1.The United States #Election2020

The theme for the February 7th episode of Sekai e Hasshin! SNS Eigojutsu on NHK E-Tele was #Election2020. We talked about the 2020 United States presidential election just as the Iowa caucuses were getting underway on February 3rd.

On the show we focused on the five leading democratic candidates: democratic socialist Bernie Sanders, who young voters have come to embrace; Pete Buttigieg, former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, and youngest of the candidates; progressive Elizabeth Warren, who is anti-Wall Street and who has pledged to break up Big Tech; Joe Biden, Vice President under Barack Obama; and Andrew Yang, the first Asian-American presidential candidate in U.S. history. The focus now is on which one of these candidates—if any—will be able to unite the Democratic Party and mount a respectable fight against President Donald Trump.

To that end, the Iowa caucuses have long been considered as a bellwether for the success of presidential candidates. Unlike a primary—an election in which voters cast ballots for the person they want to be the candidate for their party in the general election—a caucus is “a meeting of party leaders or party member to select candidates." (Dictionary.com) Such meetings are held in each county across a state, and participants (party members) attempt to convince other attendees to support their candidates. First, the attendees group together based on the candidates they support and an initial tally is taken; any candidates who get less than 15% of the support are considered not viable, and their supporters are allowed to move to another candidate (or leave the caucus) in what is called “realignment". A final tally is taken, and national delegates are allotted based proportionally on how many supporters each candidate has. In other words, it’s a three-step process.

Based on how things had gone in the past, we expected to get a sense of who would come out on top before the taping of the show. But after we finished our rehearsal run-through, we checked our phones and saw that the results were being delayed because of some system trouble.

Since then, two main reasons have been given for the fiasco. One is problems related to a smartphone app. Ahead of the 2020 caucus, the Iowa Democratic Party decided to introduce mobile software to help tally votes in an efficient manner. They tasked an obscure tech company called Shadow with creating the app, giving them a short, two-month timeline for development. No state-wide tests of the app were conducted prior to the caucus. On the day of the caucus, workers had trouble downloading, logging into, or using the app, and frustrated, they attempted to call in their results over the phone; the phone center got so backed up that some callers were put on hold for over an hour.

The other reason is confusion caused by rule changes to the nomination process. The Iowa Democratic Party, looking to increase transparency, asked each precinct to report three sets of tallies: the first tally, the final alignment tally, and each candidate’s total of number of “state delegate equivalents". The changes caused complications and resulted in inconsistencies, delaying the reporting of results for days. In other words, the Iowa Democratic Party showed it was bad with numbers.

Whatever the case, the Iowa caucuses mark the start of the presidential election season, and in many ways set the tone for the weeks and months to come. If the problem was with the app, it doesn’t bode well for the Democrats in an election where digital media strategy will be key. If the problem was with the tallying, that only provides ammo to the Republicans, and many will hesitate to put their support behind a party that can’t even count votes.

The embarrassment is compounded by the fact that this wasn’t the first time in recent history that a vote-counting debacle rattled a U.S. presidential election. In this column, I will consider what these snafus say about America.

2.The 2000 United States Presidential Election

Up until now, when someone mentioned the words “presidential election" and “recount", you knew they were talking about the 2000 U.S. presidential elections, where Republican George W. Bush ultimately defeated Democratic Vice President Al Gore by the narrowest of margins after a five-week war over the ballots.

On election night, November 7th, the race was so tight that it all came down to Florida, where the voting was so close that officials could not declare a winner. At first, it appeared Gore would win, and national TV networks called him the projected winner. Later that evening, the networks reversed their call and gave the advantage to Bush, and then later retracted that as the state was “too close to call". Gore even phoned Bush that night to concede, only to retract his concession when he learned how close the count was.

On November 8th, the count was given as 2,909,135 votes for Bush, and 2,907,351 votes for Gore—meaning Bush had a lead of just 1,784 votes. Due to the narrow margin, the Gore campaign began to requested a manual recount in certain counties, while the Bush campaign attempted to stop the recounts. Bush’s lead continued to diminish until Florida’s secretary of state certified the statewide vote count on November 26th with Bush ahead by just 537 votes. Gore contested the result, and ultimately appealed to the Florida Supreme Court, while Bush appealed to the Supreme Court to stop the recounts. On December 12th, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Bush and the Florida election recount was halted. The November 26th results were certified, making Bush the winner. The following day, Gore conceded the election in a televised speech.

