in the open real quick…

The polls have been accurate.  Even in 2016.  They were as accurate as they usually are.  So what happened?

We happened. We couldn’t make up our mind of who we liked enough to turn out and vote for (making “Likely Voter” modeling by the pollsters more difficult).

But the final election results came in within that general margin of error.  And things get messy when that margin of error crosses the victory line.  And it crossed for Trump in 2016.  Trump had the momentum leading into Election Day.

This time, Democrats do.  For the past few days, Democratic probabilities have been on a slow-and-steady rise in both the Senate and House.

Midwestern state capitols may throw a collective big, blue switch

Right now, the only state in the Midwest to have a Democratic governor is Minnesota.

However, if all pans out the way Nate’s probabilities show (again, a very very big “if”), Iowa, Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ohio will join them.  And if you throw in the thought of a slight polling error again, Kansas and even South Dakota may go blue.

But, almost all of those races are super-super tight.  Of those eight races, the leader in four of them (Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa, Kansas) has a probability below 60 percent.  That means you can more-or-less throw a dart at the board with those.

Don’t expect Nate to land another 100 percent performance

It’s not his fault, really.  It’s that Americans are growing increasingly polarized, and polarization affects turnout.  For some, polarization energizes.  For some, polarization alienates.

When you add in unlikeable candidates running campaigns (or even careers) chock full of controversy, that throws a wrench in public opinion making polling more difficult.

And if YOU can’t figure out who you like more, how the heck is Nate supposed to do it?

The post How to Sort Out Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight Data Leading Into the Midterm appeared first on The Midwest Guy.

four years ago. 

made it as an experiment, in two 5-gallon batches.  The idea being, one would be served after a brief rest, the other would be aged in the 5-gallon oak barrel I received many Christmases ago!  It’s still in the barrel, in need of additional aging,

I figured I would pull a sample and see how we’re doing!

I haven’t fooled with the “non-aged” mead at all, but that’s because the fermentation got stuck at the stage of “alcoholic pancake syrup.”  It’s the exact same recipe, it just stalled out at about 1.047 (for reference for those of you who aren’t regular brewers/vintners, 1.047 is roughly where a Budweiser-type beer will start before fermentation).

Anyway, here’s the recipe:

Fermentables:

• 17 lbs Kallas Honey Farm blueberry blossom honey
• 2.5 lbs Kallas Honey Farm buckwheat honey

Yeast:

• 3 packets Lalvin 1116

Adjuncts:

• 12oz bee pollen
• 1 tsp yeast nutrient
• 1 tsp yeast energizer

Vitals (according to the EXTRA handy Brewer’s Friend):

• OG: 1.140 (measured)
• FG: 1.020 (measured)
• IBU: 0
• SRM: 5.72 (pre-aging)
• ABV: 15.75%

BrewDay: January 26, 2014

Brought a combination of honey and enough water to make 5.5 gallons to about 185˚F.  Once temp was up, added bee pollen, and mixed well.  Added yeast nutrient and energizer and mixed just prior to putting in primary fermenter.  Pitched with 3 packets of Lalvin 1116.

March 15, 2014

Checked final gravity and it was down to 1.020.  Transferred off lees to a clean carboy to figure out what to do with it next (a lot was going on with life around this time).

October 19, 2014

After transferring out a big barleywine from the barrel, I transferred this into the barrel (where it remains as of this writing).

Tasting: October 28, 2018

Appearance: (3/5) Frankly, it looks like a hazy brandy.  That’s a product of both four years in an oak barrel (the dark brown-ness of it), and the load of pollen and nutrients I haven’t clarified out of it, since it’s not quite ready for prime time.

Aroma: (3.5/5) It smells like a honey brandy almost.  A floral, sweet aroma paired with a little heat from the alcohol.  This…is a big mead.  I really had no idea how to make mead properly when I made this batch (I’ve since learned I screwed up a lot, but hey, that’s what learning’s all about!), but the aroma is, still, pleasant.

Taste: (3/5) Hot!  It’s a hot one, folks!  Granted, it clocks in at (calculated) 15.75% ABV!  But with a 1.020 final gravity (tested), it’s still sweet.  I’ve since learned the main thing I screwed up is that I should have started with less honey, fermented it dry (that is, a final gravity closer to, say, 1.005) and then “back sweetened” it, which is to say, add honey after it was done to add sweetness.  Since I put all the honey in at the start, a lot of the blueberry and buckwheat blossom flavors got fermented out.  But there’s still a good honey flavor in it, and it tastes…I don’t know…special?  It tastes like more than a typical honey wine.  The high final gravity, combined with the high alcohol content, makes it taste like a thick, sweet, honeyed brandy.  Like something to serve chilled in a snifter while wearing a velvet robe.  Kinda.  Or served in a cordial on Christmas eve.

