Blogs

Watch Donald Trump's Concession Speech After Losing the GOP Iowa Caucus to Ted Cruz

| Mon Feb. 1, 2016 11:21 PM EST

Ted Cruz defeated Donald Trump in the Republican Iowa caucus tonight. Cruz's victory comes as a major surprise, as the final two polls preceding Monday's caucus projected a clear win for Trump.

Below is Trump's unusually humble concession speech, which even included a rare congratulatory message for the Texas senator.

Advertise on MotherJones.com

It Turns Out That Millennials Like Hillary Clinton Just Fine

| Mon Feb. 1, 2016 3:37 PM EST

It's the first election day of the cycle, so I might as well go with the flow. Langer Research recently asked millennials how they'd feel if various candidates won the presidency. Here were the choices:

  • like declaring a national holiday
  • like there's a light at the end of the tunnel
  • like shrugging
  • like going back to bed
  • like fleeing the country

And here are the results:

Needless to say, Donald Trump elicited the most extreme reaction. More interesting, I think, is that even among millennials there's really no enthusiasm gap between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. This has decidedly not been the conventional wisdom, and most poll results seem to confirm that Sanders has more support among the young. But this one, which explicitly measures enthusiasm, shows no difference. Apparently young liberals are just as excited about a Clinton presidency as a Sanders one.

Let These Legos Explain How the Iowa Democratic Caucus Works

| Mon Feb. 1, 2016 3:21 PM EST

Today, the state of Iowa reasserts its outsize importance in American politics with the official start of the presidential primary season, the Iowa caucus. For the huge amount of attention the Iowa caucus draws, there's also a ton of confusion about what exactly happens during it. Republicans gather and cast secret ballots, but Democrats get together and do...what? Whether you're in need of a quick refresher or new to the game, let this brilliant video produced by the folks at Vermont Public Radio outline what's taking place today when the Democratic Party holds their caucuses.

For more of an in-depth look at Iowa and beyond, check out our up-to-the-minute political coverage here.

The Political Generation Gap Has Become a Generation Chasm

| Mon Feb. 1, 2016 2:37 PM EST

This is nothing new, but I continue to find it sort of fascinating. Here's Pew's breakdown of the voting generation gap over the past 40 years:

At the turn of the century, there was no partisan difference in the votes of young and old. But in recent elections, there has been a huge generation gap at the polls. Today 92% of Republicans are to the right of the median Democrat in their core social, economic and political views, while 94% of Democrats are to the left of the median Republican, up from 64% and 70% respectively in 1994.

There's more at the link. Approval ratings of presidents are now based almost entirely on party affiliation. Liberals and conservatives get their news from entirely different places. And they just flatly disapprove of each other more than ever.

And it apparently all started with George Bush. Even during the Clinton wars of the 90s, the gaps weren't that big. Only after Bush was elected—and the Republican Party became thoroughly Rove-ized—did all these trends really pick up steam. Thanks Karl!

Adele: Donald Trump Has "No Permission" to Use My Songs

| Mon Feb. 1, 2016 1:40 PM EST

After several accounts surfaced of Donald Trump playing Adele's music at campaign events around the country, the pop megastar has finally stepped in to tell the world she never gave the GOP frontunner permission.

"Adele has not given permission for her music to be used for any political campaigning," her spokesman told the Independent on Monday, effectively asking the presidential hopeful to stop blasting her smash hits "Rolling in the Deep" and "Skyfall" to fire up crowds. 

This isn't the first time musicians have expressed disapproval of Trump for using their music. Back in June, when Trump first told the world he was running for president, Neil Young slammed him for playing "Rockin' in the Free World" for the announcement. Trump responded with characteristic Trumpiness:

(For the record, Neil Young "feels the Bern.")

But Trump might be a bit more disappointed by Adele's brush-off. The real estate mogul is a noted fan of the British singer: he even paused campaigning last November to attend the singer's one-night-only show in New York. According to several reports, Trump reportedly cut the line to get into the exclusive show.

As for Adele, this isn't the first time she has found herself tangled up in Republican politics. Just last week, Mike Huckabee released a head-scratching parody of "Hello." (Due to a copyright claim, the audio for the post was muted on YouTube, then un-muted.) She also credits former GOP vice presidential nominee and governor of Alaska Sarah Palin with launching her career in America, back in 2008.

