Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts published in “Day: November 8, 2017”

Shifting paradigm?

carlson

A “paradigm shift” is a fancy phrase for changing the way we look at and perceive things. We revisit our assmptions and then change our approach.

Watching that instant classic game two of the World Series between the Dodgers and the Astros while also filtering through my mind another series of steps and maneuvering by the President that day, it occurred to me that as a nation we are in the middle of a paradigm shift orchestrated by the President.

Furthermore, neither the media nor the political cognoscenti who within the Beltway talk to each other ad nauseum understand this shift is occurring. President Trump and his former Chief Strategist, Steve Bannon, though do understand and are leading the shift.

For example, the pundits and talking heads in D.C. and New York are constructing artificial benchmarks which they proclaim the voters want to see Congress achieve, such as repeal of ObamaCare and passage of tax reform. Otherwise, they pontificate the voters exacting swift retribution at the polls in November of 2018. Maybe so, maybe not.

The baseball analogy occurred to me as I listened to the game announcers rattle off traditional yardsticks by which ballpayers are measured, such as batting average, slugging percentage, runs batted in. For a pitcher it is wins, strikeouts to walks, innings pitched.

Michael Lewis’ fine book Moneyball came to mind. The book basically demonstrates how a paradigm shift radically redid the business of baseball. The book tells the story of Oakland A’s General Manager Billy Bean, who as a prospect was labeled a “can’t miss making the majors.” But he did.

Once Bean got to the business side he started pondering why and this eventually led him to familiarize himself with sabermetrics, a new way of measuring the potential of a ballplayer to make it to the major leagues.

Being in a small market with a tight budget Oakland couldn’t afford to have too many misses. So Bean embraced the new way to evaluate players and also made the decision they would not draft high school phenoms but rather would focus on older more mature players.

Bean told his scouts, for example, to note the on-base percentage of a prospect believing that he would find more patient hitters who more often could get on base without a hit. Likewise, he worked up different formulas for evaluating fielding success and pitching success.

It paid off with Oakland winning several league championships. It wasn’t long before other teams adopted many of Bean’s methods.

President Trump is in the middle of pulling off a major paradigm shift in politics and is well on his way to redefining how success is measured. Frankly, he does not care really whether ObamaCare is repealed or tax reform is achieved. Successful legislation has to come from the Congress, or the GOP supposedly faces political disaster.

Trump will argue not necessarily. That’s the old way of measuring success. The new paradigm is cutting intrusive federal agencies down to size, eliminating bothersome and burdensone regulations, appeals to white males that are subtle messages of racism couched in language underscoring “fairness,” beating up on media that obviously has an anti-Trump agenda, and keeping your opponents off balance with a constant shifting of views and tactics.

If Congress can pass enabling legislation on tax reform, great. Don’t kid yourself, however, because tax reform is already dead. Trump’s base is largely holding strong because they don’t believe much of what the press reports and what they do see is their man standing up for American “values” against those shifty-eyed Muslims and those nasty Persians and North Koreans.

The more they see and hear the establishment scream and yell the more they like it. It’s a classic “paradigm shift” and don’t be surprised if it doesn’t lead President Trump not to impeachment but to a second term.

Git ‘er done

stapiluslogo1

There is something to be said for, even in politics and maybe especially in politics, getting something useful done.

Maybe that's the through line of LBJ, the latest movie about Lyndon Johnson (the last being the HBO play translating starring Bryan Cranston). This one, now in theaters - albeit not that many, and maybe not for long - stars Woody Harrelson as a reasonably convincing but still somewhat kinder and gentler LBJ than the one many people have known, or written of. If you miss it in theater, catch it on streaming.

The movie, well made and well acted (Jeffrey Donovan's John Kennedy was a nice turn), covers the period from just before the 1960 election, when Johnson was still Senate majority leader, to his first few months as president.

The time span covers the same run as the last volume in Robert Caro's many-volume biography of Johnson. As Caro has pointed out, the books put on display different threads, some light and some dark, of Johnson's life. The great book centered on the 1948 Senate election, for example, showed Johnson at his least sympathetic; the most current (The Passage of Power) is one of the brightest, showing him effectively and usefully taking and and using presidential power. It showed him assuming leadership at a moment of crisis, and using his newfound clout to push through important civil rights legislation that had eluded earlier presidents, including Kennedy. It was not a story of Vietnam; Johnson would mire himself in that soon enough, but not quite yet.

This new movie tells much the same story as the last Caro book, and gets most of the basics right. It misses here and there. It overstates the degree to which civil rights legislation was a central goal (at that time) for the Kennedys. (It also turn Bobby Kennedy into a spoiled brat, which in spite of his own rough edges he never was; and it understates Johnson's own role in their often-bitter relationship.) It misses a chance to more clearly show the legislative power of the South by depicting Senator Richard Russell, the leader that contingent, as rawer and rougher than the smooth and courtly man (albeit staunchly segregationist) actually was.

But the movie's through line is sound. From early on, it made the point that Johnson, rough though he was, understood politics and power and getting things done in a way the Kennedys did not. The Kennedys were far more presentable. But Johnson got things done.

The whole of the Johnson story is immensely complex, which is why Caro has taken so many big books to tell it (and isn't done yet). But this part of it, even recognizing Johnson's other flaws, should not be forgotten. Good can come out of politics. It should not be a dirty word.