Drinkability/Mouthfeel: (2/5) This is one you only need one of after a big dinner, it seems.  The mouthfeel, as I mentioned, is heavy.  It’s thick.  But pleasantly so.  But you wouldn’t want a full 5oz pour of this, I don’t think.  The heat from the alcohol pushes you back a bit.

Design: (0/0) Since I haven’t finished anything for this yet, there’s no design for it.  But I DID get a bunch of clear claret bottles for it, so I’m going to do something special with it!

Overall: (11.5/20) This is a fun experiment so far.  It still needs to age a few more months, it seems, but once it does, I’ll clarify it, bottle it, and we’ll do another test!

The post Recipe & Tasting: Wisconsin Alt Blau (After 4 Years in a Barrel) appeared first on The Midwest Guy.

U.S. Supreme Court decision in 1971!!!), it put in my mind

recipe for world leaders (or even domestic politicians) to “deal with” Trump, and his unpredictable nature.

One of Ali’s most famous boasts during his boxing days was that he would “float like a butterfly, and sting like a bee.  The hands can’t hit what the eyes can’t see.”

What Ali was trying to impress upon the audience was that he would move so fast and gracefully that his opponent wouldn’t be able to land a hit on him, and that Ali, in turn, would “sting like a bee,” hit his opponent with the hurt in their confusion.

It’s that latter part that people “across the table” need to do to Trump.  Ignore the floating like a butterfly.  It’s important that Trump CAN see you…slug him right in the proverbial mouth.

I learned this years ago dealing with bullies.  Being the nerdy kid I was (but having the benefit of being a large nerdy kid), I came to realize that if someone is trying to get the best of you through classic bullying tactics, trying to intimidate you, trying to bulldoze you, the only way to end it is to “swat them hard.”

A recollection: Back in the days when I was a salesperson at Circuit City (yeah, I know) in Decatur, Illinois, there was another salesperson in another department that tried to bully people out of “her area,” would harass them for stealing “her customers,” and just overall make things unpleasant for anyone she thought she could push around.

Me being the generally polite, laid-back guy I am, normally ignored her.  But one day she tried really laying into me, and trying to get me to give her credit on one of my sales I “stole from her.”  Having had enough, I told her that she gets nothing, to get back to her department, and when she tried the “you can’t talk to me like that” bit, I told her “I’ll talk to you any damned way I please, now get out.”  That’s the really short version of it, at least.

I felt bad, in a way.  I always hate losing my cool (especially since I have so little of it to lose).  However, from that day on, guess who had a new “best friend.”  For the rest of the time I worked there, this same person was just buddy-buddy with me, would do anything I asked or would help with anything I needed help with, and just otherwise did a complete 180 from how she used to be.

I’ve had a couple opportunities to play that same move on other bullies since, and every time it works the same way.  They bully you, you have enough, you “sting them like a bee,” they become your new best friend.

So how do you make this work with Trump?  Easy.  In conversation, give him the same treatment he gives others.  Touch on every insecurity (and they’re myriad) he has.  Call him “Donny.”  Rag on how he’s spent his life playing with “daddy’s money.”  Don’t back down, even for a second.  If he has businesses where you are, start having health or building inspectors start showing up all the time.  Things like that.

Because once you sting him hard, once you cross lines that he thinks only he can cross, he’ll be your new best friend.  He’ll do anything you ask.  He’ll give you anything you want.

Schmoozing him only works when you have something he wants.  But right now, all any of his “opponents” have to offer him is politics.  He doesn’t want politics.  Heck, I don’t even think he actually wants to be president.  So that’s out.

That leaves one option that nobody seems to have taken on…hit him hard.  You’ll only need to do it once.

Because as the only other boxer with (almost) as many memorable quotes as Ali once said, “Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.”

The post If World Leaders Want to Get Anywhere With Trump, They Need to Learn to “Sting Like a Bee” appeared first on The Midwest Guy.

this way…I love Jack White.  I love his virtuosity on guitar.  I love that he takes risks.  I love that he loves music.  And I love that he doesn’t entirely seem to care what other people think about what he’s creating.

