The progress of the intellect is to the clearer vision of causes, which neglects surface differences. To the poet, to the philosopher, to the saint, all things are friendly and sacred, all events profitable, all days holy, all men divine.
Editor's note: This interview was originally published in April 2017.
Story by Joseph Ford Cotto
As always, there is a lot going on in Washington, DC nowadays. No small measure of it relates to money, but not necessarily campaign spending.
How Donald Trump and, to a lesser extent, his administrative personnel -- along with Republicans on Capitol Hill -- handle the economy will make or break this presidency's legacy. Trump promised a great deal to his supporters, and managed to unilaterally see through some of his pledges, but found congressional-slash-judicial opposition toward others.
Most intriguing is that Trump tied the seemingly non-fiscal matter of immigration to his economic platform. Foreign trade, while more relevant to national wages than border patrol hirings, has traditionally been in the realm of international policy. Trump broke from precedent by tying it to the average American's quality of life.
Politics have not been the same since, and it seems unlikely that they will revert to business-as-usual anytime in the foreseeable future.
Story by Joseph Ford Cotto
"Like I've said before .... polls are only good for strippers and cross-country skiers," Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin told Fox News host Bill O'Reilly two days before last year’s presidential election.
While I have criticized her more than a fair bit during years gone by, it is undeniable that she turned out to be a sage among pundits.
When Palin made her remark, virtually all national opinion surveys – save two highly important yet conspicuously underreported ones – indicated an impending win for Hillary Clinton. Reuters predicted she was set to win 247 electoral votes outright and favored to seize so many more that her chance of victory hovered at 90 percent.
At the Princeton Election Consortium, Dr. Sam Wang – a neuroscientist and prolific author – declared that Clinton enjoyed a 99 percent probability of winning. The platinum-grade forecaster Moody's Analytics also claimed she would triumph in the Electoral College.
Story by Joseph Ford Cotto
"Like I've said before .... polls are only good for strippers and cross-country skiers," Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin told Fox News host Bill O'Reilly two days before last year’s presidential election.
While I have criticized her more than a fair bit during years gone by, it is undeniable that she turned out to be a sage among pundits.
When Palin made her remark, virtually all national opinion surveys – save two highly important yet conspicuously underreported ones – indicated an impending win for Hillary Clinton. Reuters predicted she was set to win 247 electoral votes outright and favored to seize so many more that her chance of victory hovered at 90 percent.
At the Princeton Election Consortium, Dr. Sam Wang – a neuroscientist and prolific author – declared that Clinton enjoyed a 99 percent probability of winning. The platinum-grade forecaster Moody's Analytics also claimed she would triumph in the Electoral College.
