The Unlikeliest of Doppelgangers: Dylan and Trump

A doppelganger in German folklore is a biologically unrelated look-alike of another; what some call a twin stranger. I wonder if Donald Trump and Bob Dylan ever met. Because, as odd as it seems on its face, these two icons share more than a few uncanny similarities in career and public perception.

I know, I know. Scores of burnt-out ex-beatnik/hippie seniors living in gentrified urban neighborhoods who can quote Dylan lyrics verbatim despise Donald Trump. And many MAGA hat-wearing ardent Trump supporters consider Dylan an incoherent mumbler of dubious talent. One would not be caught dead with the other, and both groups pride themselves on their disdain for the opposing icon. Yet the parallels between the career trajectories of Trump and Dylan run many and deep.

A key commonality between the two is that there is, well, much not to like. Dylan’s early career of acoustic folk protest songs I find tinny and much too romanticized by an accommodating rock press. His penchant for discarding those around him who no longer furthered his career ambitions was less than admirable. Trump’s insatiable ego and hunger for the spotlight drives an introvert like myself seeking a dark, quiet place.

Yet both men enjoyed a condensed period where they left a permanent, undeniable, and positive mark upon society.

In ten short years, from 1965 to 1975, Dylan created perhaps the greatest trio of albums ever with Highway 61 Revisited (’65), Blonde on Blonde (’66) and Blood on the Tracks (’75). Trump was the first president in a generation who had the audacity to break the oppressive shackles of bureaucracy, regulation, and government to liberate society’s doers, free enterprise, the middle class, employment, and economic growth. The legacy of both men will live on.

Dylan and Trump presented existential threats to the established interests where they first took root.

Dylan turned the folk music community inside out when he went electric, causing a freaked-out Pete Seeger to attempt to cut (allegedly with a hatchet) Dylan’s power during his live performance at the 1965 Newport Folk Festival. Trump roiled the traditional Republican platform when he railed against globalism and multinationalism, causing old guard stalwarts like McCain, Romney, and Bush to become the most strident members of the resist movement. Ironically, Dylan and Trump grew the brand and reach of folk music and the Republican party, respectively, yet were subjected to public attack from each group’s old guard beneficiaries.

Both men defied being pigeon-holed into convenient labels to suit the simple constructs of others. Trump is not a populist, traditional Republican, or conservative. Dylan is not a poet, protest singer, or rock star. Both are more complex than easy definitions and tags, as is the case for most individuals who leave indelible marks on history.

“Fake news” was not a foreign phenomenon to either trailblazer. Of course, Trump turned the tables on the biased media and made fake news one of the most effective planks of his campaign platform. But not many realize Dylan was subjected to similar media shenanigans; the British press would report a mass exodus of audience from concert halls during his early, controversial electric performances when the reality was only a small handful of narcissists wishing to make a scene staged a walkout. With media, some things never seem to change.

There’s a sense both icons are torn between obsessively bolstering their public personas and being willing to completely disappear from the limelight.

Dylan meticulously tailored earlier artistic moves to grow his aura; but then would disappear from the public eye for years on end. Although Trump is the embodiment of obsession of publicity, he has hinted from time to time a desire to sail off into the sunset to enjoy a life beyond the lens and Twitter. Perhaps both experience a hunger for, and subsequent exhaustion from, such global profiles.
Ultimately, Trump and Dylan are forces of individualistic creative destruction. Both tore down establishments that initially elevated them, refusing to yield to a tide of conformity. Both replaced the ruins with new edifices that evolved the status quo into their own visions. Although their critics will never accept their greatness, the rest of us would be well served to appreciate the lasting legacies of both.

Teens and Avoiding Poverty: Three Simple Yet Challenging Rules

I have a confession to make #2…in a series. From time to time, while writing The Leech and researching speech topics on various contemporary issues, I am presented the opportunity to challenge my presumptions and replace them with a more rigorous understanding. Although these essays may not be life altering or change the world, I share them for two possible benefits. First, to convey what I learned on a topic, how it deflated my original hypothesis, and replaced it with a better one. Second, to illustrate a hidden benefit and reality of the painful writing process: you often land in a very different place than where you targeted. That’s growth.

For the past ten years or so, I subscribed to an oft-quoted rule of thumb for how teens can almost guarantee themselves living a life outside of poverty: graduate high school, get a job (any job), and avoid getting married and having children until you are at least 21. Extensive research supports the sensible trio. Data show 98% of Americans who followed these three things did not end up in poverty and 55% who followed these landed in the middle class. Since western Pennsylvania has its share of economically disadvantaged communities, from urban Pittsburgh to rural Greene and Fayette Counties, emphasizing and encouraging these three rules of thumb offers an impactful payoff for the young adult and the region.