I love that last part right now because his latest solo project, Boarding House Reach…is a bit of a reach.  And it’s starting to make me wonder if Jack’s, you know, okay, man.

This seems to be a bit of a trend for him since going solo, and breaking off from The White Stripes…The Dead Weather…The Raconteurs…am I missing any?  His first solo album, Blunderbuss, was a tour de force if you ask me.  Solid beginning to end, with just a couple mediocre tracks mixed in where White gets a little…weird.  His next act, Lazaretto, was hot and cold.  But the hot tracks (especially the title track) were so good I hardly cared some of the others fell flat.

Boarding House Reach, however…

1. Connected by Love (75 points)

White’s album starts with his first single.  He’s crafty like that.  I don’t dislike the synth bass and drum machine as much as I normally would.  It sounds a lot better when the rest of the band (with piano, hammond organ, real drums, etc) come in.  I kinda dig the lyrics as well.  They have a good emotion to them.

The track suffers from a lack of White’s signature blazing Airline guitar until about the 3-minute mark, and even then it’s only kinda there.  The background singers don’t do much for me.  All that said, this is one of the more successful tracks on this album.

2. Why Walk a Dog? (50 points)

Welcome to track two, where it’s all synth, all the time!  And not in a pleasant, quirky, Rush-goes-synth kind of way.  This dark, brooding track only breaks from the heavy synth for the occasional hyper-distorted, slow-moving solo from White.  I guess I don’t get this one, man.

3. Corporation (85 points)

This track works the hardest to win me over.  That 70s-funk groove that carries from the opening bassline, to the cheesy (in a good way) distorted organ, to the congas rappa-ta-tapping in the back, this one bobs my head.  About the 2-minute mark, White plugs in his Res-O-Glass and grabs a pick, and turns the song up to eleven.  The lyrics are complete nonsense, and that’s just fine.

I’m thinkin’ about startin’ a corporation!

Who’s with me?

Most of the vocals are just…sounds.  And when there are real words, it’s just White having a spazz attack…and it’s fun! If only the rest of the album sounded like this.

4. Abulia and Akrasia (45 points)

A-who-lia? This is like an intermission track.  With C.W. Stoneking reciting a poem over a track that would sound at home in a Westworld episode, it just misses the mark.  And here’s why: Whoever recorded and produced Stoneking’s voice screwed up.  I don’t know who Stoneking is, and I don’t know what his voice sounds like outside this track, but his voice has no bottom end on it.  Neither does the music.  There’s not much here that provides balance in a bass clef kind of way.  At least it’s short.

5. Hypermisophoniac (70 points)

So, this one starts out with some 80s-style electronica on top of a shaking Krylon can.  It then mixes in a jazz piano, a rapping hi-hat, and Jack White’s voice through a real aggressive flanger.  Every now and then White’s guitar joins the cacophony successfully.

Here’s the thing with this one: As I’m giving it a second listen-through while writing this, I’m liking it more than the first time.  It’s a little goofy, and I don’t exactly mind goofy.  And as I give it more time, my ears start to find, and appreciate, the groove of this song more.  I think with a few more play-throughs, I may well even dig it.

6. Ice Station Zebra (65 points)

In the first 45 seconds of Ice Station Zebra, White crosses styles from generic rap-rock, to Bel Biv DeVoe, to Jack-White-mashes-on-a-piano, amateur Metallica, to piano-boogie-electronica-fusion, and back.  And then Jack White starts rapping.  White, normally an impeccable producer, got either sloppy or intentionally weird with his vocal processing, and he’s worse off for it.  After White’s first verse we then switch styles again to Jamiroquai.  Around the two-minute mark, White shifts gears and now we’re in more of a modern funk sound and…it works!  Honestly, if you skip the first half of the song, it’s a pretty good groove.  But I didn’t, so here we are.

7. Over and Over and OverBI (85 points)

I want to love this song.  This has all the hallmarks of classic Jack White: overprocessed-guitar rocking a great riff, White’s idiosyncratic vocal pacing, lyrics that only make sense if you’re in a manic state, goofy bridge, third act that adds in more depth to the sound (and sounds great), screwball visuals in the video…it’s great!

…Except for those damned backing singers.  They ruin it for me.  They’re (presumably intentionally) off-key the whole time.  Gah!

8. Everything You’ve Ever Learned (75 points)

The first time I listened to this album, I skipped this track.  The opening was that annoying.  But I made myself listen to this for the review, and I’m glad I did.  Thirty seconds of a smarmy, phased voice saying “Hello! Welcome to everything you’ve ever learned! Brought to you by…” over and over eventually leads into an intermission-sized track that reminds me of the meaty bits of Pink Floyd’s One of These Days.  Give it a chance.

