IS THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE ALWAYS OF THE MAJORITY PARTY?

Recently Nancy Pelosi was named the Majority of the House of Representatives The Speaker of the House of Representatives need not be a member of the majority or plurality party or even a member of Congress.  The exceptions mainly have come when a third party has members of the House, but the leader of the majority or plurality party need not be the speaker.  Though possible, the Speaker has always been a member of Congress.

Historically, the Democrats have always elevated their minority leader to the speakership upon reclaiming majority control of the House. However, Republicans have not always followed this leadership succession pattern. In 1919, Republicans bypassed James Robert Mann, R-IL, who had been Minority Leader for eight years, and elected a backbencher representative, Frederick H. Gillett, R-MA, to be Speaker. Mann had "angered many Republicans by objecting to their private bills on the floor", and was also a protégé of autocratic Speaker Joseph Gurney Cannon (R-IL18) who had been Speaker from 1903 to 1911, and was still in the House. Many members "suspected that he [Mann] would try to re-centralize power in his hands if elected Speaker".[10]*]**
.....................................................................
Most Speakers whose party has lost control of the House have not returned to the party leadership (Tom Foley lost his seat, Dennis Hastert returned to the backbenches and resigned from the House in late 2007). However, Speakers Joseph William Martin, Jr. and Sam Rayburn did seek the post of Minority Leader in the late 1940s and early 1950s. Nancy Pelosi is the most recent example of an outgoing Speaker who was elected Minority Leader, after the Democrats lost control of the House in the 2010 elections.*

Thus it is unusual for a former Majority Leader, like Nancy Pelosi, to become the Majority Leader again after a period of being Minority Leader.

During the period of changeover of Majority or Plurality Parties from the November election to the January transition, the Speaker remains the same.

But the bottom line is that the election of Nancy Pelosi to Speaker is not a sure thing since a number of members of her party voted against her as Majority Leader.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaker_of_the_United_States_House_of_Representatives
http://www.quora.cohttpsm/Has-there-ever-been-a-Speaker-of-the-US-House-of-Representatives-who-was-not-from-the-majority-party

CAN DEMOCRATS WIN 60 MORE SEATS TO THE HOUSE THAN REPUBLICANS?

There is a bias toward the Republican party because of sparsely settled rural America has a disproportionate number of spots in Congress.  Even then they have to do voter suppression to win in many places.  But for Representatives, gerrymandering is also in Republican favor.

An organization called FiveThirtyEight apparently forecast the House of Representative's outcome in 2018 dead on at again for the Democrats of 39 seats.  Incidentally, they forecast that the probability of the Democrats gaining 63 was 0.8%.

(click on figure to enlarge)

OK so here it is.  In 2010 Republicans got 6.7% more votes than Democrats and won 63 more Representative seats than the Democrats.  In 2018 Democrats got more than 8% more votes than the Republicans and won 40 (max.) more seats than the Republicans.  In other words, with a smaller margin of votes than the Democrats, Republicans won 23-24 more seats in the House than the Democrats.

Democrats probably cannot win 60 more seats in the House than the Republicans.  There are people who play with the numbers and, as I recall, Democrats would have to win something like 30% more of the votes to win 60 seats in the house.

* https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2018-midterm-election-forecast/house/

ECONOMY OUTLOOK 2018

It is hard to believe, but the tax cut on top of a roaring economy seems to have had only a very short-term effect.  I think that to a large extent this is due to corporations buying back so much stock and doing so many Mergers and Acquisitions so it is wasted money.  My feelings are reinforced by Jim Cramer.

