Good morning.
Sunday in Whitewater will be sunny with a high of thirty-six. (The average November high here is about forty-six.) Sunrise is 6:54 AM and sunset 4:26 PM, for 9h 32m 18s of daytime. The moon is a waning gibbous with 58% of its visible disk illuminated.
Worth reading (or hearing) in full —
Katherine J. Cramer observes that For years, I’ve been watching anti-elite fury build in Wisconsin. Then came Trump: “Almost a decade ago, I selected 27 communities in Wisconsin and asked locals to help me identify a coffee klatch in each. Some of these communities were urban or suburban, but the majority were rural. (I selected the communities by first dividing the state into eight regions, based on a variety of political, economic, and social characteristics, and then sampling a small town and a larger one in each. I later supplemented those selections with additional ones, to add variety. The result was a fairly representative swath of non-urban Wisconsin.) I then walked into the gas station — or diner or other location — that I’d been directed to, at the appropriate time, and introduced myself as a public opinion scholar from the state’s flagship university. They tended to be welcoming, maybe in part because my thick Wisconsin accent made me less of a stranger. Once I passed out my business cards, handed out tokens of appreciation like Badger football schedules, and turned on my recorder, I asked them, “What are the big concerns of people in this community?” Regardless of geography, people in most of these communities talked about their concerns about health care, jobs, and taxation. But in the rural places and small towns, people expressed a deeply felt sense of not getting their “fair share” — defined in different ways. They felt that they didn’t get a reasonable proportion of decision-making power, believing that the key decisions were made in the major metro areas of Madison and Milwaukee, then decreed out to the rest of the state, with little listening being done to people like them.”
Anne Applebaum contends that The Radical Populism Phenomenon in Politics Offers a Kind of Magical Thinking:
In the WSJ, Nick Timiraos finds Inside Donald Trump’s Economic Team, Two Very Different Views: “One group, which appeared ascendant in the closing weeks of the campaign, largely rejects mainstream economic thinking on trade and believes eliminating trade deficits should be an overarching goal of U.S. policy. That camp views sticks—tariffs on U.S. trading partners and taxes on companies that move jobs abroad—as critical tools to reverse a 15-year slide in incomes for middle-class Americans. The opposing camp is closer to the traditional GOP center of gravity on taxes and regulation and includes many policy veterans staffing the transition team and advising Vice President-elect Mike Pence. Those advisers have long championed supply-side economics and reject the hard-line position on trade that one side’s gain must come at the other’s expense. By offering more carrots—slashing red tape and taxes to make the U.S. the top destination for businesses—they say stronger growth will obviate any need for trade protectionism. “It is the supply-siders versus the zero-sum crowd,” said Andy Laperriere, political strategist at research firm Cornerstone Macro LP who closely watches such policy developments.”
Filmmaker JT Singh’s recorded A Quick, Visual Journey Through Shanghai. Shanghai, at a fast pace —