Simple, right? Diving deeper, I was reminded of the differences between ‘simple,’ ‘effective,’ and ‘challenging.’ These three ‘simple’ rules of thumb are ‘effective’ for the young to escape the grip of poverty. But meeting all three can be an incredibly ‘challenging’ task.
Let’s start with perhaps the easiest of the three: getting a job.

Those of us old enough to remember can recall that for a long time getting a job, especially a stable job, was nearly impossible in western Pennsylvania, northern West Virginia, and eastern Ohio. The region’s population drastically declined during the economic exodus of the late 1970s and 1980s; economic reality drove many of us out and sent us to regions where there were jobs.

In those days you didn’t have to worry about becoming a teen parent or not graduating high school, because mom and dad might have to pack up your belongings and drive off to Texas or Arizona to start the family anew.

About 15 years ago, the regional job market changed for the better. The natural gas industry bloomed, revived manufacturing, and drove demand up for services. Trump administration policy took the onerous federal regulatory handcuffs off free enterprise and business. All of it fueled job growth, to the point where most teenagers and young adults looking for work could find it at the start of 2020. The proof is in the labor data: prior to the pandemic, labor participation skyrocketed while overall unemployment and minority unemployment were at, or close to, historic lows.

Yes, things changed for the worse when the pandemic hit, and no one knows for certain when the economy and labor demand will fully recover. But let’s assume we know that under the right conditions and policies, this region can create an environment where most kids who want a job can find one.

That leaves two of the three ‘simple’ rules.

Waiting until you are 21 to marry and have children is always carefully worded yet often sparks controversy. Even normally aligned entities and individuals can face off on this topic; then-Mayor Bloomberg and Planned Parenthood fought epic battles over teen pregnancy communication efforts in New York City. Certainly, becoming a teenage mother or father often presents serious social and economic challenges for both child and parent. Same with divorce for young married couples. Everyone agrees these are serious issues, but no one seems to know how to effectively address them, particularly in our poorer communities. Society needs to keep trying, but success won’t be easy or quick. Call it a work in progress, but victory on this front does not appear to be imminent.

What about the last of the three, graduating high school?

This one looks on its face to be the most achievable. We pour massive amounts of money into our schools, technology has grown leaps and bounds in its educational efficacy, and high school graduation rates are at historic highs across much of the country.

So why don’t I feel good about this one? Because this piece of the three-part advice is not specific enough. Graduating high school is not enough.

Instead, one must graduate high school armed with competency in reading, math, and science. I assumed for too long that graduating necessarily comes with sound proficiency. In many school districts, particularly ones in economically disadvantaged areas, that is a flawed assumption.

The evidence is everywhere.

  • New York City public schools have barely over a third of students in grades 3-8 who passed proficiency tests in math and English.
  • The Detroit school system in 2016 had only 5% and 7% of fourth graders being proficient in math and reading, respectively.
  • The Milwaukee public school system has math and reading proficiency levels hovering around 20%.
  • The Pittsburgh public school system in my hometown posts eighth grade math proficiency at 20%.
  • Los Angeles is not much better, showing 22% of fourth graders math proficient.

These kids may be eventually graduating, but are they prepared for life?

Yes, the three rules of thumb are enticingly simple. And, no doubt, teens who follow them have the odds heavily in their favor to avoid poverty. But achieving all three looks to be extremely challenging for kids in economically stressed communities. The most challenging is graduating high school, assuming it must result in math, reading, and science proficiency. If that is the standard, we are failing millions of young adults, regardless if they receive a piece of paper to hang on the wall.

Maybe while we have been busy lecturing the kids on what to do, we forgot about our responsibility in this. Holding politicians, bureaucrats, and public teachers’ unions accountable for student proficiency levels would be a good rule of thumb for parents and taxpayers to follow.

Dead Men Walking: Big Time Collegiate and Professional Sports

The anno terribile that is 2020 will claim as victims many traditions, institutions, individuals, and careers. Perhaps one such casualty is major college and professional sports. Although cracks in credibility and business models were propagating for years, 2020 dealt a death blow to big-time sports as we knew them. It was not a single death blow but a crushing, dual pincer movement of self-inflicted stumbles and exogenous shocks (pandemic, economic, etc.) that delivered the fait accompli.

Major college and professional sports have entered terminal decline. Their recovery to healthier, more prosperous times is not in the cards. Amusingly, everyone senses this except those closest to the industry. Not only will life go on, it might improve without big time sports. Despite being a life-long sports fan, I feel fine about such a prognosis. You should, too.

I’m not talking about youth sports, high school athletics, or most run-of-the-mill collegiate sports. Instead, I’m focusing on major college football and basketball and professional sports. The 100,000-seat, sold-out stadium on autumn Saturdays and the subsidized palaces sporting $300 ticket prices that are modern day arenas and stadiums for pro sports are increasingly looking like memories of the past.

Self-Inflicted Crisis in Credibility

Big-time sports did itself no favors by self-inflicting crises in credibility.