I have wondered what the decline in home sales may mean for the economy.*  It turns out there are other problems too.
"I know more than they do," Cramer said, urging Fed officials to "do more homework" and talk to more CEOs to get a better picture of the pockets of weakness in the economy. "I'm shaken here about what's happening because it's happening faster than the Fed seems to realize." He pointed to the recent sharp drop in oil prices as well as slowing in homebuilders, autos, and retailers as signs.**

Regarding agriculture:
Corn and soybean prices are hovering near decade lows, and this year's bumper harvest is further swelling U.S. farmers' massive stocks of unsold grain.***
....................................................................
Overall, U.S. net farm income will fall to $65.7 billion this year, down 47 percent from just five years ago, according to U.S. Department of Agriculture forecasts.***
....................................................................
In July, Trump slapped a 25 percent tariff on $34 billion of Chinese imports, prompting China to impose a 25 percent duty on American exports, including soybeans. The impact was swiftly felt among soybean farmers. Last year, China bought about 32 million tons, but now buys almost none.***

To some extent, the economic problem was covered up by companies buying back stock that had the effect of juicing the stock market making it look like we were entering a bubble, something that seems to be over.  If we are in a bubble, it may be a debt bubble:
"From a 50,000-feet viewpoint, we're probably in a global debt bubble," [Paul Tudor] Jones said at the Greenwich Economic Forum in Connecticut. "Global debt to GDP is at an all-time high."****
.........................................................................
The hedge fund manager believes it is in the corporate bond market where the first signs of trouble will emerge. Data from SandP Global released earlier this year showed U.S. corporate debt hitting an all-time high, totaling $6.3 trillion. Global debt also hit a record high earlier in 2018, reaching $247 trillion.****
It is amazing that companies haven't used all this money from the tax cut to buy back debt.  Since the tax cut generated money coming from the tax cut is borrowed by the Federal government, there may be a two-way debt crisis.

All the above is receiving supportive forecasts from financial organizations.
JP Morgan economists expect economic growth to slow down in 2019, to a pace of 1.9 percent for the year.
The economist say the slow down from a "boomy" 3.1 percent in year-over-year fourth quarter growth will come as fiscal, monetary and trade policy get less supportive or more restrictive.****
..........................................................................
The economists expect that growth will hold above 2 percent in the first and second quarter, at 2.2 and 2 percent respectively, before falling to 1.7 percent in the third quarter and 1.5 percent in the fourth quarter. The economy last grew at less than 2 percent in the first quarter of 2017.****
..........................................................................
Boosted by tax cuts and stimulus, the economy's growth picked up to a peak of 4.2 percent in the second quarter, 2018 and was growing at 2.5 percent in the fourth quarter, according to JP Morgan's forecast.****

* http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2018/10/home-sales-fall.html
** https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/16/cramer-blasts-the-fed-i-know-more-than-they-do--do-more-homework-on-the-economy.html
*** https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/15/soybean-farm-belt-sticks-with-gop-in-midterms-but-democrats-gain-ground-cnbc-analysis-shows.html
**** https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/15/paul-tudor-jones-says-were-in-a-global-debt-bubble-and-maybe-tax-cut-wasnt-a-good-idea.html
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/21/theres-a-9-trillion-corporate-debt-bomb-bubbling-in-the-us-economy.html
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/20/jp-morgan-sees-a-slowdown-coming-with-economy-growing-at-less-than-2-percent-in-2019.html

CARAVAN INVASION

More than 7,000 American troops are spread in a thin line dressed in camouflage uniforms along the border between U.S. and Mexico.  Bayonets are fixed and rifles loaded and cocked awaiting the invading horde any minute.  Soldiers at any point along the line are to hold it for at least 10 min. no matter what until reinforcements arrive to save the horde from raping our women and converting our children into slaves.

Through the above paragraph is a gross overstatement, President Trump has said the soldiers should shoot to kill if rocks are thrown against them. The latest report I can find on the location of the Caravan shows them to be over 800 mi from the U.S. border. on November 1*  Estimates are that the Caravan has shrunk from 7,000 to about 4,000 including 2,300 children.  As of November 1st, the Caravan is said to be about 896 mi. from the closest border crossing at Reynosa, Mexico, near McAllen, TX.

