Election 2020

[pbrower2a]

Donald Trump cannot win fair and square. He has likely been so told, but he may order people to make sure that he wins. That is what Amy Coney Barrett is for -- to seal any decision that ensures that America become a fascist dictatorship.

Polling data suggest that Trump has no meaningful chance to win:




https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/...es-months/

Trump has likely never been ahead in any poll average in any state that he lost in 2016 (which explains why he is not shown for such states as California, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, or Washington). He loses Arizona, Florida, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin unless he can do at the end of a sordid campaign what he never did at any other time but that he won in 2016.  That's before I discuss Georgia or Iowa, where late polls have gone against Trump. 

People have been watching the polls heavily, and it is hard for anyone to believe that Trump can win unless he can unilaterally disqualify the votes by which he loses.  Many people, like I, trust mathematical (including statistical) rules far more than they trust the utterances of a President who alternates between word salad (which Amy Coney Barrett so generously dished out in her confirmation hearing) or outright Newspeak.

I hate this President. In the unlikely case that he gets re-elected, I wish I could emigrate.

[Eric the Green]

What To Make Of That New Wisconsin Poll That Has Biden Way Ahead
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/wha...way-ahead/

[Eric the Green]

(CNN)With the race for the presidency approaching its end amid a raging pandemic, Democratic nominee Joe Biden maintains a substantial lead over President Donald Trump nationwide, according to a new CNN Poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/28/politics/...index.html

Among likely voters, 54% back Biden and 42% Trump. Biden has held a lead in every CNN poll on the matchup since 2019, and he has held a statistically significant advantage in every high-quality national poll since the spring. Although the election will ultimately be decided by the statewide results, which drive the Electoral College, Biden's lead nationally is wider than any presidential candidate has held in more than two decades in the final days of the campaign.

The demographic chasms that have defined the nation's politics in the last four years remain in place. Women break sharply for Biden, 61% to 37%. Among men, it's a near-even split, 48% for Trump and 47% for Biden. Voters of color support the Democrat by a nearly 50-point margin, 71% to 24%, while White voters split 50% for Trump to 48% for Biden.....

Those near-even numbers among men and among White voters mask significant divides by education among Whites and by race across genders. Women of color (77% Biden to 21% Trump) and White women (54% Biden to 45% Trump) both break for Biden, as do men of color (64% Biden to 28% Trump). White men, however, favor Trump by 56% to 41%.

Those with college degrees favor Biden by 30 points, while those without degrees split evenly. Among White voters, the difference is larger. White voters with college degrees favor Biden 58% to 40%. Those White voters who do not hold a four-year degree are a mirror image, breaking 58% for Trump to 40% for Biden. Among those White voters with degrees, the gender gap is relatively small, but it is a yawning 38 points between White women without degrees (49% Biden to 49% Trump) and White men without degrees (68% Trump to 30% for Biden). (like Classic Xer)

And seniors, who shifted in the Democrats' direction in the 2018 election, are solidly in Biden's corner in this poll. (non-Jones Boomers like me). Overall, 55% of likely voters age 65 or older back the Democrat, 44% Trump. Biden also leads by a broad margin among voters under age 35 (68% Biden to 30% Trump) (younger Millennials), while voters between the ages of 35 and 64 are split about evenly between the two candidates (48% back each candidate). (Xers and Xer cuspers)

[Eric the Green]

(10-28-2020, 03:48 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: I hate this President. In the unlikely case that he gets re-elected, I wish I could emigrate.

Maybe I'll see you on the plane. Where are you looking at going? I'm thinking The Netherlands. My you-tube friend organist Gert van Hoef is from there; lots of organ music culture there. And still a liberal country, unlike the UK. I love France too, but if Macron is the best they can do, I'm not so keen on it. And French is hard to speak; most people in Nederland speak English.

[jleagans]

Wherever you are it won't be needed. I've gamed this out and if he wins I'm convinced California and Texas secession should be expected. California just won't abide his rule and destruction of law, and Texas (and I'm saying this as a Texan) has a self-identity that won't allow California to secede first .

