Democratic Meltdown 2008!

[SDW2001]

Denial ain't just a river in Egypt. :)

It seems the Dems have found a way to meltdown once again. This one will eclipse all other meltdowns. They had it all: A sluggish economy, high deficits, an unpopular war, GOP scandal, a cheerleading media, an unpopular President, high gas prices and a charismatic, historically unprecedented nominee.

But the meltdown is on:

1. The Obama Campaign is in big trouble. Obama has gone from consistent 5+ point leads to being down 3-4 points amongst registered voters. Likely voters were going for Mccain 1-4 points...now they're McCain +10. The entire race has done a 180 degree turn.

Obviously Palin is the reason for this shift. But it's Obama's response that has made it worse. He's gone on the attack, gotten off message and started to tarnish his brand among independents. Worse, his campaign is going to go even more negative. They've said so. (http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/09/12/america/12obama.php) They've done so. (http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/still_ad/) It started during the acceptance speech...a more negative tone that is the antithesis of his brand. Not a good idea.

This is a HUGE mistake. Obama must get back on message to win. If he continues to run against Palin instead of McCain, he's going to continue to sink.

2. Congress: What should have been another Dem landslide is looking more competitive every day. (http://www.gallup.com/poll/110263/Battle-Congress-Suddenly-Looks-Competitive.aspx)
Here's a Bloomberg link (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aaWaPymjJ3rk) discussing fundraising, appearances and connections to local races/people.

3. Joe Biden: Thought that Blowhard, Gaffing Joe was a thing of the past? Think again. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/2801657/Joe-Biden-Hillary-Clinton-might-have-been-a-better-vice-president-than-me.html) This was an unreal statement on his part. What was he thinking? Perhaps he was in the same frame of mind when he said this. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM19YOqs7hU)

4. The Republican base is now energized because of Palin. The "enthusiasm gap" has been nearly closed in the last two weeks.

My question is: How do Dems manage this nearly every election year? Can you honestly blame "the sleaziest campaign is history" or "swiftboat" politics? Or, is it something more?

[Bergermeister]

I would direct people's attention to the front page article of the New York Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

Took them less than two weeks to uncover all of this. How was she vetted again?

If the country still has any hope, then the Democrats will not have anything to worry about. This woman is frightening; that somebody would choose her for VP, even more so.

[franksargent]

Or, is it something more?

Post RNC bump.

Obama raised $66,000,000 last month, his highest monthly donor contribution total to date.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/19/Mad30.jpg

[icfireball]

In the Gallup daily tracking polls, McCain's lead has diminished by no less than one point per day, and by that count, it will be down to 1 point today. McCain is by no means "pulling away," although I do agree that Obama doesn't not "have this in the bag."

[SDW2001]

I would direct people's attention to the front page article of the New York Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

Took them less than two weeks to uncover all of this. How was she vetted again?

If the country still has any hope, then the Democrats will not have anything to worry about. This woman is frightening; that somebody would choose her for VP, even more so.

Ahh...the classic talking point: Palin wasn't vetted! Whatever dude. Obama's desperation over Palin is truly comical. Oh, and GASP! A critical NYT piece??? The headline reads like something from the Onion: "Politician Tries to Get Votes" or "Feminist Believes Women Are Equal" come to mind.
:rolleyes:

[groverat]

I'm glad that you acknowledge that McCain is a politician first and a leader second.

[SDW2001]

I'm glad that you acknowledge that McCain is a politician first and a leader second.

Yes, that's exactly what I said. Exactly.

[Bergermeister]

Ahh...the classic talking point: Palin wasn't vetted! Whatever dude. Obama's desperation over Palin is truly comical. Oh, and GASP! A critical NYT piece??? The headline reads like something from the Onion: "Politician Tries to Get Votes" or "Feminist Believes Women Are Equal" come to mind.
:rolleyes:

A classic rebuttal. As has been asked before, did you read the article? How about responding to the points found therein?

---

Tina Fey did a great impression of Palin on SNL. A page that I viewed asked readers who they preferred watching from now until the election; over 80% voted for the Tina Fey Palin.

"I can see Russia form my house!"

[Bergermeister]

Yes, that's exactly what I said. Exactly.

The country needs a leader, not a politician.

[trumptman]

I find articles like that NY Times article very telling. It focuses on a minorty of very disgruntled people who mostly have nothing truly substantive to air but complaints. Additionally it takes normal actions and attributes sinister motives to them.

Take this example...

Ms. Havemeister was one of at least five schoolmates Ms. Palin hired, often at salaries far exceeding their private sector wages.

Um... Alaska has 600,000 people in it. The likelihood that she went to school with someone who was hired is going to be exponentially higher than say, California. Got any evidence that they have done the job badly, are corrupt, or done anything that would lower the Palin 80-90% approval rating?

/crickets chirping.

When Ms. Palin had to cut her first state budget, she avoided the legion of frustrated legislators and mayors. Instead, she huddled with her budget director and her husband, Todd, an oil field worker who is not a state employee, and vetoed millions of dollars of legislative projects.

Wow... she avoided people who wanted pork. Scary. OMG soooooooo scary.

That is the whole tone of the entire article. Here is so and so who is disgruntled. The investigation unveals some bad blood but nothing wrong.

Now as for the original post.

My question is: How do Dems manage this nearly every election year? Can you honestly blame "the sleaziest campaign is history" or "swiftboat" politics? Or, is it something more?

Well they like to blame how the campaigns are run, but it is certainly something more. I posted an article back when it came out called "It's Not Race, It's Arugula." (http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/215hpooz.asp?pg=1) I posted it because it shows the real problem with Democrats this year and it explains how the explosion of the media into the race hastens and worsens the problem.

The divisions between these two classes tend to be deep. Academicians traffic in words and abstractions, and admire those who do likewise. Jacksonians prefer men of action, whose
achievements are tangible. Academicians love nuance, Jacksonians clarity; academicians love fairness, Jacksonians justice; academicians dislike force and think it is vulgar; Jacksonians admire it, when justly applied. Each side tends to look down on the other, though academicians do it with much more intensity: Jacksonians think academicians are inconsequential, while academicians think that Jacksonians are beneath their contempt.

Every one of those types of differences are what are now being aired in a near media avalanche against Palin. Bergermeister did us all a very big favor in that he posted the one article that is almost a perfect example of this. It is a list of nuanced grievances about emotional slights, lack of perceived fairness, and abstractions about how something could have slippery-sloped into something dangerous in the minds of some while no actions actually took place in those areas.(book censorship for example)

The "Bridge to No Where" is a perfect example of this as well. The complaints about it all have to do with if she used language or a title and when, what she knew and when, what was her initial understanding and position on it versus where did that end up and when.

The Jacksonian Democrats like action.

Jacksonian Democrats: Is there a bridge there now?

Obama campaign/media surrogates: No (/nuance) but the earmark had language in it that allowed her to keep the money and devote it to other road projects, so she didn't give the money back and she also complained about that phrase before adopting it and....

Jacksonian Democrats: Is there a fucking bridge?

Obama campaign media surrogates: No.

Jacksonian Democrats: She spent the money the way it should be spent, on roads and bridges to somewhere?

Obama campaign media surrogates: Well, it isn't really fair or proper to say that because she didn't like the word "nowhere" at first and somewhere would mean that....

Jacksonian Democrats: Holy Jesus, listen do you want the bridge that wasn't built.

Obama campaign/media surrogates: No.

Jacksonian Democrats: Do you have any problem with the road projects the money ended up going to after the bridge was stopped?

Obama campaign/media surrogates: No, but it wasn't really stopped because the earmark had a clause with a choice and if you just would see this isn't so black and white, but very muddled and nuanced...if you would just look at this timeline that shows when she protested the phrase, versus when she used the phrase...

Jackson Democrats: Dude, come on, this is a waste of time. Look what did your guy do and give it to me quick.

Obama campaign/media surrogates: Our candidate has some good ideas, a good platform, he has given some very good speeches on this matter and....

Jackson Democrats: Look, what did he do.

Obama campaign/media surrogates: Well he has undertaken a personal journey that when he is president will allow him to...

Jackson Democras: Dude, bye.

EVERY story that illustrates nuance, that complains about some nebulous concept of fairness was not applied by a disgruntled party, that complains not about the actions taken, but that an imaginary checklist was not followed in taking it helps McCain and Palin. There are a ton of those articles right now which means that Jacksonian Democrats are getting more and more unenthusiastic and likely are being driven towards McCain. The very grievances that the academics list increase this schism within the Democrats. The final nail though is that the academics cannot just keep these disagreements abstract and air them. They have to personalize them and that is where the shit really hits the fan. Everyone who disagrees with them suddenly becomes dumb, dimwitted, an idiot, doesn't get it, is making it up, etc.

Calling large swathes of people stupid doesn't earn you their vote.

[screener]

Take this example...
Ms. Havemeister cited her childhood love of cows as a qualification for running the roughly $2 million agency.
Out of 600,000 people, this is the best they have to offer?
Seriously, /crickets chirping?

If she ends up becoming Vice President, is this the quality of appointees you could or should expect?

[Bergermeister]

"I like vodka."

"You can be our ambassador to Russia."


---


"I cut my finger while dressing a moose. It healed pretty well, I think."

"You can be Surgeon General."

[trumptman]

Out of 600,000 people, this is the best they have to offer?
Seriously, /crickets chirping?

If she ends up becoming Vice President, is this the quality of appointees you could or should expect?

We understand that the newspaper presents it in a bad light. So what is the confirmation of that bad light in terms of action?

If she ends up becoming Vice President, is this the quality of appointees you could or should expect?

The quality is determined by the job they do. Can you find anything about someone doing a bad job and not something about how some phrase that can be turned or spun shows a lack of... intellectual rigor (calling someone stupid)... lack of vetting(calling someone lazy and stupid), etc.

If the answer is no, then the article is not going to be effective. The Times will print it. They will watch their losses grow and the election will be lost while anguished hands continue to wring, but when speaking to people who value action, you must address actions if you want to convince. If you can't or don't, then the energies are wasted and possibly counterproductive.

[hardeeharhar]

Meltdown?

I think it says more about the Republicans that they are so excited to be tied in this race than it does about the Democrats who are watching the post-convention bounces fade away with the belief that Palin is god's gift and McCain is still the candidate for president.

Nick, perhaps you should try to follow McCain's logic when assigning significance to the bridge to nowhere before you map out how voters have responded...

[screener]

We understand that the newspaper presents it in a bad light. So what is the confirmation of that bad light in terms of action?



The quality is determined by the job they do. Can you find anything about someone doing a bad job and not something about how some phrase that can be turned or spun shows a lack of... intellectual rigor (calling someone stupid)... lack of vetting(calling someone lazy and stupid), etc.

If the answer is no, then the article is not going to be effective. The Times will print it. They will watch their losses grow and the election will be lost while anguished hands continue to wring, but when speaking to people who value action, you must address actions if you want to convince. If you can't or don't, then the energies are wasted and possibly counterproductive.
You missed the point.
Would you hire a childhood friend to run your business, say construction, because they like hammers.

Pretty dumb business move don't you think?

Would you send a diplomat to avert a crisis overseas because they can see Russia from an island off the coast of Alaska as a qualification?

I suppose you could hope for the best.

[SDW2001]

Meltdown?

An 8-10 point swing? Yes...meltdown.



I think it says more about the Republicans that they are so excited to be tied in this race

It's not tied. Even when it's tied in the polls, that's an Obama deficit. Obama needs to be 5 up to be even. It's just the way the polls have worked in recent years. There is a Democratic bias in them, whether or not it's intentional.

than it does about the Democrats who are watching the post-convention bounces fade away with the belief that Palin is god's gift and McCain is still the candidate for president.