The claim is that the group is traveling 30-35 mi. a day, a figure I consider totally suspect, even without so many children.  Personally, the most I have walked in a day is 21 mi. and had blisters all over my feet.  These people must be in excellent shape to walk 30-35 mi. a day, day after day.  But accepting the figure, it will take them a month to reach the closest point of the U.S. well after Thanksgiving if they can keep it up.*

(click on figure to enlarge)

November 18: Reports are that some of the Caravan is at the border in Tijuana.**  Apparently, they are arriving by bus and more buses are arriving daily so they cheated and haven't walked the whole way.  I'm not surprised.  I wonder who is paying for the buses?  Apparently, around 350 arrived as long ago as November 13, but most are still far from the border.

* https://www.newsweek.com/where-migrant-caravan-and-when-will-it-reach-us-border-1196055
** https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/18/world/americas/mexico-tijuana-migrants-caravan.html
https://abcnews.go.com/Video
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2018/11/13/migrant-caravan-some-border-most-mexico-far-us/1992059002/

MONICA LEWINSKY AT 45

Now a nice loking lady of 45, Monica Lewinsky is reappearing again, this time in a documentary "miniseries," of all things, and publishing another article in the magazine Vanity Fair.  Make no mistake about it.  When I was growing up a woman such as Monica Lewinsky at 22, pursuing a married man old enough to be her father, would have been called a "homewrecker."

Perhaps not surprisingly, Monica has managed to somehow rationalize herself with the #MeToo movement, but there is no comparison.  In contrast with the #MeToo movement that was concerned about powerful men being predators of women trying to get a job or to sexually harrass a woman at work, Lewinsky threw herself at Bill Clinton, a known womanizer.  Not only did she flip her blouse to show her bra strap to Clinton, but she admits she did other things.   For example, she once ran home to put on clothes that Clinton noticed recently in the hopes that he woud notice her again at an event (he did).  She has said that she was disappointed that they didn't have intercourse and that she wanted him to divorce Hillary and marry her.

Yes, I have written about Monica  Lewinsky before:*
This is a new age and women don't keep quiet about their affairs.  The big problem was that Monica blabbed about the affair and blabbed to the wrong person who started a political campaign against the president.
....................................................................
I'm surprised that so many women had sympathy with Monica Lewinsky at the time and feel that President Clinton took advantage of a girl, a child of 22.  I am reminded, however, that age 22 is considered an adult with the full privileges of voting, drinking alcohol, and smoking.   It is hard for me to understand that a woman of 22 doesn't know that she is not supposed to have an affair with a married man.  Apparently, it is accepted by many women that it is all right for a "girl" of 22 to pursue a married man, even one old enough to be her father, if he is powerful.* (underlining added)
____________________________________
From my piece on Monica Lewinsky again, I need to repeat my own thoughts:
What I would have done in a similar situation, I really don't know.  I have a saying that "Untested Virtue Is No Virtue At All,"  and I never had pretty young women come on to me.**
.......................................................................
Her real sin was that she had to blab about her affair.  It used to be that women kept their mouths shut if they managed to have a affair with the President, but she just had to tell an enemy of the President.  Today is different, women tell.**

If women at 22 are not mature enough to know that you shouldn't take up with a married man, then at what age are they mature enough to be considered adults and not covered by statutory rape?

Among the women that feel great sympathy with Monica is Mika Brzezinsky.  I wonder if she would change her tune if Morning Joe (her fiance) were to hire her?  Also I wonder if many of Monica's problems aren't due to other factors about her personality than the famous affair?  I mean after having an affair with the President, would she marry a truck driver, for example?  I suspect it would have to at least the CEO of a Fortune 500 company.   I also suspect that people that might hire her feel she might be a problem in the work force and I don't mean as just a distraction.  Still Monica has done pretty well, monatarily, being known as the woman who had an affair with President clinton.