[pbrower2a]

(10-28-2020, 04:25 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: What To Make Of That New Wisconsin Poll That Has Biden Way Ahead
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/wha...way-ahead/

That lead is a gigantic outlier, consistent with about a 57-40 win by Biden in Wisconsin. Oddly the same pollster showed Biden up "only" 7% (which itself would be lethal to any chance of a Trump win of Michigan, and when other pollsters had margins of 8%, 9%, and 10% for Biden in Michigan.  I could imagine the states switched, with unusually high turnout for Democrats in Michigan. Trump badly mangled the response to the nefarious plot against Governor Whitmer.

All of a sudden I see a 4% lead for Joe Biden in Iowa, something that I had never seen (the Hawkeye State had typically shown that Trump's 9% win in Iowa in 2016 was no fluke).

To put it tamely, we are going to see some strange things on Tuesday night. We are accustomed to close elections and to incumbent Presidents getting re-elected. But this is a Crisis Era, and attitudes can change swiftly. I see a new political consensus forming, but I can't quite define it. One obvious difference is that the leader that we now have is about as far from the leaders of the Continental Congress, Abraham Lincoln, and Franklin Roosevelt as is possible in competence and integrity. Obama may have been more the sort of leader that America tends to get after a Crisis is over, more like Grover Cleveland or Dwight Eisenhower... someone more likely to negotiate than to read the Riot Act toward opponents. Trump is swift to read the Riot Act, so to speak, especially when the opponents are anything but rioters. 

I see America tiring of confrontation. This election is not the end of the Republican Party; when Joe Biden is getting much support in the election from people who have typically voted for conservative Republicans one knows that he at best can hope for a shaky alliance soon after he is inaugurated. This said, Americans seem to want placid politics and not apocalyptic speeches. We have had our experience with the Hard Right getting power and sticking it to everyone else instead of efforts to find workable compromises.

[Eric the Green]

(10-29-2020, 12:28 AM)jleagans Wrote: Wherever you are it won't be needed.  I've gamed this out and if he wins I'm convinced California and Texas secession should be expected.  California just won't abide his rule and destruction of law, and Texas (and I'm saying this as a Texan) has a self-identity that won't allow California to secede first .

That's true, there have been ideas afloat about secession for a while. It depends on how far it goes. I had predicted this idea might be floated in the 2020s since way back in the 1970s based on my reading of the planetary cycles.

I doubt CA and TX would secede under the same circumstances. TX is now a purple state, so it might not go now, although when Perry was governor he proposed secession. Blue states might secede if Trump gets installed by Court order, and red states might secede if Trump loses. 

I have thought 2025 would be about the time this happens, though, figuring that after the 2024 election things could get more drastic all the way around. I didn't know about Kamala Harris in the 1970s, obviously, but now it appears that if she is the nominee in 2024, she will lose and thus force a return of trumpism (under the most-likely candidate, Tom Cotton). Kamala is not a winning candidate. She should not have been chosen VP. Blue states might then secede. Alternatively, if a younger and more powerful candidate than Biden wins the Democratic nomination over Kamala, and gets elected, the red states might feel the pinch of new taxes and gun laws and rebel. I have thought this is the more-likely scenario, at least before Kamala was chosen VP.

So I'm not sure if now is the time for secession. The Court just allowed ballots postmarked on election day but received days later to be counted in PA and NC. They are not allowing them in WI. Barrett did not interfere, saying she didn't know enough about the case. It seems like despite their eagerness to get Barrett on the Court so it would rule the other way on this, they were too late for their power play after all. So, things are looking up, at least for now. Biden is up in WI, and holding on in PA and NC.

Update: it appears Kavanaugh and the other 3 reactionaries may have only postponed a decision in this issue, and they could get Barrett's vote next time. Right now I think the repugs could pull off suppressing the late-arriving ballots in PA, but Biden has a fairly steady lead in PA and so far the ballots outstanding would cut off almost as many Republicans as Democrats if not allowed. The North Carolina case may be harder for Barrett to stomach, since state law allows late-arriving ballots in emergencies. Stay tuned.

