Is Denialism the Original Sin, in the Contemporary Republican Party

TL;DR I maintain that it was not just a very unfortunate turn of events that allowed the MAGA mentality to completely take over the Republican party, and that it is not so hard to imagine different circumstances leading to a left-wing version of it. 

In a "Beg to Differ" podcast episode (43:13) a few months ago, Mona Charen took a run at a form of half-hearted apologism for the conservative movement, by trying to make the case that the contemporary descent into MAGA madness was circumstantial, and one could imagine something comparable happening in the democratic party: 

I do think that it’s too easy to say it had to happen this way because I don’t think it did. I think the party had many more it was mostly full of normies. And then Trump came along, and he kind of stripped away the barriers, and the normal inhibitions that most people have, and suddenly people fell in line.

The "mostly full of normies" part is where I differ. Circa 1980, that was a fair statement. Where the seeds of madness were sown, in my view, is when the mainstream/secular right made an unholy strategic alliance with the emerging religious and populist right. In my view, the two camps didn't have that much in common, beyond sharing a common opponent, "big government". 

In particular, these groups were devoted to particular issues/beliefs are so utterly contrary to facts, that they can only be maintained through denial of facts. At the top of the list: Creationism, Guns Are a Positive Good run-rights maximalism. And the "no compromising" rhetoric that is the antithesis of democratic politics, but inherent to dogmatically-held beliefs. These issues were the gateway drug for Denialism, which spread and became both a habit of existing Republicans, and a draw for new ones. It was less than a generation ago, for instance, that anti-vaxism was associated with the far left, but now the right is the home of the anti-vax crowd.

(For the record, I appreciate and support both the podcast, and Mona Charen. It's just that I have to "beg to differ" on this one.)

Grocery Store Shopping - Mass List

 Paste in a list of all my items and search them in bulk. Target is the worst for excess clicks.

Wine Rating Scale

I am so tired of the numeric wine-rating scale popularized by Robert Parker. It is meaningless, every bottle wants to be 89-93. Some ideas for improvement.

Overall

That would be the Robert Parker-style score. But even in this category, we need to re-calibrate. 100 points is way too many. 20 would probably suffice. 

1: Actively disagreeable.

• 2: Utterly bland and uninteresting. Someone who is utterly indifferent to wine and in the mood for an alcoholic beverage might drink it, but for anyone with even a modicum of wind appreciation, not worth the calories.
• 3: Would drink as a last choice if in the mood to drink wine and no alternative.
• 4-15: Relative ratings for wines most people are likely to drink--max price $50/bottle.
• 16-20: for the elite.

As an Exemplar of Its Category

Assuming the wine fits a well-established category (e.g., New Zealand Sauvignon Blanc), how well does it express the qualities expected of the category? Sort of like how a dog show judges an animal's features not in the absolute, but relative to its breed.

Under the Right Circumstances

Most likely factor to influence this would be food pairing. E.g., this wine is generally rough, but with really spice food, it holds up. This category is a bit loose, if not careful, it could be an excuse for grade-inflation.

Value

Graded on the curve of price.

Multi-Factor Console for Updating Critical Business Parameters Executed by Software

Major business policies, especially in financial services, are often driven by some simple parameters that are executed in software. E.g., for a lender, what interest rate is being charged.

There is typically a dashboard accessible to a small number of users with authorized elevations, to enter these values. In general, that works fine, but there may be concerns about data-entry mistakes or deliberate sabotage (less probable). I think a good solution involves:

• Purpose-built UI (console), limited of course to an appropriate, small user group.
• Require multi-factor -entry to implement a change: i.e., 2 or more members have to independently submit the update (exact number is configurable, depending on the sensitivity--but in general, I think 2 is the magic number).
• Add some UX niceties for workflow—e.g., showing pending updates where only 1 entry has been made, reminders if 2nd entry is overdue.
• Email the entire group whenever a change is initiated and completed.