In my Impromptus today, I begin with Taiwan — and an inspired instance of philanthropy: A Taiwanese businessman, Robert Tsao, is donating $47 million to the training of civilians against a possible invasion by China. There are many, many ways to give away your money. Almost all of them are laudable. But $47 million on civil defense? That is a new one on me, and a very good one.
What else is in my column? Politics, language, music — no sports, that I can recall. The Michigan football season starts tomorrow. Are there other football teams? I’m not sure.
In the course of my column, I address some of the latest on Donald Trump, and from Trump. After I had put the thing to bed, this came up: “Trump vows pardons, government apology to Capitol rioters if elected.” (Article here.)
I believe that this is a campaign promise that Trump would keep. And his pardons, and that apology, would have the usual defenders.
For the past several years, I have tried to avoid the conclusion that everything is tribal. That would be too cynical, right? But this conclusion is hard to avoid. Take the present case of Trump, the classified documents, and the FBI. It has become clear that Trump had in his possession many classified documents, some of them classified at the very highest levels. He lied about this. He refused to return the documents.
If a Democratic ex-president had done this, don’t you think every Republican in the country would be crying bloody murder, along with “Lock him up! Lock him up!”? Would the FBI be the bad guy? Or would the Democratic ex-president?
I often point to the example of the Electoral College. In 2016, Hillary Clinton won the “popular vote” by about 3 million. Trump, however, won in the Electoral College. Say that things had been the other way around. Say that Trump had received 3 million more votes but Clinton had threaded the needle in the Electoral College.
Now try to imagine Republicans’ saying the following: “It was a tough loss. But that’s the way the cookie crumbles, in our republic. Our Framers were geniuses. We wish the new president well, and we’re praying for her. And we’ll meet her at the ballot box four years from now.”
If you can imagine it — you have an imagination that differs from mine. I think Republicans, in general, would have howled for the abolition of the Electoral College, as an affront to democracy, denying the Will of the People.
On Election Day 2012, it briefly seemed possible that President Obama would lose the “popular vote” but win in the Electoral College. Donald Trump tweeted up a storm. “The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy.” “He lost the popular vote by a lot and won the election. We should have a revolution in this country!” Etc., etc.
Four years later, Trump became president thanks to the Electoral College. He deleted the tweets from Election Day 2012.
Let me stay with my theme. This week, Alaska held a special election. They did so according to the system of ranked voting. Sarah Palin lost, and a Democrat won. So Republicans, many of them, are decrying the system. Would they be doing so if Palin had won? Come on.
It could be I’m cynical. It could also be I’m realistic — that I “didn’t just fall off the turnip truck,” as the first Bush would say.
Well, I wanted to publish some reader mail, but I’ve gone on and on. Maybe we could have one note — a language note — with a reply:
I have a question about pronunciation. Why is the plural of “process” — “processes” — so often pronounced “process-eez”? Other words ending in “esses” are pronounced the way they look: “excesses,” “successes,” etc. . . .
I first encountered this pronunciation [“process-eez”] years ago in California, when I worked with health-care and medical consultants. It has proliferated in the decades since. My supposition is that the pronunciation is an attempt to make a rather simple word sound more scientific or intellectually complex. Your thoughts?
I think our letter-writer is correct. When it comes to the pronunciation of plural words, the classic example is “base” and “basis.” The plural of “base” is “bases” — as in “stolen bases.” You say “base-ehz.” The plural of “basis” is “base-eez.”
And the plural of “process”? “Process-ehz.”
Now, “processes” can also be a verb — as in “The bride processes down the aisle.” But this is a “whole ’nother story,” as we’d say in my family . . .