[Eric the Green]

(10-29-2020, 05:40 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(10-28-2020, 04:25 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: What To Make Of That New Wisconsin Poll That Has Biden Way Ahead
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/wha...way-ahead/

That lead is a gigantic outlier, consistent with about a 57-40 win by Biden in Wisconsin. Oddly the same pollster showed Biden up "only" 7% (which itself would be lethal to any chance of a Trump win of Michigan, and when other pollsters had margins of 8%, 9%, and 10% for Biden in Michigan.  I could imagine the states switched, with unusually high turnout for Democrats in Michigan. Trump badly mangled the response to the nefarious plot against Governor Whitmer.

All of a sudden I see a 4% lead for Joe Biden in Iowa, something that I had never seen (the Hawkeye State had typically shown that Trump's 9% win in Iowa in 2016 was no fluke).

To put it tamely, we are going to see some strange things on Tuesday night. We are accustomed to close elections and to incumbent Presidents getting re-elected. But this is a Crisis Era, and attitudes can change swiftly. I see a new political consensus forming, but I can't quite define it. One obvious difference is that the leader that we now have is about as far from the leaders of the Continental Congress, Abraham Lincoln, and Franklin Roosevelt as is possible in competence and integrity. Obama may have been more the sort of leader that America tends to get after a Crisis is over, more like Grover Cleveland or Dwight Eisenhower... someone more likely to negotiate than to read the Riot Act toward opponents. Trump is swift to read the Riot Act, so to speak, especially when the opponents are anything but rioters. 

I see America tiring of confrontation. This election is not the end of the Republican Party; when Joe Biden is getting much support in the election from people who have typically voted for conservative Republicans one knows that he at best can hope for a shaky alliance soon after he is inaugurated. This said, Americans seem to want placid politics and not apocalyptic speeches. We have had our experience with the Hard Right getting power and sticking it to everyone else instead of efforts to find workable compromises.

Although I agree generally here, I see things a bit differently. I don't think the era of confrontation is over. The country is more polarized than ever, with increasing passion on both sides. What is necessary to redress and change direction after the Trump mess will be confrontational, and anything less will just be another bland disappointment like Bill Clinton and Obama were. The court must be reformed and packed now, or nothing much will change from the way things have been for 40 years. That kind of stagnation and drift is just not acceptable to the Left anymore, such as it is. Barrett is an unacceptable coup, it is like the Dred Scott decision; it must be overturned. Schumer seems ready. And making that and other changes won't be acceptable to the Right either. Our 4T is half over, and as such, people being tired of confrontation won't change that fact. The right wing is not going to accept Biden, any more than they accepted earlier moderate Democrats Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. "Workable compromises" cannot be made with them; only within the Democratic Party. To the Right-wing, all Democrats are socialists, except for someone like Joe Manchin. Our crisis will continue for another 8 or 9 years. Turnings are not usually only 12 years long. And I don't agree with the civil war anomaly. We are still 1850s redux, as I have said already very often.

Grover Cleveland is not the example you want, at least not his second term (maybe his first, which was still 1T at least until half-way through; his second was 2T). He read the riot act to the 1894 strikers and brutally crushed them, thus sealing his non-renomination and Bryan took over and changed the Democratic Party forever. The equivalent of Ike was U.S. Grant. The winning general, like Washington. All three were nomad types. As he took office in 1869, he called for calm. All three were very popular and won election easily tor 2 terms.

[pbrower2a]

Just a reminder; someone still thinks that he can win, even if he resorts to desperate threats. Trump's words in red as if he were (as he thinks he is) an equal to the Man Whose Words in the Bible  (which of course this President neither reads nor heeds) that he infamously held up in what Trump thought an act of piety following an act of brutality.

I hate to reprint nearly-whole news articles because such is on the surface a copyright violation, but this article will likely be of little value on November 4 or later:


WASHINGTON (AP) — The suburbs wouldn’t be the suburbs anymore, the economy would sink into its worst depression ever and police departments would cease to exist. Even America’s older adults would be left to figure out how to get by without heat, air conditioning or electricity.
This is the apocalyptic version of American life that President Donald Trump argues would be the dire consequence of turning over the White House to Democrat Joe Biden.

“He’ll bury you in regulations, dismantle your police departments, dissolve our borders, confiscate your guns, terminate religious liberty, destroy your suburbs,” Trump said in one of many over-the-top pronouncements about Biden in the campaign’s final weeks. Trump typically makes his warning about the fate of suburbia as he showcases his own decision to end federal regulations that govern the placement of low-incoming housing in the suburbs.