9. Respect Commander (80 points)

I have a feeling that if White sat in on a session with the band Cake, the end result would sound a lot like Respect Commander.  The majorly-overdriven guitar over an assertive, jazzy bass riff, and a rhythmic drum line are the hallmarks of a Cake track.  The bizzarroland bits, the blaring blues solo, and the unnecessary electronica are modern Jack White.  I dig this one.

10. Ezmerelda Steals the Show (30 points)

Unless you’re into badly-recorded, spoken-word poetry over a three-note pacing guitar, just pass on this one.

11. Get in the Mind Shaft (70 points)

So this one starts off spoken-word again, but then moves into this voice-boxed, Parliament-sounding, slow-paced, electronic funk.  This is kind of what I imagine the sound of falling asleep stoned would be like.  It grows on you, though.

12. What’s Done is Done (65 points)

And now we shift gears entirely into a Johnny Cash/June Carter-style duet.  The only real difference from a real Cash/Carter piece is the hammond organ, and the oddball synth bridge.  So if Get in the Mind Shaft is what it sounds like to fall asleep stoned, What’s Done is Done kinda harshes your mellow…all while being mellow itself.

13. Humoresque (80 points)

Humoresque almost has a feeling of an old American Standard.  A piano melody that follows the lead of the vocals.  Gentle tapping on the hi-hat, with an occasional flourish on the drums (especially toward the end).  Pretty words from White, sung almost-not-terribly (let’s face it…White’s not the world’s greatest vocalist).  All put together, this is a simply beautiful song…and a good way to send this collection of music out.

Overall Score: (67 points)

I love Jack White.  I really do.  And maybe that’s why I’m so rough on him with this album.  I know he can produce an album sharper than this.  I know he can write music more engaging than this.  I know he can be more consistent than this.

I don’t begrudge a music artist trying to branch out and try new things (it’s better than falling into an AC/DC rut where you start running out of ways to say “LET’S ROCK AND PARTY!”).  But at the end of the day, you have to listen back through that track, and say to yourself, “I dig this…that’s a good one.”

There are several good tracks on Boarding House Reach.  But there are enough cruddy ones as well that just mar the whole thing.

Did you find this review worth something?

Well, if you found it to be nice enough to make you want to pick yourself up a copy of Boarding House Reach, maybe get your copy from one of the links below?  That way, they’ll toss me a few nickels and I can get myself something from the vending machine.

Get Boarding House Reach from:

Amazon –  Apple iTunes/Music

The post I’m Getting the Feeling Jack White is Getting Bored – Boarding House Reach [Track by Track] appeared first on The Midwest Guy.

the wily political veteran Hillary

promised…something. 

not sure, to be honest.  But we were “with her,” yeah?  No?  Well…hm.

Okay, let’s rewind a little further.

The olden days of 2010.  Here in Wisconsin, what would turn out to be a battle for the soul of the Badger State was raging between two men who were practically neighbors.  In the right corner stood Scott Walker, Milwaukee County Executive, the first Republican to hold the post…probably ever, who knows.  But Walker promised Wisconsinites that he was going to “cut your taxes,” and “kill the train,” and “create 250,000 jobs!”  His opponent, in the left corner, Mayor of the City of Milwaukee, Tom Barrett.  Barrett, the former congressman cum city CEO got out on the stump and promised the people of Wisconsin he would…not be Scott Walker?

Are you noticing a pattern here?

What I just described to you, in a nutshell, is the reason Democrats have had such a hard time winning elections even though they have proven themselves to be the better party at actually doing the jobs we elect them to do.  They aren’t putting out a bold vision for anything.  And what little vision they are talking about is so damned nuanced and long-winded that nobody remembers what they’re promising by the time they get to the end of detailing the promise from the stump.

The frustrating thing is the grassroots of the Democratic Party isn’t just demanding bold action…they’re telling the party exactly what to do.  What’s worse is, while the Republicans are promising things that either can’t be done (build the wall, create 250,000 jobs) or shouldn’t be done (cut your taxes, kill the train), Democrats have a plethora of promises to pick from that can be done, and should be done.

The best example of how to do this as a Democrat actually comes from newly-elected Virginia State Delegate Danica Roem.  Roem, while she had every opportunity to play the identity card as a trans woman running against an anti-transgender “old boy,” or to parry every bigoted attack that was thrown at her from her opposition, instead, won on a simple message: “Fix Route 28.”