It's not post-convention bouncing in the traditional sense. Conventions don't totally change the race. It went from Obama's race to lose to McCain with a lead.



Nick, perhaps you should try to follow McCain's logic when assigning significance to the bridge to nowhere before you map out how voters have responded...

And what of my comments on it? His statement was perfectly reasonable.

[screener]

The quality is determined by the job they do. Can you find anything about someone doing a bad job and not something about how some phrase that can be turned or spun shows a lack of... intellectual rigor (calling someone stupid)... lack of vetting(calling someone lazy and stupid), etc.
http://www.andrewhalcro.com/nov_19_no_spilling_the_milk_a_gag_order_on_the_mat anuska_maid_fiasco
Nepotism at it's best.

[hardeeharhar]

An 8-10 point swing? Yes...meltdown.

You are taking the swing post-DNC as opposed to pre-DNC... The pre-DNC swing is only 3 points (a classic post-convention bounce)


It's not tied. Even when it's tied in the polls, that's an Obama deficit. Obama needs to be 5 up to be even. It's just the way the polls have worked in recent years. There is a Democratic bias in them, whether or not it's intentional.

Sorry, but it is tied -- all of the polls say its tied (likely voter corrections by the polling agency take into account the bias you refer to)...


It's not post-convention bouncing in the traditional sense. Conventions don't totally change the race. It went from Obama's race to lose to McCain with a lead.

This doesn't make sense. You are claiming that Obama is now losing because he is trailing (slightly) in the polls which is completely explainable by a post-convention bounce. You then remark that this represents a change in the race. THEN you claim that it cannot be a post-convention bounce because this represents a change in the race.

It's logical fallacy time.

[trumptman]

You missed the point.
Would you hire a childhood friend to run your business, say construction, because they like hammers.

Pretty dumb business move don't you think?

Would you send a diplomat to avert a crisis overseas because they can see Russia from an island off the coast of Alaska as a qualification?

I suppose you could hope for the best.

I didn't miss the point. I fully understand the point thank you.

The deal is that words can always be twisted, strawmen can always be created and questions can always be asked.

Let me give you an example.

Would you vote for a man who is sexist enough to make a claim lipstick on a pig for a VP candidate?

Pretty dumb political move don't you think?

I suppose I could hope for the best.

The fight becomes about words, their associations, and intents, etc.

It doesn't become about action, who has and would take it.

With Jacksonian Democrats this means the fight is already lost. Asking them to agree that they are "pretty dumb" if they don't agree is just additional insult on top of injury.

Those types of attacks are not effective with Jacksonian Democrats. They are effective with Academics, thus the split.

Obama has promised to come out swinging several times now and each time the attacks are of the academician nature. They rile up the cable news, and lefty bloggers, but not the Hillary voters/Jackson Democrats. Calling anyone not moved by these charges "pretty dumb" be it me (not a personal attack in my view, I get your point but I'm trying to make one as well) or a Jackson Democrat just makes them it worse.

McCain: We are going to drill and build 45 nuclear reactors.

Obama: I believe conservation and perhaps limited drilling as part of a comprehensive energy plan (all to be worked out later) is acceptable.

Which do you think would move a Jacksonian Democrat? Which one has action and which one is an abstraction?

Bill Clinton was very good at this action appeal. He would list so many small things people teased he was running for mayor. His 100,000 more cops bit was amazing politics. Why are Republicans always having wars on things, drugs for example. It is because Jacksonian Dems like to fight for their families and communities. Obama may have something like this out there, but it is not being repeated by the campaign and on the stump. It is not something being pushed.

[jimmac]

I would direct people's attention to the front page article of the New York Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

Took them less than two weeks to uncover all of this. How was she vetted again?

If the country still has any hope, then the Democrats will not have anything to worry about. This woman is frightening; that somebody would choose her for VP, even more so.