......

Trump made fear — particularly the fear of immigrants — a major theme of his 2016 campaign. Now, he is giving voters a laundry list of mostly implausible reasons to fear a Biden presidency.

“This election is a choice between a TRUMP RECOVERY or a BIDEN DEPRESSION,” the president tweeted, echoing what he tells supporters at rallies. “It’s a choice between a TRUMP BOOM or a BIDEN LOCKDOWN. It’s a choice between our plan to Kill the virus – or Biden’s plan to kill the American Dream!”



Trump has criticized Biden for saying he’d follow the scientists, and the president claims the Democrat would shut the country down. In fact, Biden hasn’t said whether he’d endorse large-scale shutdowns of the nation’s economy, if things get drastically worse, like much of the country did in March.


“If you vote for Biden, it means no kids in school, no graduations, no weddings, no Thanksgiving, no Christmas and no Fourth of July together,” Trump said at a rally Wednesday in Goodyear, Arizona. “Other than that, you have a wonderful life.”

https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-donald-trump-police-economy-3082b995c1fd89129671b245797bc902

[Isoko]

Eric, 

If I'm going to be honest, the only way I see the U.S potentially breaking up is with a Trump win. I think if Trump fails to get into the white House this time, the Republicans will abandon Trumpism and quickly go back to good ole Bush era Republicanism. 

I just cannot see Tom Cotton jumping on the Trump train in terms of ideology or thought. I think if he becomes the main candidate, he would just be a typical neo con. 

Also what we have to remember is that Trumpism itself is on a very big time limit. So is the Republican party as a whole. Trumpism is mainly made up of older white people who "want their old white country back" along with the mainly blue collar voting base. Problem for the Republicans is that the younger generation of millennials have mainly gone into white collar occupations and don't feel particularly economically threatened (as of yet) by globalisation.

Also you have the older voting base who are dying off. The younger voters, particularly gen z, don't have the same attachment to ye olde white America. They grew up with diversity so it is normal to them.

You know, the more I think about it, the more I realise that Trump himself is the last hurrah of the Republican Party. After him, there will really be no point in voting Republican anymore.

[Eric the Green]

(10-29-2020, 11:54 AM)Isoko Wrote: Eric, 

If I'm going to be honest, the only way I see the U.S potentially breaking up is with a Trump win. I think if Trump fails to get into the white House this time, the Republicans will abandon Trumpism and quickly go back to good ole Bush era Republicanism. 

I just cannot see Tom Cotton jumping on the Trump train in terms of ideology or thought. I think if he becomes the main candidate, he would just be a typical neo con. 

Also what we have to remember is that Trumpism itself is on a very big time limit. So is the Republican party as a whole. Trumpism is mainly made up of older white people who "want their old white country back" along with the mainly blue collar voting base. Problem for the Republicans is that the younger generation of millennials have mainly gone into white collar occupations and don't feel particularly economically threatened (as of yet) by globalisation.

Also you have the older voting base who are dying off. The younger voters, particularly gen z, don't have the same attachment to ye olde white America. They grew up with diversity so it is normal to them.

You know, the more I think about it, the more I realise that Trump himself is the last hurrah of the Republican Party. After him, there will really be no point in voting Republican anymore.

Tom is pretty typical trumpist, from what I have heard. We'll see. And I think Republicans are mostly trumpists now. 40% of America has been sick and depraved for a while now. And they have put up some pretty steep blocks that Democrats may not have the guts to tear down. They will stand for one or two decades if not taken down, and the problem is that will be too late to stop climate change, and probably the entrenchment of corporate America and many more deaths from gun massacres and lack of health care.

You are right about the time limit for them. Obviously that has not stopped them from trying to freeze their world in place. They are angry and armed and who knows what they will do.

[Isoko]

Eric, 

If I'm going to be honest with you, America itself needs to settle on some kind of new centrism that appeals to all segments of the population. Right now, it is way too politically divided that I actually think a future secession would be better for the country to heal. 

I think if the country did separate into red and blue and went their own way, it would be better in the long run. The blue could focus on more progressive values and establishing programmes that need to be done. 

