Moses Kagan's Aurora Borealis

Great article in the NY Times regarding a reversal in South Korea of the long-term trend in modernizing Asian countries towards heavily male-skewed populations. Apparently, ratios are so out-of-whack due to abortion of female fetuses that China has something like 120 boys for each 100 girls in younger age cohorts. South Korea's ratio has now dropped to 107 boys to 100 girls.

What are the likely effects of these skewed ratios on politics in the 21st Century? The United Nations Population fund warns of sexual violence and human trafficking as the main concerns. I'd like to propose others.

In the US, females tend to favor progressive causes and candidates. No Democrat can be elected president without winning the women's vote by a wide (60%? 70%?) margin. Without any evidence, I'd be willing to bet that similar trends will shape emerging democracies in Asia. We ought to expect more market-driven economic policies, higher defense spending, and more conservative social structures than would have dominated had the population hewed more closely to the natural gender ratio.

Further to my post about the Clinton campaign's dirty tricks: Here is the Kerrey apology, ensuring that "Obama is Muslim" stays in the news one more day.

Labels: Clinton, Hillary, Obama

Here's why I think Mitt Romney is the worst of the Republican candidates running for president right now:

The conventional take on Romney is that he's a flip-flopper. Romney used to be reliably moderate on social issues - reliable enough that he was elected governor of Massachusetts, one of the most liberal states in the country. Then, when he decided to run for president as a Republican, he flip-flopped, undergoing an instant conversion to a right wing orthodoxy that denies women's right to choose, gay people's right to marry, etc. So good so far...

But here's what I want to know: Given that Romney is an observant Mormon, and given Mormonism's general hostility both to women's rights and gay rights, how did Romney come to his "original", moderate positions. To put it another way, do we even believe that Romney was a moderate in the first place?

I would argue that Romney's original "flip-flop" was the one he made in order to position himself to run for governor of Massachusetts. So, this most recent ideological back-track is really the second one in his relatively brief political career.

I can live with politicians who use questionable tactics to reach admirable goals (like FDR). I can even live with, though not support, politicians who fervently hold beliefs that I find objectionable (Mike Huckabee). I can't live with Mitt Romney, a politician who doesn't really have any personal beliefs, just positions that change based on the electorate to which he happens to be pandering at any particular point in time.

Labels: Mitt Romney, politics

Hillary Clinton is a negative branding ninja. She and her advisors are demonstrating through their management of media cycles that they have the ambition and skills to tarnish Obama's brand and probably that any of any Republican who challenges her in the general election. Three recent incidents confirm for me her ability to kick ass.

The first incident involved Bill Shaheen, Clinton's New Hampshire campaign, repeatedly mentioning Obama's past cocaine use. Then former senator Bob Kerrey, who had recently endorsed Clinton, publicly described Obama as having been educated in a madrassa (muslim religious school). Finally, over the past few days, three members of Hillary's staff in Iowa have been fired for forwarding around emails claiming that Obama is muslim. In each case, Hillary moved very quickly to discipline the offending parties.

To understand why these are examples of Clinton kicking ass, you need to understand how modern politics works. First things first: Those incidents weren't accidents. Given the Clinton campaign's military-like insistence upon discipline in the ranks, I think we need to assume that stories emerging from the campaign emerge because she wants them to.

The second thing to understand is how important owning a media cycle is. When a story like the Shaheen story breaks, it fills a day's worth of campaign coverage. When Clinton apologizes and disciplines staff the next day, the story earns a second full day of coverage. Most people don't follow political news that intently. They just see the ticker on Fox or CNBC. So they just see the words "Obama" and "cocaine" and "Obama" and "muslim" repeated endlessly on the tube for two days.

And that, dear readers, is how you use media ninjitsu to tarnish your competitor's brand.

We're going to be announcing the launch of my new company shortly.

Check back on over the next few days (or subscribe to the feed at right) to find out what it is!

Labels: Surprise