The NBA trumpets various forms of social justice and lecturing to its domestic audience yet obediently looks the other way when it comes to an oppressive and anti-human rights China, who coincidentally offers promise of future revenue and market growth.

Tone-deaf cohorts in network TV and the NFL show us millionaire kneel-ins during the national anthem on Thanksgiving games while scoreboards play live feeds of men and women of our armed forces standing for the anthem in Afghanistan.

The NHL trumpets climate change posing but bloats individual player carbon footprints by instituting energy inefficient bubbles to play games through the pandemic.

MLB loves to lecture us directly and indirectly on mask wearing and social distancing but the moment its veneer is peeled away you see a grinning, star player who just tested positive for Covid standing next to, sans-mask, an at-risk cancer survivor manager in a World Series celebration.

And the NCAA is all about equity and inclusiveness; until it comes time to pay major sports program players a fair share of the millions of dollars they earn for the university.

Self-Inflicted Crisis in Business Model

Big-time sports’ situation worsens by applying outdated and broken business models.
With 2020 bringing layoffs and reduced salaries across sports media and team front offices, the NBA found two of its teams paying Gordon Hayward and Jayson Tatum (who?) $120 million and $195 million, respectively.

MLB’s financial model consciously creates two team classes of big market haves and small market have-nots, where incentives are structured to reward risk-taking/big spending in large markets and miserly/perennial non-competitiveness in small markets (I’m a long-suffering fan of the poor-playing but financially-profitable Pirates that MLB incentivizes).

NCAA basketball and, increasingly, football motivates the one-and-done path to the pros, whereby collegiate teams no longer develop an identity or continuity to lineups.
The in-person live experience for all pro sports has become a time-consuming, expensive, and boring slog; games take forever, and endless interruptions and timeouts kill game flow.

Exogenous-Driven Crisis in Credibility

Perhaps big-time sports could’ve survived these unforced errors in credibility and business model. But when the pandemic and its associated economic upheaval arrived in 2020, the industry’s credibility and business model suffered mortal blows. The sports world will never be the same.

A shock to the system via Covid shattered the thin veneer of credibility the sports world projected.

Massive stadiums sat empty, with ridiculous cut-outs of people in the stands. Tune in to a lifeless game in an empty stadium and you hear fake cheering and crowd noise, as if the networks and leagues think we are that gullible. Teams shield coaches and players from reporters under auspices of health risk, yet everyone recognizes that pretense is nothing but a convenient excuse to further insulate coddled elite athletes from the annoyance of everyday people.

Worst of all, sports have ceased to be relevant in a world where everyone is struggling and is concerned about personal health, finances, job, and loved ones. We’ve realized there are way more important things in life. For many fans—from the casual to the chest painters—sports have been replaced with other pursuits and they’ve moved on to never return.

Exogenous-Driven Crisis in Business Model

Covid wrecked sports’ already buckling business models.

Leagues heavily dependent on gate revenue, like the NHL, suffered the most. A return to sold-out arenas and stadiums will be far off into the future, if ever.

Does anyone think pro leagues will return to the lucrative corporate luxury box and advertising model soon? Why would a corporation, under its own financial stress brought on by 2020 calamities, spend precious budget dollars on luxury boxes (and associated ad spend) that risk the health of its employees, customers, and partners?

As local and state governments lose tax revenue from shuttering economies, expect little support for future public subsidy of pro sports. Government needs to get kids back in school and economies functioning again; retention of a sports team has fallen down the depth chart of priorities.

Speaking of kids, the future audience and customers for major sports have evaporated in two truncated seasons of hiatus and altered play. The typical teen could not care less about big time sports today and won’t likely start to care about it if, and when, normalcy returns.

Moving On

With all these headwinds facing major college and pro sports, you would think the owners, players, and unions would band together to navigate the treacherous waters. Instead, expect hostility and in-fighting, as everyone wants to pretend times have not changed and that risk and concessions should only be shouldered and made by someone else. A word to the wise professional athlete: save your money, because a change is coming.

To all the old school sports fans out there, do not despair. Spend more time hanging with family, exploring a new topic, or learning a new skill. And to scratch that sports itch: log onto YouTube and watch a complete World Series from the 1970s. That decade delivered a golden era of baseball, with epic matchups and legendary teams, including The Big Red Machine, Swingin’ A’s, Bronx Bombers, BoSox, Orioles, Dodgers, and Lumber Company. Ten years of fast-moving games, sound fundamentals, great sportscasters, hall of fame players, and dedicated fans. That’s how baseball was meant to be enjoyed.

COVID-19 copies climate as elites squash science

If you’ve been noticing an eerie similarity between the elite rhetoric surrounding the pandemic and that of climate change, you are on to something. Both issues, technically complex, have seen science and fact superseded by the politics and religion of the Left.

The parallels are evident. Both issues are utilized by the Left as convenient opportunity for excessive government action and intrusive intervention. The consequences, intended or not, often worsen both situations.