Media and academic organizations have since conducted their own inquiries into the recount, with some determining that if all undervotes (votes that had been cast but showed no legally valid selection) and overvotes (votes showing the selection of more candidates than were allowed) had been included in a state-wide recount, Gore would have been the winner. Coupled with the fact that Gore had won the popular vote and would have likely won an “instant run-off election", the 2000 presidential elections would give Americans (more specifically, Democrats) recount trauma that, clearly, continues to this day.

3.Americans are Bad with Numbers

Americans have a reputation for being bad with numbers. The U.S. consistently ranks among the lowest of industrialized nations when it comes to math and science assessment. That’s not solely about a lack of academic ability or motivation; Americans just tend to be a little bit looser when it comes to numbers.

For example, regarding the turnout for his 2017 presidential inauguration, Donald Trump has said, “I looked out, the field was, it looked like a million, million-and-a-half people." Experts say—and photographic evidence suggests—the actual number was between 300,000 and 600,000.

During his State of the Union speech the other day, President Trump claimed that the USMCA (the U.S.-Mexico-Canada agreement on trade) “will create nearly 100,000 new high-paying American auto jobs", but the U.S. International Trade Commission has estimated that it will create 28,000 jobs over its first six years.

Back during the 2016 presidential election, he acknowledged that he had received a “small loan of a million dollars" from his father to build his own company. Later, the New York Times said that it had found that President Trump’s father had lent him a total of at least 60 million dollars.

President Trump is, above all else, a showman driven by his bottomless appetite for the spotlight. He fudges numbers with abandon, reshaping reality to his will.

The habit of exaggerating numbers to make oneself appear bigger or more capable is certainly more than a Trumpism—it’s part of the fabric of American society. How many 5’11" American guys out there regularly round up their height to 6 feet? I can’t count the number of times I’ve said that I’m 6’2" (technically, I’m 6’1 1/2").

I think of all the times I’ve picked up a backpack full of textbooks or a box packed with junk and commented, “this weighs a ton". (OK, on more than one occasion, the object in question was actually as light as a feather.) Then there’s the ten-gallon hat, a staple of the cowboy ensemble and symbol of overcompensation. And I’ve often come across packages of dry pasta that give a cooking time of “eight to twelve minutes".

On the show we talked about Andrew Yang, the first Asian-American to run for the highest office in the land and an avid champion of math. The central proposal of Yang’s platform is what he calls a “Freedom Dividend", a form of universal basic income (UBI). Yang says he intends to give every American adult 1,000 dollars a month.

Yang’s campaign has “MATH" hats, which stands for “Make America Think Harder". Growing up in America, I felt the “all Asians are good at math" stereotype all throughout my childhood. Yang has chosen to embrace the stereotype as central to his identity, and I respect him for it.

Yang plans to fund his Freedom Dividend with a 10% value-added tax, among other things. That being said, many experts say that the numbers “don’t add up" when it comes to his UBI plan.

4.The Significance of Statistics and Opinion Polls

Americans are fast and loose with numbers, but are utterly obsessed with statistics. They believe that statistics are a tool to understand reality and the truth. From political elections to the weather forecasts, health surveys to content production, Americans utilize statistics in almost every area of their lives in order to predict—and control—the future. In the age of big data, this has become especially true.

Statistical data has also played a big role in American elections—specifically public opinion polls. Door-to-door polls started being conducted around the 1930s, and subsequently polls taken over the phone. These days much of the polling is done online. Americans tend to be more than eager to share their views when asked (and in many occasions, of course, even when unsolicited). There is also a sense of participating in politics through answering polls, because candidates decide where to spend their campaign money and time depending on how they are polling in different areas.

The American obsession with statistics is perhaps most acutely seen in the realm of sports. It can be seen both with the fans and in the players and teams. Sports fans pride themselves on having a wealth of otherwise useless sports trivia, which they seem to be able to channel at will when debating the GOAT of a particular sport. Then there are those who play fantasy sports—where participants put together their favorite players to create imaginary teams; results are based on each player’s actual performance during the season.

