From David Remnick's outstanding profile of Bill Clinton in The New Yorker (not online):
"'I keep reading that Bush is incurious, but when he talks to me he asks a lot of questions,' Clinton went on. 'So I can't give him a bad grade on curiousity. I think both he and his father, because they have peculiar speech patterns, have been underestimated in terms of their intellectual capacity. You know, the way they speak and all, it could be, it could just relate to the way the synapses work in their brain.'"
I just love the reference to neuroscience. The whole article, though scrupulous and fair, makes me deeply nostalgic for the moderate politics of the Clinton era. As Joni Mitchell sang, "You don't know what you've got till it's gone."
More like this
I am utterly undecided. Feel free to make a suggestion.
"Trump's chance of victory have doubled over the last two weeks," notes FiveThirtyEight, and this is in accord with what I've been saying.
UPDATE (Tuesday Morning):
In the Democratic Caucus, Hillary Clinton beat Bernie Sanders by an amount so small that the caucus results have to be regarded as tie.
Clinton: 49.86%
Sanders: 49.57%
O'Malley: 0.57%
The Clinton Foundation started as a very successful post-presidency foundation of the type that is normally formed under the leadership of an ex president, in this case, Bill Clinton.
Bush is quite the academic. He now offers lectures on logic: