When it comes to racial diversity, you’d almost have thought last night’s big speech was being delivered by a Democrat:

As President Trump delivered his State of the Union address on Tuesday, he highlighted several people of color for promotions and giveaways and referred to policies popular with minority voters. It was an aggressive continuation of a strategy that he and his advisers believe should be a central part of his re-election effort: courting African-Americans, even if the odds look stacked against him and polls show that most black voters believe he is making the country’s racial issues worse.

….Mr. Trump’s overtures to black voters were not subtle. His gestures earned him accolades from his administration members and Republican supporters gathered in the House chamber, but others criticized Mr. Trump’s checklist-style approach as pandering.

So who was this aimed at? Obviously, it was aimed at least partly at African Americans themselves. As many people have already pointed out, Trump doesn’t need to become their favoritest president ever. He just needs to woo a few percentage points of the black community away from the Democratic candidate, and that might be enough to tip a close race in his favor.

Who else? A number of people think Trump’s speech was aimed at suburban centrists who are uneasy with his usual harsh rhetoric. The idea here is for Trump to look more moderate and inclusive toward blacks while continuing to bang the drum about immigrants who have murdered white folks. The message is that Trump is no racist, but he’ll keep you safe from all the brown people.

But that’s not all. Something that I think people miss is that this kind of inclusive racial rhetoric is also aimed directly at Trump’s base. Remember this?

Happy #CincoDeMayo! The best taco bowls are made in Trump Tower Grill. I love Hispanics! https://t.co/ufoTeQd8yA pic.twitter.com/k01Mc6CuDI

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 5, 2016

Anybody with a liberal sensibility cringed at this, but the message to Trump’s base was clear: See, I’m trying to reach out to Hispanics. But no matter what I do they call it racist.
The inclusive SOTU rhetoric works the same way: Trump is telling his base that he’s no racist and, by inference, that they aren’t racist either. Liberals just call everyone racist who disagrees with them. It’s a very comforting message.

Ukrainegate lives!

On Wednesday, House Judiciary Committee Chair Jerry Nadler confirmed that the House is “likely” to subpoena former national security adviser John Bolton to testify about his direct knowledge of the scandal. That news comes on the heels of last week’s Senate vote to block witnesses, including Bolton, from being called in the trial, despite mounting reports detailing several bombshell allegations Bolton is prepared to make against Trump in his upcoming memoir. Those allegations reportedly include Bolton’s claim that Trump’s efforts to pressure Ukraine into opening investigations into his political rivals started much earlier than previously known.

Will this work? It’s a repeat of the “Hillary’s emails” strategy from 2016 that was so successful for Republicans. Just keep going, and you never know what you’ll find.

Of course, Donald Trump appears to be made of teflon, while Hillary Clinton was made of velcro. People just don’t seem to care much that Trump’s entire life has been constructed out of scandals that make Clinton look like a girl scout. Still, it can’t hurt to try.

My overall response: From a partisan Republican point of view, this was a pretty good speech. Trump stayed on script and was focused like a laser on hitting every hot button he could. The economy is booming. Our enemies are on the run. Our trade policy is great again. We’re keeping our borders secure. We’re protecting religious freedom. Etc. There was absolutely nothing conciliatory toward Democrats. Trump wouldn’t even shake Nancy Pelosi’s hand at the beginning. It was a red-meat reelection speech from start to finish.

It was also more showmanlike than usual, from giving Rush Limbaugh a Medal of Freedom on live TV to reenacting that old faithful tearjerker, a surprise visit of a soldier to his family. As Jake Tapper said, this was a SOTU from a guy who used to be a reality TV star.

Democrats were stonefaced nearly the entire time. Nancy Pelosi shook her head and rolled her eyes and bit her lip. Chants broke out at one point. At the end Pelosi ripped up Trump’s speech.

That’s about it. It was a fairly standard partisan speech, and I’d say Trump delivered it pretty well. There was no mention of impeachment, apparently because Trump decided it was best not to even remind people about it. And why bother? This speech was aimed at Trump’s base, and it hit its target. Transcript here.

---

I’m not sure I can take yet another one of these from Donald Trump, but duty calls. So let’s get into this.

10:26 pm – We’re listening in as Trump leaves, and the sycophancy of the Republican members of Congress is enough to make you ill.

10:24 pm – And the winner is 78 minutes! Then Nancy Pelosi tears her copy of Trump’s speech in half. What’s up with that?

10:21 pm – Annie Oakley? Was Trump having trouble coming up with women who were part of American history?

10:20 pm – Genuine question here: is it appropriate for a president to use active duty personnel as guests at a partisan event? I truly don’t remember if this was common practice in the past.

10:18 pm – Do we have more heartwarming/heartbreaking guests this year than usual?

10:11 pm – “Radical Islamic terrorism.” Have a drink

9:59 pm – I was wondering if we’d get our annual person “killed by an illegal alien.” Sure enough, we did.