Trump's Iowa Campaign Gets Hit With a Sex Discrimination Complaint

| Mon Feb. 1, 2016 1:35 PM EST

A Donald Trump field organizer who was fired in January has filed a sex discrimination complaint against Trump's campaign.

The New York Times reported on Sunday that Elizabeth Mae Davidson, a 26-year-old field organizer for the Trump campaign in Davenport, Iowa, filed  the complaint last Thursday with the Davenport Civil Rights Commission alleging that men who were doing the same work earned more money, were given more responsibility, and were treated more leniently in the campaign. 

Davidson recruited organizers for most of her region's 63 precincts and also opened the Trump campaign's second field office in Iowa. She was fired on January 14, the day after she was quoted in a different New York Times article about problems with the campaign in Iowa. The quotes attributed to her were about the process of recruiting volunteers and said nothing disparaging about the campaign. Davidson told the Times in an interview for Sunday's story that she was paid $2,000 a month, while several men with her same title—district representative—were paid between $3,500 and $4,000 per month. 

In her complaint, Davidson alleges that male district representatives have been quoted in the media without getting fired, and that her male peers were given the opportunity to organize and speak at rallies while her requests to do this work were ignored. Her complaint also alleges that when she and another female volunteer met Trump at a rally last summer, the presidential hopeful said, in reference to their appearance, "You guys could do a lot of damage."

In an interview with the Times, Trump denied making this comment and did not address the other allegations. He also explained that his staff had told him that Davidson "did a terrible job," and he criticized the paper for publishing this story the day before the Iowa caucuses. "A story like this," he said, "could damage my chances."

Advertise on MotherJones.com

Health Update—So Far Filed Under "Huh?"

| Mon Feb. 1, 2016 1:19 PM EST

So what was the dexamethasone thing about last night? Here's the story.

During my first round of chemotherapy I took a three-med cocktail. One of the meds was dexamethasone, a corticosteroid. It helps the other drugs work better, and also seems to program cancerous myeloma cells to die on their own, which is a handy attribute. But one of the side effects is sleep disruption. For the first few weeks, it had no effect. But then it started disrupting my sleep on the day I took it. Then for a couple of days. Then all the time. Then even more. It was a pain in the ass, but for the most part kept under control with sleeping meds that varied over time.

Now I'm on a second round of chemo, and it's not working as well as we'd like. So a couple of weeks ago we added dex to the mix. It was half the dose I was taking last year, so I was hopeful the sleep disruption would take a long time to show up and would be milder than before. No such luck. Perhaps the first round created a heightened sensitivity to it? In any case, on the very first day I was up until 2 am. Hmmph. But maybe that was just a placebo effect I had talked myself into.

Again, no such luck. It's a weekly dose, and I took the second one on Saturday morning. I didn't sleep at all that night. Nor was I tired at all. In fact, kind of buzzed. I stayed awake all day Sunday, too. But last night I fell asleep normally and slept for nearly nine hours.

So how will this play out going forward? No telling. I'm in terra incognita. If it stays like this, it's not really a big deal. I'll just have a sleepless but otherwise pleasant night once a week. If it gets worse, though, I'll have lots of sleepless nights and start to feel like crap. We'll see! I'd just as soon not get back on the sleep meds, so hopefully it doesn't get worse. Unfortunately, I suspect that's a forlorn hope.

Here Are Your Final Iowa Poll Results Until 2020

| Mon Feb. 1, 2016 12:55 PM EST

It's neck and neck in Iowa! Who will have the best ground game? What will the weather be like? Who will scoop up Martin O'Malley's votes in the absurdly convoluted Democratic caucuses?

You'll find out tonight. In the meantime, here are the final Pollster aggregates. I've turned off smoothing this time in order to provide the most current possible results.

This Chart Shows Why Your Conspiracy Theory Is Really Dumb

| Mon Feb. 1, 2016 12:48 PM EST

Update, 2/2/2016: Chris Bauch, an editor for PLOS ONE, said in an email that the author of the study we reported on below "should have used a different model for some of the analyses" and that the author "is working on submitting errata." Bauch added, however, that he is "pretty sure the correction will not change the conclusions” and that he does not "foresee a retraction.” We'll update when we know more.