With those three simple words Roem knocked out a 28-year veteran Republican in a safe Republican seat.

That’s the kind of magic that Democrats need right now.  Why?  Because the Republicans are coming back.  Why?  Because the Republicans at least say they believe in something.  Something actionable.  Something affirmative.  Something everyone can understand (whether they support it or not).

So the Democrats have to fight simple, affirmative platform fire with simple, affirmative platform fire.

Connect every home!

Every home in the United States, urban or rural, east or west, north or south, should have a connection to at least 100 megabit broadband internet.  Not only will this be the economic equivalent of rural electrification in the 1930s, this could save rural America entirely.  Our small towns and counties have been hollowed out over the last 50 years.  Farming families are dying out, literally.  Massive agribusiness is taking over the small farms and folding them in, but not doing anywhere near as much for the adjacent towns.

But you know who seems to kinda dig rural life?  Millennial desk jockeys.  There’s an unusual entrepreneurial spirit in the 18-37 year old cohort (full disclosure: that includes me).  Possibly because the Great Recession hit right when a lot of us were supposed to be getting “real jobs,” so we had to find ways to create our own.  And, apparently, we want to do it on a small farm.  But we need a website for that small farm, and credit card payment processing at the farmers markets, and a VPN connection for the spouse to remote into work downtown, and don’t even ask us to live without our Netflix.

Connect every home and you save rural America.

Make work pay!

Meet “Ned.”  Ned is a nice guy.  Ned works at the local Sam’s Club food counter in Naperville, Illinois stocking shelves for $10/hr.  Ned works full time, and goes home to his 16-year-old son Charlie, 12-year-old daughter Melissa, and his wife Betsy who earns $12.50 an hour as a Certified Nursing Assistant.  Together, they gross about $49k.  Problem is, that’s about $10k per year short of being able to afford the average 2-bedroom apartment in Naperville.

So they get a small Section 8 voucher to help afford their place to live.  They qualify for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program. Neither one of them has ever been able to afford a new car, and the idea of “retirement” is something “rich people do.”

It’s more than just raising minimum wage.  Minimum wage has to go up and be set to automatically adjust every year or two to keep up with inflation.

But more is needed beyond that.  A tax penalty against companies that have a certain percentage or more of their workforce eligible for certain public benefits because the pay is so low.  Think about it…if a full-time worker is eligible for $5,000 in various forms of public aid, that means that person’s employer is getting $5,000 worth of free labor every year.  Either pay your people what they’re worth, or repay the taxpayer what you’re costing them.

Fix our country!

America’s infrastructure is so dilapidated it’s embarrassing.  And it’s not just our roads.  Our bridges are falling into the water.  The parts of our power grid that aren’t full-on failing are still vulnerable to cyber-attack.

But didn’t Donald Trump promise to fix our infrastructure?  Sure!  He promised to spend only $200 billion on a trillion-and-a-half dollar’s worth of work!  How?  Magic, apparently.  Oh, also, the plan is already dead.

No, a real plan, with real money, and real vision is needed.  Pledge to spend X-dollars within Y-years to create Z-results.  For example: “We’re going to spend $75 billion dollars here in Missouri to bring every road in the state up to spec by 2023.”

Make our own bank!

Here’s a cool idea: create a Bank of [State].  North Dakota did this eons ago, and it is helping that state weather bad times, and secure good times.  It makes every tax dollar in that state go a little further.  And residents can invest in it, getting a good return, and generating even better outcomes for North Dakota residents.  Why should North Dakota be having all the fun?

Clear out criminals!

You know what has really cheesed the American people off?  Watching people harm their fellow Americans and get away with it.  I’ve been a big fan of Barack Obama ever since I interviewed him back during his Senate race.  Still am.  But he really screwed up here, directing his Department of Justice to not prosecute those who broke the law in the Bush Administration, or who caused the Great Recession.

Americans need to be able to trust their government again.  And they will never be able to do that so long as those who are put in a position of public trust and/or power are let off when they break the law.  No more leniency for public servants or powerful people who violate the public trust.

Create a bunch of jobs!

Sure, Scott Walker made this promise and failed on it.  Hard.  But does anyone care?  No.  At the end of the day, so long as you’re in the positive on this category, you win.  Just throw a number out there.

There are plenty more ideas that can be summed up in three words.  So if you’re a Democrat running for office, either pick a few things off the menu above, or come up with your own.  Just make sure you can sum it up in 3-5 words, make it big, and hang your hat on it.