9:44 pm – Trump takes a shot at California, which is going to hell becuase of all the health care we provide for “illegal aliens.” Nancy Pelosi has a classic WTF look on her face. For the record, here’s the economic performance of the ten biggest states since the end of the Great Recession:

9:41 pm – “We will always protect people with pre-existing conditions.” And sure, I suppose so, except for all those plans you actually tried to pass in 2017 that did nothing of the sort. Plus that lawsuit you’re supporting that would immediately take away protections for pre-existing conditions. But it doesn’t matter. As Trump told us years ago, “You just tell them and they believe you.” And they do.

9:38 pm – Oh wait. You might not actually be watching, so I shouldn’t be coy. The answer is “black.” Nearly all of the guests that Trump has invited are people of color.

9:37 pm – Hmmm. I wonder which ethnic group Trump is hoping to attract with this speech? Let’s see . . .

9:35 pm – The first 20 minutes of this SOTU was one of the most aggressively partisan I’ve heard. According to Trump, the entire country was nearly in a state of collapse under President Obama, and he came along to rescue it just in time. And he did!

9:31 pm – Trump pronounces “Space Force” with a tone of reverence. Say what you will, but forever into the future Trump will be known as the president who created the Space Force.

9:12 pm – Trump says he’s produced 7 million jobs in the past three years. Fact check says: True! But in the three years before that, Obama created 8 million jobs. Still, 7 million isn’t bad for a Republican.

9:09 pm – Three short years! We’ve gone from international basket case to strongest nation on earth! Pence is unimpressed. Pelosi can’t stand to hear more.

9:04 pm – ZOMG! Nancy Pelosi offered to shake hands with Trump but he refused.

8:56 pm – How long will tonight’s SOTU last?

a) 59 minutes
b) 64 minutes
c) 67 minutes
d) 75 minutes
e) 83 minutes

8:54 pm – Did Dana Bash just say that this is the 100th anniversary of white women getting the vote? WTF?

8:52 pm – We’ve still got a few minutes to go, so let’s play a game. Which of these is the most likely headline following tonight’s speech?

a) Trump sounds notes of prosperity, unity
b) Cheers, jeers for Trump
c) Response divided after Trump shoots Adam Schiff
d) Trump announces federal occupation of California
e) President calls for civility, honesty in public life

The Iowa counting fiasco has prompted a resurgence of folks who think we should conduct all elections using paper ballots. It worked for decades, so why not now? Who needs all this techno gimcrackery anyway?

I happen to agree with this, despite paper ballots being responsible for the election of George W. Bush in 2000. However, many, many people with disabilities don’t agree, and they have the ADA on their side. So keep this in mind when you issue your clarion call for paper ballots. As a backup to machines they’re fine, but as a replacement not so much.

From the Deseret News in 1998:

Hurricane is well known by locals as “the biggest speed trap in the whole St. George Valley,” and officers there have “elected to arbitrarily issue tickets to out-of-town drivers who they know cannot contest the citations.”

In 2020 Hurricane is still a big speed trap, as I can personally attest. But a very polite one. I’ll give them that.

Here’s another picture from my Arizona trip. Back in the day, the only way to cross the Colorado River at Hoover Dam was to drive across the dam itself. Everyone knew this couldn’t last forever, and in 2005 construction was finally started on a bridge across Highway 93. The Mike O’Callaghan-Pat Tillman Memorial Bridge—the highest concrete arch bridge in the world—was finished in 2010 and here it is, in a shot taken from down near the dam itself:

This is a panoramic photo. I couldn’t fit the bridge into a single shot, so I took two pictures and then stitched them together using Photoshop. However, that produces a bit of a fisheye effect, which requires yet more Photoshop magic:

Not bad! In the slot canyon pictures, a modest amount of fisheye isn’t even visible since the walls of the canyon swoop and curve in the first place. But in a picture like this, where the deck of the bridge is obviously supposed to be flat, it really needs to be corrected.

As usual, however, note that it’s not possible to correct everything at once. The bridge is tolerably straight now, but the Lexus at the bottom right is visibly stretched, as if it were one of those old wide-track Pontiacs. But you probably wouldn’t have noticed it unless I had pointed it out.

Jared Kushner has spent three years formulating his Middle East peace plan. He had one job: give Bibi Netanyahu everything he wanted and tell the Palestinians to pound sand. Apparently he couldn’t even get that much right:

Supporters of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have grown increasingly frustrated at White House pushback over plans to immediately annex Jewish settlements in the West Bank as envisioned in President Trump’s peace plan, with their ire focused in particular on presidential adviser Jared Kushner.

….David Elhayani, the chairman of the powerful Yesha Council, which oversees more than 150 settlements…told The Washington Post. “Kushner misled the prime minister. He misled everybody. He knew for a long time that Netanyahu wanted to declare sovereignty over the Jordan Valley and northern Dead Sea — he said it many times over the last year. Gentlemen just don’t act this way.”