* http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2014/05/monica-lewinsky-still-with-us.html
** http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2014/10/monica-lewinsky-again.html
*** https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monica_Lewinsky

NO LOVE LOST OVER SESSION'S FIRING

President Trump is a screwball for sure.  Here he had an Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, with no daylight between him and the Attorney General and the attorney general gets fired.  The one unforgivable thing, one thing, the Attorney General did that the President didn't like was that the Attorney General recused himself from the Russian election mischief, something Sessions had to do

It is clear that Donald Trump thought, even before the election, that The President was a dictator and that the Attorney General should be his 100% loyal personal lawyer and "take a bullet" for him if necessary.

Make no mistake, Session is an evil man.  He is the "father" of kidnapping children from Hispanic foreigners entering the country with the goal of never, ever returning them to the parents.  This was to teach people a lesson that the U.S. was not a welcoming place for refugees.  Sessions even managed to find a verse in the Bible to justify his horror though the quotation says nothing about the government kidnapping children and never returning them to their parents.*
*Apostle Paul also said“I would cite you to the Apostle Paul and his clear and wise command in Romans 13, to obey the laws of the government because God has ordained the government for his purposes,” Sessions told a group of law enforcement officers in Fort Wayne, Indiana last week. “Consistent and fair application of the law is in itself a good and moral thing, and that protects the weak and protects the lawful.”
Read more at https://www.themonastery.org/blog/2018/06/sessions-cites-bible-separating-children-and-parents/#H9ya8CUyQ1CSlq0O.99

Apostle Paul also said, "The one who is unwilling to work, shall not eat." (https://biblehub.com/2_thessalonians/3-10.htm)  Did Paul really mean that the infirm should starve to death if they would not work?  

ECONOMY AT PRESIDENTS' FIRST 22 MONTHS

A recent article on CNBC compared the first 22 mo. of recent presidents to check on Trump's claim that his economy is the greatest ever.*  The reference includes four figures with accompanying text.  It turns out that while Trump's record is good, it is in about the middle of the pack for economy growth in the first 22 months.  I think it wouldn't be right for me to reproduce all the four figures here, so I'll do just one, and you can bring up the reference to read the whole article.

Until recently President Trump has touted the growth of the stock market as a sign of his success with the economy, but the figure below shows that the record belongs to ---- Obama!  Surely Trump's stock market record has been good. He comes in 3rd place, but not the best.

(click on figure to enlarge)

There is also a figure and text on Job Gains (Trump comes in 4th behind  Jimmy Carter, the clear winner, followed by Bill Clinton and John Kennedy.  On gains in Gross Domestic Product, Jimmy Carter again is the clear winner closely followed by Jack Kennedy and Gerold Ford with Trump in 5th place closely followed by Barack Obama.  On Wages, the winner is John Kennedy closely followed by Richard  Nixon, then Jimmy Carter, and Gerold Ford with Trump 5th.

Please note that Trump's first 22 months does not rank first in any of the four categories.  Trump's best ranking is 3rd and that is on the stock market.

In view that some claim that Jimmy Carter was one of or the worst Presidents, it should be noted that his economy was very good.  He came in 1st in both Job Gains and GDP plus 3rd place on Wage Gains.  Though I didn't like him as President, in hindsight, he looks very good,  He got more than 70% of his program through and settled the Panama Canal issue against strong Republican opposition.  One shouldn't forget, of course, the peace treaty between Egypt and Israel.

A special note needs to be included on President Lynden Johnson whose first term lasted only 13 months.  For example, Johnson was the leader on wage gains at 13 mo. and higher even than Kennedy and Nixon after 22 mo.  On GDP and wage gains, Johnson was 2nd and 3rd on stock market gains if just the first 13 mo. are counted.

* https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/03/trumps-campaign-claims-about-his-economic-record-just-dont-add-up.html

TRUMP AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION

President Donald Trump's appointment of someone who has not been vetted by the Senate as Acting Attorney General is in violation of the Constitution.  Every Senator should have standing in a legal case because the Trump appointment deprives them of voting on confirmation as the constitution states.  The Senator can say that one of the reasons he/she ran for Senator was to have a say on departmental appointments.

There is little doubt that Trump has done this as an initial step to break the constitution and permit him to pursue his desire to become a dictator.  I grant it is possible that Trump did this to take attention off the election results.  Either way, it should not be allowed to stand.