Oh why don't just leave her alone and let her be VP?:lol:;)

I mean she just a sweet little girl from Alaska! How that translates into good enough to handle the country I'm not sure. But stop picking on her!:lol:;)

[trumptman]

Oh why don't just leave her alone and let her be VP?:lol:;)

I mean she just a sweet little girl from Alaska! How that translates into good enough to handle the country I'm not sure. But stop picking on her!:lol:;)

:no::no::no:

[jimmac]

It's sure starting to look like that.

Forget fundraising records, that's only an indication of a bunch of people so desperate they think they might be able to buy their way out of the slide.

Forget tracking polls of the popular vote, electoral votes are what matter.

Check out the polling that yields the potential Electoral College outcome: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/

Obama is now down (from 293 about 2 weeks ago) to 248. Uh oh.

I think it's ever more clear why the Palin hate-fest has happened. She must have scared the shit out of them. Maybe now we know why.

Oh I think it's still a little early to be hoping for stuff on the republican side. Just wait for more Palin interviews.:lol:

[jimmac]

:no::no::no:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/12/palin.investigation/index.html

Lawmakers vote to subpoena Palin's husband, aides

Oh my!

About the " little girl ".

Well that's the stance that most supporters try to take when she's asked tough questions.

" Gibson tried to rattle her! I'm never watching this show again......"

So is she a strong woman that knows the answers or not?

Every candidate gets asked tough questions. It's all in how they're handled. If she can't stand a little toughness what's she doing running for VP?

:lol::rolleyes::lol: ;)

[screener]

I didn't miss the point. I fully understand the point thank you.

The deal is that words can always be twisted, strawmen can always be created and questions can always be asked.

Let me give you an example.

Would you vote for a man who is sexist enough to make a claim lipstick on a pig for a VP candidate?

Pretty dumb political move don't you think?

I suppose I could hope for the best.

The fight becomes about words, their associations, and intents, etc.

It doesn't become about action, who has and would take it.
So your argument is that the article has no semblance of truth and the claims shouldn't be researched independently because well, they are just words that could mean anything.

Makes this forum kinda pointless then.

I'll repost this,
http://www.andrewhalcro.com/nov_19_no_spilling_the_milk_a_gag_order_on_the_mat anuska_maid_fiasco
in the palin hater thread, maybe you'll post your thoughts about it.

[jimmac]

So your argument is that the article has no semblance of truth and the claims shouldn't be researched independently because well, they are just words that could mean anything.

Makes this forum kinda pointless then.

:lol:;)

[Jubelum]

The Gaffe Machine Cranks Out Another... (http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OTliMTNiZjg5ZDEwZWNiZDYwZWFjN2JlNjNjNjkxZmM=)

Good thing Obama isn't running against Dole... he could deride him for not playing more tennis.
Way to look stupid, Barry, you flippant, ignorant, heartless schmuck.
It's Obama's version of "Stand Up, Chuck." Just a hell of a lot worse.

You owe John McCain an apology for this kind of ad. Really.

I hope McCain runs an ad in response to yours that rams your ignorance and lack of sensitivity down your arrogant liberal throat.

[jimmac]

The Gaffe Machine Cranks Out Another... (http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OTliMTNiZjg5ZDEwZWNiZDYwZWFjN2JlNjNjNjkxZmM=)

Good thing Obama isn't running against Dole... he could deride him for not playing more tennis.
Way to look stupid, Barry, you flippant, ignorant, heartless schmuck.

You owe John McCain an apology for this kind of ad. Really.

Nothing biased about that web site at all is there?

[jimmac]

1. What I'm hoping for isn't going to happen.

2. It doesn't matter what I hope for, the voters make up their own minds for whatever reasons they may have.

3. I'm just observing what's happening (and a bit shocked at Obama's significant drop off of late). One of the wonderful things to observe is seeing liberals tie themselves in knots over this with the horror that their destiny (President Obama) might, in fact, not be destiny after all.

4. I actually think (thought?) Obama was going to win.


Keep on thinking.;)

[Jubelum]

Nothing biased about that web site at all is there?

Do you have a rebuttal for any of the facts therein presented?