….Elhayani and other settler leaders also met with a senior U.S. official in Washington who told them that if the Palestinians did not accept the plan within 48 hours, Israel would be allowed to declare sovereignty over 30 percent of the West Bank. “But something happened after that; they changed their minds,” said Elhayani.

For those of you who want a map, here it is:

Israel has occupied the Jordan Valley along with the rest of the West Bank ever since 1967, and Netanyahu has long planned to annex it to Israel outright. Trump’s plan does just that. The Jordan Valley becomes Israeli territory, with a bunch of roads and tunnels connecting the various islands of a proposed future Palestinian state. Needless to say, this plan ensures that the Palestinians are completely surrounded by Israel.

For reasons unknown, however, apparently Trump got cold feet. So now the Arabs are mad at him for producing such a transparently pro-Israel plan in the first place, and the Israelis are mad at him for backing off his pro-Israel plan. Nice work, Jared. You really demonstrated a firm grasp of the history and passions governing this piece of the world.

Whether or not you think Donald Trump should be impeached over Ukrainegate, Jonah Goldberg says there’s no question that he’s guilty as charged:

Sens. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) and Marco Rubio (R- Fla.) were the first out of the block to explain that the president is guilty but shouldn’t be ousted for it….In his statement, [Alexander] said the House managers “have proved [the charges] with what they call a ‘mountain of overwhelming evidence.’” In an interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Alexander dismissed the need for more witnesses. “If you have eight witnesses who say someone left the scene of an accident, why do you need nine? I mean, the question for me was: Do I need more evidence to conclude that the president did what he did? And I concluded no.”

Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) agreed with Alexander’s position, telling reporters that he speaks for “lots and lots of us.” I somehow doubt there will be a torrent of outrage from Trump World at all of these senators (one never knows with Trump himself) who finally brought themselves to admit the emperor was naked all along.

I don’t doubt this. Now that acquittal is a sure thing, it’s become safe to quietly admit that Trump was guilty all along. The modern GOP is just chock full of profiles in courage.

For myself, I would have been satisfied if this had been the party line all along and Mitch McConnell had engineered a vote of, say, 62-38 for impeachment. This would have meant that Republicans could keep their president, but it also would have sent a clear message that this kind of behavior was bad enough that Trump had only barely survived.

But instead Trump demanded, and Republicans delivered, a complete and utter demonstration of fealty, and that meant a complete and utter defense of Trump’s actions. And this in turn has opened the door for future presidents to demand personal favors in return for official actions. When that happens, Republicans will have no one to blame but themselves.

The Wall Street Journal suggests that everyone’s favorite recession indicator is probably wrong:

The market’s most-popular recession warning is flashing red again as fears about the economic impact of China’s coronavirus outbreak prompt a big drop in Treasury yields. Yet the warning—a drop in the 10-year Treasury yield below the three-month bill, known as an inverted yield curve—is signaling something much more benign: the expectation of Federal Reserve support later this year.

Well, that’s that. Whenever people finally become indifferent to some particular economic warning, that’s a strong sign that we’re about to get bitten in the ass. Here’s what the yield curve looks like:

When financial reporters talk about inverted yield curves, they always mention the bright side: although inversions do seem to predict recessions, it can take as much as a year before the recession comes. Unfortunately, as you can see, the yield curve actually dropped below zero last summer and has been near zero ever since. If it drops again, it’s probably best to treat the entire period as a single episode, which means we’ll get another recession by mid-2020.

Or not. I mean, the yield curve is sort of a mysterious thing, and it “always” predicts a recession until it doesn’t. On the other hand, there’s a brand of economic analysis that looks at everything in terms of “oh, this thing that looks like bad news is actually good news because it will force the Fed to loosen up monetary policy.” I’m not fond of it. The Journal plays this card today with a subhead that literally says things are “different this time.”

Maybe so! I sure don’t know. But I’ll be resting a little uneasy for the next few months.

As near as I can tell, the Iowa caucus meltdown has finally gotten the media mad. For starters, it made them stay up really late when they weren’t expecting to—and with literally nothing to talk about. Second, the Iowa election poobahs refused to talk to them about what went wrong. Quelle horreur! And then, to finish things off, it’s Iowa. They really just wanted to announce the results from this pissy little flyover state and then move on to the East Coast.

Unlike everyone else, I guess, I sort of feel sorry for the Iowa folks. I mean, it’s one thing to screw up the rollout of Obamacare, which was genuinely a massive and intricate computer system. But to screw up the reporting of about a dozen numbers for fewer than 2,000 caucus sites? That’s epic. I know that many of you will think I’m exaggerating here, but this is literally the kind of thing a high school kid could do as a class project these days. The front end is embarrasingly simple, and the back-end database is literally less sophisticated than your average contact manager. Finally, there are the summations and calculations, and that’s sixth-grade arithmetic.

Aside from all that, I suppose I find this more humorous than outrageous. They should have stuck with telephone banks and—maybe—an Excel spreadsheet. I suppose they’re tired of hearing that by now, but it’s true. Not everything has to be computerized, after all.