On the player side, teams and organizations use big data to determine the best player prospects and design training regimens and strategies. The 2011 film Moneyball is the story of how the general manager of the Oakland Athletics used sabermetrics (the detailed statistical analysis of baseball data) to reinvent the team.

Buy on Amazon

At the root of this obsession is American pragmatism. Americans like to be able to see evidence and results, and not just rely on theory or on what the Japanese call konjo (guts or the fighting spirit). Due to the fact that America is so big and its society is based not on families but on individuals, the fabric of society depends on there being a shared idea of truth; as a multicultural society people depend on facts in order to sway or convince another.

To put it another way, it’s not that Americans love statistics per se, it’s that they love the utility of statistics as a tool for proving the validity of their claims. They are especially partial to statistics that prove their preconceived notions. In the world of politics and media, this is called spin, and people such as press agents, who specialize in spin, are called spin doctors.

All of this was put into stark relief in the 2016 presidential election. Since the 2000s, analysts at companies like FiveThirtyEight and Politico have been in the spotlight each election cycle. Statistical wunderkind Nate Silver, who founded and runs FiveThirtyEight, successfully predicted the winner in 49 out of 50 states in the 2008 election. In the 2012 election, he successfully predicted the outcome in all 50 states.

In the 2016 presidential election, however, the opinion polls would turn out to be deceptive. Silver originally forecasted that former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton had an 86.2% chance of winning the election, while Donald Trump had only 13.8%. The majority of analysts and news outlets predicted the same. For Americans who worshipped statistics, Trump’s victory was an earthshaking event.

5.An Inability to Admit Ignorance

There were many reasons behind the discrepancy between the polls and the outcome: dissatisfaction with President Obama, white panic and rage at fact that immigrants and multiculturalism are whittling away at their privilege, disillusionment with the Establishment, arrogance on the part of experts and Democrats. One incredibly straightforward reason that is not often brought up is the fact that Americans have no reservations about lying when the alternative is admitting ignorance. There used to be a time when Americans would have been embarrassed to say they were Trump supporters, but it is clear that many of them voted for him anyway.

In America, it is practically against the law to be without your own opinions on things. From classrooms to business offices, people who have an opinion or a personal statement ready to go whenever they are called upon are seen as capable and important. To sit in silence or to refuse to join a discussion is to demonstrate oneself to be worthless. Whether your views are correct or reasonable or blatantly wrong are beside the point—the person who speaks up, wins.

All of this means that Americans have trouble admitting when they do not know something. When it comes to opinion polls, even if you are not fully informed, it is better to take a stab in the dark than it is to plead ignorance. If anything, an American (male) is someone who can talk at length and ad nauseam about something they know nothing about. That’s why those in positions of power are so often salesmen and entertainers.

This also manifests itself in daily life. As the stereotype goes, an American male behind the wheel will never, ever admit that he is lost. Ask 10 people for directions, and you will end up with 10 different routes. Good luck with getting to your destination—it’s probably a better idea to just rely on your GPS.

In the post-truth age, lies are no longer something looked down upon; they have been given free rein. President Trump can discount any fact or truth with just two words: “fake news". His impeachment acquittal is no different. Republican senators reasoned that even if his actions were morally or constitutionally questionable, if he had done it with the national interest in mind, it should be permissible.

And this time, with the Iowa Democratic caucuses, when the candidates heard that the results would be delayed, they did not wait patiently for the facts to come out. Instead, they looked at their own internal data and came to their own conclusions. Pete Buttigieg jumped the gun and essentially proclaimed himself the winner. As the youngest of the Democratic candidates, he has perhaps finally caught on to how battles are won in the post-truth age. (As of February 7th, results show Buttigieg and Sanders practically neck-and-neck; meanwhile, there are calls for a recount.)

For Americans, who are bad with numbers but great at spinning statistics to shape their own narrative, it’s party time.

6.My Wardrobe This Week

Black striped suit by Tailor Fukuoka

Check out CINEMA & THEATRE #021 for more about this item.

Gray striped button-down shirt by Universal Language

Check out FASHION & SHOPPING #007 for more about this item.

Black socks by Isetan Men’s

Check out CINEMA & THEATRE #005 for more about this item.

Wing tip shoes by Regal

Check out LANGUAGE & EDUCATION #003 for more about this item.

Black glasses by Zoff

Check out FASHION & SHOPPING #006 for more about this item.