By now, climate change has joined the moon landing and the JFK assassination in the upper echelons of fodder for conspiracy theories. Back in 2004, Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) called global warming the "greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people." A few years later, Inhofe told our own David Corn that the climate hoax was most likely being perpetrated by Barbra Streisand. Donald Trump, meanwhile, thinks it was "created by and for the Chinese." I could go on.

There's plenty of evidence that these conspiracy theories are garbage, starting with the overwhelming scientific consensus about climate science and the fact that 2015 was the hottest year on record. But in case you're still not convinced, here's another bit of proof.

In a new peer-reviewed paper in the journal PLOS ONE, an Oxford physicist devised a mathematical formula for the lifespan of conspiracy theories—that is, how long it would likely take for them to be publicly unveiled if they were in fact true. It's not long: In the case of climate change, it's about 27 years if you assume the cover-up is perpetrated by only published climate scientists—and just four years if you assume it includes the broader scientific community.

The author, David Robert Grimes, found similar maximum life spans for a few other prominent conspiracy theories:

Grimes, PLOS 2016

Let's pick, somewhat arbitrarily, preeminent climatologist James Hansen's 1988 testimony to Congress about global warming as the beginning of the great fraud. According to Grimes' formula, climate change would have been publicly outed as a hoax by 1992 if it were carried out by a broad coalition of scientific organizations. And it would have been exposed by 2015 if it were carried out only by published climate scientists. Unless I missed something, that didn't happen. (Sorry, the "Climategate" emails definitely don't count.)

conspiracy chart
Here's how long it would take for four big conspiracies to fall apart: (a) moon landing hoax, (b) climate change hoax, (c) vaccination conspiracy, and (d) suppression of a cure for cancer. Grimes, PLOS 2016.

Grimes' model is based on the statistical probability that one person within the conspiracy (one climate scientist, for example) would intentionally or accidentally let slip the truth. The odds of that happening go up as the number of people involved in the conspiracy increase—hence the shorter life span for the climate fraud if it involved broad scientific organizations (whose membership Grimes totals at more than 400,000). To help in that analysis, Grimes studied a few actual conspiracies, including the National Security Agency's widespread spying on US citizens that was exposed by Edward Snowden.

Anyway, climate change is not a hoax. And we did land on the moon. And there isn't a hidden cure for cancer. And you should go get your vaccinations, dammit.

H/T: The Skeptics Guide to the Universe

Happiness Tip of the Day: Ditch the Commute

| Mon Feb. 1, 2016 12:01 PM EST

From Alex Tabarrok on homebuying:

One final point: behavioral economics tells us that we quickly get used to big houses but we never get used to commuting. So when you have a choice, go for the smaller house closer to work.

A thousand times yes. Obviously not everyone has this choice, and it's not practical to move every time you get a new job. But yes, if you have the option, try to keep your commute under 20 minutes.

Want something more quantifiable? Here are two of "The Rules" from Joel Garreau's Edge City, a dated but wonderful book about the building of suburbia:

The maximum desirable commute, throughout human history, regardless of transportation technology: 45 minutes.

Cevero's law of the value of time wasted in traffic jams: People view the time they waste in a traffic jam as equal, in dollar value, to half their hourly wage. For example, if you make $50,000 per year, that's $25 per hour. That means you'll pay $3.12 each way per day to cut 15 minutes off your commute. That's about $125 per month, which scales to about $30,000 in the price of a house.

That sounds low to me—in Southern California that's a rounding error in the price of a home—but it's at least a good starting point. If you can buy a house 15 minutes closer to work for $30,000 more, grab it. If it's $50,000 more, behavioral economics says you should ignore your financial angst and grab it anyway. If it's $100,000 more, you might need to think things through a little harder. Or, as Tabarrok suggests, settle for a small house near work at the same price as the bigger house in the burbs. You probably won't regret it.

Anyway, from personal experience I can tell you that short commutes are great. And the greatest commute of all? A walk down the stairs each morning. That's hard to beat.