I believe this should be litigated even if a new Attorney General nomination is put forth shortly in order to have a decision for future reference.  The litigation should be made even if the decision isn't finalized before the Acting Attorney General (Whittaker) is out of the office.  It is my hope that the Supreme Court would vote in favor of defending the Constitution, but I am not sure of this.

THEY ARE LIES UNTIL PROVEN OTHERWISE

We know, or should know, that our President is lying until proven otherwise.  When he says things like "many people say so," and "some lawyers say" or similar phrases, actually he has not talked to anyone.  It is hard to train yourself to doubt everything our President says.

Remember Donald Trump's proposal of a 10% tax cut for the Middle Class only?  We were supposed to see the write-up of the bill probably before November 01.  Well, it is November 03 and no bill.  My guess is that this is the last we hear of this unless the news media bring it up.  Actually, the bill doesn't sound like a Republican bill as they wouldn't just give a tax cut to the Middle Class without a larger cut for the wealthy.  I'd like to see the Republicans bring such a bill up for discussion and a vote in Congress.   They could probably get some Democrats to come along as it would be more of a Democratic bill than Republican (but watch out for the fine print).  In fact, if the Democrats would take control of Congress, they might float a tax cut for the Middle Class and might even get some Republicans to join them and make it bipartisan (though I doubt it).

For example, the 5,200 to 15,000 armed forces on our Southern Border.  Our president tells us that the first troops are there and setting up.  I say, "where are the pictures, President Trump?"  Actually, there are pictures that show a beginning of such a move.  Here is one reported by Stars and Strips.*

(Click on figure to enlarge)
The Washington Post includes a picture of troops spreading razor wire.*

Note added Nov. 06: Pentagon spokesman Colonel Robert Manning told reporters more than 4,800 troops were already deployed near the border as of Monday in support of Operation Faithful Patriot, including 1,100 troops in California, 1,100 in Arizona and 2,600 in Texas. He anticipated that the number of active duty troops could reach 7,000 soon.*

I feel sorry for these troops because I presume they are probably going to be at the Southern border for at least months until the Caravan arrives.  Will the deployment stop after the election?  There are already 2,100 National Guard troops have been at the border since April.  No doubt all this will be paid for on the cuff (i.e. borrowed).

Then there is the President's claim that Republicans will take care of "preexisting conditions" in health better than the Democrats who were the first to cover preexisting conditions with the ACA (Obamacare).  Many Republicans running for office now say they are for covering preexisting conditions in health care.**  These even include governors of Florida and Wisconsin who are members of a group trying to make the ACA illegal.**

A cute one is by Rep. Martha McSally, a retired Air Force Colonel, who has voted against the ACA but at least briefly came out for it (at least the preexisting conditions part).  Now she really doesn't want to talk about it.  REALLY DOESN'T.  Somehow, McSally is known as a centrist though she votes with Trump 97% of the time.  There are rare occasions, however, where she votes for the people.  Somehow, I thought that a woman military officer would be more centrist than male officers.

As with the tax cut for the Middle Class, I think Republicans being for coverage of preexisting health conditions will disappear after the election.  In fact, Senate Leader Mike McConnell has said he would like to have a vote after the election to repeal the ACA.***

Then there is the weird Trump claim about getting rid of, by Executive Order, the part of the 14 Amendment to the Constitution (passed in 1968) that has long been interpreted that children born in the U.S. are U.S. citizen.
But his [Trump's] interest in repealing birthright citizenship isn't a new idea. Lee says for the last 30 years or so, there have been several overtures by the political right to explore "citizenship reform," a timeline that she says aligns with the ascendancy of modern American conservatism.****