The red can live in ye olde America and be content. Maybe later on they could unite again when their political differences are solved. But I must confess, I do get a very good light if the country does break up. 

America is sort of where the Soviet Union was in the 1980s. I would class the Baltic stated, Ukraine etc as Blue and Russia, Belarus and the Central Asian countries as Red. What is interesting is that originally, those red areas wanted to keep the Soviet Union alive and regretted its passing. The blue wanted it gone for good. 

Now the red want to join the blue and get rid of the Soviet system for good, which was unthinkable at one point. So maybe the same with happen to the reds in America.

[Eric the Green]

Polling averages Oct.30, 9 AM
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/pol.../national/
75+ million already voted.

National Biden +8.8

Alaska Trump +7.5
Arizona Biden +3
Florida Biden +2
Georgia Biden +1.7
Indiana Trump +8.9
Iowa Biden +0.3
Kansas Trump +9.3
Maine CD-2 Biden +2.8
Michigan Biden +8.6
Minnesota Biden +8.2
Missouri Trump +6.7
Montana Trump +5.2
Nevada Biden +6.1
New Hampshire Biden +11.4
North Carolina Biden +2.1
Ohio Trump +1
Pennsylvania Biden +5.1
South Carolina Trump +7.8
Texas Trump +1.3
Wisconsin Biden +8.6

[Eric the Green]

(10-29-2020, 01:34 PM)Isoko Wrote: Eric, 

If I'm going to be honest with you, America itself needs to settle on some kind of new centrism that appeals to all segments of the population. Right now, it is way too politically divided that I actually think a future secession would be better for the country to heal. 

I think if the country did separate into red and blue and went their own way, it would be better in the long run. The blue could focus on more progressive values and establishing programmes that need to be done. 

The red can live in ye olde America and be content. Maybe later on they could unite again when their political differences are solved. But I must confess, I do get a very good light if the country does break up. 

America is sort of where the Soviet Union was in the 1980s. I would class the Baltic stated, Ukraine etc as Blue and Russia, Belarus and the Central Asian countries as Red. What is interesting is that originally, those red areas wanted to keep the Soviet Union alive and regretted its passing. The blue wanted it gone for good. 

Now the red want to join the blue and get rid of the Soviet system for good, which was unthinkable at one point. So maybe the same with happen to the reds in America.

Yes, those of us on the blue side see little or nothing in common with those on the red side in the USA today. But this has happened before, as during the blue vs. the gray in the civil war. And divisions occurred during the New Deal years and during the Revolution as well. The progressive side won and established a new consensus afterward. During the 4T, there was no compromise, but after the more progressive side won, it established itself as the new nation, and at the same time a more moderate or conservative period followed in the first turning, and the nation muddled onward as one. I expect much the same this time, and as you say, the USA may split up for a time as during the civil war and come back together again later. But for most Americans, this still seems a drastic solution, so it may not happen.

A nation dies if it does not progress, however. Stagnation and decline has been our lot for 40 years. Progress must begin again, after all that time, or the nation and maybe the world will die. Centrism can come back later on.

[Eric the Green]

In 2012 I predicted the final electoral vote, as well as basically everything that happened during the campaign. I should try again for the vote.

It looks to me like, if all goes as it should, then a few days after election day, the electoral vote will be like this:

Right now, It's 279 to 125. Trump has a solid core of 125 that is acknowledged by all the polling average sites and has not changed for months. The odds are he will also barely hold on to the two biggest of the four perennial tossup states this year, Texas (38) and Ohio (18), where he is still ahead today. That's 181 votes.

Besides holding on to his 279 votes, the weakest of which are in Pennsylvania, in which he is ahead by 5 points, and which the Court could cut down to 2 or 3%, Biden looks like he will eek out a win in Florida (29) and North Carolina (15), which have been fluctuating between leaning Biden and tossup. NC is iffy because of a possible Court challenge, but the case there looks harder to make stick than PA. So that's 323. And he'll snag Maine's rural district, for 1 more, making 324, and Arizona, adding up to 335.