As one of the greatest Midwesterners in history, Daniel Burnham (the Architect of Chicago) once said: “Make no little plans. They have no magic to stir men’s blood.”

The post The Democratic Party is Three Words Away From Screwing the 2018 Elections Up appeared first on The Midwest Guy.

misdemeanors,” such that he recommends criminal charges against

Trump in regards to his activities during

2016 election, Congress must

take it up, file Articles of Impeachment, and play the process out.

But what about in the meantime?

A lot of experts and analysts agree, the Mueller investigation is moving along more quickly than anyone expected.  Compared to the Cox investigation into Watergate, we’re practically moving at warp speed.

That may be why Trump just started work against the political side of the scandal investigation just last night.

“We have to keep the House because if we listen to Maxine Waters, she’s going around saying ‘We will impeach him,’” Trump told a crowd at his anti-White House Correspondents’ Dinner rally in Michigan last night.

It’s no secret that Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) has been playing for impeachment for months now.  And a Quinnipiac poll recently found that 70% of Democrats believe proceedings should be undertaken.

With Democrats keeping a 7-10% lead over Republicans in the “generic ballot,” and President Trump still hanging between 15-18 points underwater on his approval ratings in recent months, it’s not a crazy position to take.

But if Scott Walker’s past is prologue, it could be a strategic error.

As a quick recap, six years ago, Gov. Scott Walker (R-Wisc.) made history, not just in Wisconsin, but in American politics.  Six years ago, Scott Walker became the first statewide politician to beat a recall.  And he did it with a clever tactic…

In early March 2011, just barely two months into his first term, having already convinced outgoing Gov. Jim Doyle (D-Wisc.) to cancel the Milwaukee-to-Madison high speed rail project he ran against, and having announced what would eventually become his infamous Act 10 against public-sector unions, polls were showing that Wisconsinites already regretted having elected then Milwaukee County Executive Walker over Democrat and Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett.

As talk of recall ramped up, and eventually became an actual process that set up the real recall election, and it looked like Wisconsinites would get the Walker/Barrett rematch they wanted, Walker shifted tactics.

Instead of running against Barrett, Walker ran against the recall itself.  And it worked.

Walker’s team made the case to Wisconsin voters that recall should only be used for criminal acts, or other much more major problems, not for policy disagreements (even disagreements that were extremely unpopular and led to days of some of the most massive protests in Wisconsin Capitol history).  Wisconsin voters bought it.

That’s what President Trump is hoping for as well.

In playing the anti-impeachment-itself card, Trump is hoping that Democrats either will be too worried about the political implications to file Articles, or should they push them forward, will set themselves up for a heavy loss in 2020 should it fail to remove him from office.

Let’s be fair about something else as well: Impeachment is never politically, nor publicly, advantageous.  It didn’t do much for Republicans when they threw the book at Andrew Johnson, and it was politically disastrous when they tried it against Clinton (making him the first sitting president to gain Congressional seats in a second mid-term election).

So let’s talk strategy.

First off, Democrats should self-ban themselves from saying the word “impeachment” until the Mueller investigation concludes.  If Mueller finds evidence to support charges of conspiracy, fraud, or anything else along those lines, Democrats (or Republicans) must file Articles of Impeachment.

But…what if the strongest charge against Trump is Obstruction of Justice?  What if evidence Trump colluded with the Russian government isn’t strong enough to support chargesAt that point, it’s hard to say.  It may be more advantageous to raise holy hell over it, in hopes Trump resigns, or failing that, gets mudhole-stomped in the 2020 elections.  However, impeachment may not play well politically if Democrats can’t justify removing a sitting president for the first time in American history.

If evidence of conspiracy or fraud, as it relates to Russia, isn’t found, it will be a hard case to press that the investigation was worth having at all, undermining impeachment efforts resulting from it.  From there, it may be smarter for Democrats to just let Trump and his fellow Republicans wallow in their own mire they created for themselves, and crush them in 2020.

Impeachment, at that point, may not be popular enough to generate the kind of public support necessary to both see it through successfully (that is, with conviction and removal of Trump).

That’s because, just like the recall in Wisconsin, Trump and his (not all unintelligent) team will press his case against impeachment itself, and Democrats will be left holding the bag.

The post On Impeachment, Trump is Playing a Card from Scott Walker’s Deck (and That Should Concern Democrats) appeared first on The Midwest Guy.