Though Trump cannot get rid of the birthright clause of the 14th Amendment by Executive Order, would the Supreme Court really reinterpret the 14th Amendment and overturn the birthright clause to not include the children of non-citizens born in the U.S. as has been done for 150 yrs.?  I don't know, but any Supreme Court that approves of the Citizen's United and Hobby Lobby decisions could do anything, in my opinion.  "There have been attempts since the 1990s to break away birthright citizenship, or narrow it down, and it did not seem that they would have a chance at succeeding until now," she says.
"To me this not only reflects the ascendancy of an extreme right position but also a return to a very narrow and exclusionary definition of Americanness."****

* https://www.stripes.com/news/us/trump-might-send-up-to-15k-troops-to-us-mexico-border-1.554452
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/FMfcgxvzLWzdgLqzkDtPxmXpwHlmQlSG
Added Nov. 06: https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/pentagon-border-troops-detention-facilities/2018/11/05/id/889436/?ns_mail_uid=142cf6cb-b757-4a77-afda-d3310b9288ee&ns_mail_job=DM8031_11062018&s=acs&dkt_nbr=0101045ul26n
** http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2018/10/republicans-come-to-jesus-moment.html
*** https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/mitch-mcconnell-repeal-obamacare-election_us_5bc7893ce4b0d38b58748f19
**** https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/31/us/14th-amendment-birthright-citizenship-explainer-trnd/index.html

ECONOMY TODAY (November, 2018)

Though both men and women have seen an improvement in the economy, women's perception is not as great as it is for men.*  In fact, Democratic women feel the economy has lost much of the ground gained since the Great Recession (see figure below*).  Republican men and women see the economy much differently going into 2017, though here too Republican women feel the economy has lost some ground in 2018.
Nearly half of men — 47 percent — said their family’s finances had improved in the past year, according to a survey conducted for The New York Times in early October by the online research platform SurveyMonkey. Just 30 percent of women said the same, despite an unemployment rate that is near a five-decade low and economic growth that is on track for its best year since before the recession.*
......................................................................
“Republican men are just more confident and more optimistic than even Republican women are,” said Laura Wronski, a research scientist for SurveyMonkey.*

(Click on figure to enlarge)

The economy does seem to be rolling what with the first October estimate seeing a growth in hires of 250,000.  Though this number can easily change in the coming months by 40,000 hires (plus or minus), even 40,000 less would still be wonderful.  What's more, it is said that wages increased by 3.1% for the first time in a decade.  Of course, increasing wages are good for the workers, but they are bad for the industry that sees costs increasing as a result.  This is reflected in the stock market decline today (November 02).

I have wondered for several months if we are entering a bubble and the October information on jobs and wages is compatible with a bubble.

Despite all the enthusiasm over the economy what with the tax cut (see figure below),** there seem to be surprising worries about the economy.  The figure below shows that as recently as early 2015, the GDP almost touched 4% whereas now it is at 3%.  While 3% is an improvement over the last couple of years, is it really what was expected from the tax cut (that is being paid for by Federal borrowing).

(Click on figure to enlarge)

Consumer confidence is at an 18 yr high.***  After a low in confidence in June, there have been four consecutive months of increases.

(Click on figure to enlarge)

I have been remarking on the low sales of homes, both new and existing, and wondering what it means.**** Though there was an increase in home construction in September, it was offset by a drop in government construction spending.  There also is some moderation in the manufacturing index in October.****:
Despite the moderation in the manufacturing numbers, October marked the 114th consecutive month of overall economic growth, according to the Manufacturing ISM report.****
................................................................
Spending on U.S. construction projects was essentially unchanged in September. It is the weakest showing since June, as an increase in home construction was offset by a slide in spending on government projects.

Certainly, not all segments of the economy are on fire.  Women feel the uncertainty in the economy more than men.

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/27/business/economy/women-usa-economy.html
** https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2018/10/27/trump-tax-cuts-were-supposed-set-off-an-investment-boom-they-arent-so-far/?utm
*** https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/30/consumer-confidence-rises-to-an-18-year-high-in-october.html
**** http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2018/10/home-sales-fall.html
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/01/october-ism-and-september-construction-spending.html
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/02/octobers-jobs-report-was-perfect-for-everyone-except-wall-street.html