So Georgia and Iowa are the hardest to call, the other two consistent tossup states this year. I feel that there may be enough people angry about the storm that destroyed much of the northeastern part of Iowa, with a very inefficient response by the Trump government, to turn Iowa blue. The congressional delegation turned blue in 2018, showing Iowans may have some buyers' remorse about their decision in 2016. Their red senator is in trouble too and is running a bit behind. But the polls have fluctuated in this tossup state. I'll call it for Biden, who at least is ahead today by .03, and who days before was up by 1.7%. That makes 341. Georgia has seen a lot of Democrats move in to its urban areas, which used to split evenly between the parties but now are trending up to 2-1 Democratic. So I'll say Georgia will go blue. Biden is up today there by 1.7%. That's 357 Biden and 181 Trump.

Total = 538. Well, we'll see!

[Bob Butler 54]

(10-30-2020, 03:54 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: Total = 538. Well, we'll see!

That is enough over 270 that he would have to challenge and win a lot of court challenges to flip it. Would the courts and state legislatures be ready to move if they have to climb that high uphill?

We'll see.

[Eric the Green]

Polling averages Oct.30, 8 PM, edited 11:45 PM
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/pol.../national/
80+ million already voted.
Will those 3 shining stars in America's Orion Belt go up and cross over into darker blue? Here's hoping!

National Biden +8.8

Alaska Trump +7.8
Arizona Biden +3.2
Florida Biden +2.2
Georgia Biden +1.7
Indiana Trump +9.1
Iowa Biden +0.2
Kansas Trump +10.3
Maine CD-2 Biden +2.7
Michigan Biden +8.8
Minnesota Biden +8.5
Missouri Trump +7.2
Montana Trump +5.1
Nevada Biden +5.9
New Hampshire Biden +11.2
North Carolina Biden +2.5
Ohio Trump +0.9
Pennsylvania Biden +5.2
South Carolina Trump +7.8
Texas Trump +1.3
Wisconsin Biden +8.6

[Eric the Green]

Which states will win the blue ribbon as the bluest?
Oct.31, 12 AM

DC Biden +82.7
MA Biden +36.8
VT Biden +36.2
HI Biden +32.7
RI Biden +31.1
NY Biden +30.6
MD Biden +29.8
CA Biden +28.1
CT Biden +24.8
DE Biden +24.0
WA Biden +23.3
NJ Biden +22.4
OR Biden +19.6
IL Biden +14
CO Biden +13.9
ME Biden +13.8
VA Biden +11.9
NM Biden +11.2
NH Biden +11.2
MI Biden +8.8
WI Biden +8.6
MN Biden +8.5
NV Biden +5.9
PA Biden +5.2

Congratulations to these states leading the nation back on the road to sanity!
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/pol.../national/

[Eric the Green]

Trump says the winner must be known on election night (which I assume also includes early AM).

He may get his wish if Biden maintains his 2.2% lead in Florida, his 2.5% lead in North Carolina, and his 1.7% lead in Georgia, plus his 3.2% lead in Arizona. In that case, the news media will call the election for Biden while PA, WI and MI are still going through their out-of-date, Byzantine, SCOTUS-imposed methods of not opening mail-in ballots until election day, and perhaps not even counting the ballots that arrive at the registrar after election day (what kind of a post office do they think we have, or maybe in fact they know).





https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/tru...ction-map/

[Bob Butler 54]

I'm still concerned about the Trump lame duck period.  There seem to be three phases possible.

The first would involve contending the election.  This would involve the courts and the state legislatures.  It would expose both to a rabid Trump loyalty which would taint them going on.  I am beginning to suspect that this phase will not occur, or will fall flat.  The Republican remnants will not want to further expose any loyalty to Trump.

The second phase would be retribution.  Trump will still be president, and could do what he could to hurt his enemies, which would amount to hurting America.  You would think a president wouldn't walk this path, but if he walks it hard enough holding the world's fastest impeachment might be prudent.  Even a discredited Republican senator might agree if he didn't want to be tainted by the deliberate hostility to America.

The third phase would be pardons for everyone, perhaps followed by running to another country that wouldn't extradite.  This phase wouldn't have to last long.  This seems the most likely phase to occur.  Can a president be declared a flight risk by a state DA?

After the inauguration?  How much will the old Trump loyalist and bad cops resist?  How much else will have to be undone?  A busy time indeed.  It might make the folks involved in FDR's first 100 days seem lazy in comparison.  That remains a little far out...