These are simple facts... Obama DID run his ad, and it has been known since 2000 that McCain has war injuries that make it difficult for him to use a keyboard.

[screener]

Do you have a rebuttal for any of the facts therein presented?

These are simple facts... Obama DID run his ad, and it has been known since 2000 that McCain has war injuries that make it difficult for him to use a keyboard.
Can he write? Sign his name?
Hell, I still use one finger on the keyboard, the other hand is busy elsewhere.

[Bergermeister]

I have a friend who edits photos and video and prints fantastic albums using his computer. He bought his first computer several years ago and celebrates his birthday later this year: he will be 93.

In college, I had a classmate who typed all of his own reports. He lost both arms in an accident at age 12. He uses a pedal mouse and a stick he holds in his mouth. He could type faster than many of our classmates.

If there is a will, there is a way. The Republicans, however, are trying to take the stance that nothing can be said against them due to some form of discrimination or another.

Just a 3-second Google returned tons of sites offering systems that assist disabled persons in using computers.

An example of things in practice, from 2006:

http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/17/good-bytes-cafe-gives-internet-computer-access-to-the-disabled/

---
Personally, I use speech-to-text (MacSpeech Dictate) for most of my typing (this message, for example). I also use it to control basic functions of the computer, check email and do other things. It gets me 95% of the way there, then I finish with the mouse. It's faster than typing, and more accurate.

[tonton]

1. What I'm hoping for isn't going to happen.

2. It doesn't matter what I hope for, the voters make up their own minds for whatever reasons they may have.

3. I'm just observing what's happening (and a bit shocked at Obama's significant drop off of late). One of the wonderful things to observe is seeing liberals tie themselves in knots over this with the horror that their destiny (President Obama) might, in fact, not be destiny after all.

4. I actually think (thought?) Obama was going to win.

From what you've posted in the past, I can guess that what you really want is for Ron Paul or another economic anarchist to get elected and create a flat income tax with no deductions and cancel all other personal and business taxes... except maybe a national sales tax for good measure. This is not an accusation, it's a guess... I know I could be wrong, and if I am, just say so and don't go yelling to a sympathetic moderator that this is some kind of personal attack, because it's not.

But barring that from happening, you may or may not vote for John McCain (I am guessing you will anyway no matter what you say here -- again, just a guess and I could be wrong about that) but you definitely won't vote for the person who John McCain's chief economist thinks is going to cut taxes more (again, that's according to what you've posted in these forums).

One of the wonderful things to observe is seeing liberals tie themselves in knots over this with the horror that their destiny (President Obama) might, in fact, not be destiny after all.

I don't think you really see this as "wonderful", do you? To see someone else's suffering as "wonderful" is sadistic and mean, and I'm sure you're neither of those. There's not a Liberal here who would think it's "wonderful" or "entertaining" or "enjoyable" to see Obama win because it makes the Republicans suffer. We want to see Obama win because it will make this country a better place. Again, this is not a personal attack at all. I am giving you the benefit of the doubt that this is not what you meant.

[franksargent]

Um... Alaska has 600,000 people in it. The likelihood that she went to school with someone who was hired is going to be exponentially higher than say, California. Got any evidence that they have done the job badly, are corrupt, or done anything that would lower the Palin 80-90% approval rating?

Both of these statements are on shaky ground, particularly the first one.

How many of Arnold's schoolmates are currently serving in the California Government? Laugh riot ensues. :lol:

I'd suggest you pick any other state with a governor who is a native of that state before you make such a specious claim wrt the state of CA.

Go ahead pick a state, any state, because the population of any given state is irrelevant in strict probabilistic terms.

Why?

Because the relevant population to form the correct probabilistic analysis is the population of all classmates directly known to the individual in question, in this case one Governor Palin.

So if Np = Palin classmates known to Palin at the time of school attendance (which we'll assume is roughly the same for any two random people on average, assuming similar class size populations in either case), and Na = population of Alaskan government employees (which we'll assume is roughly proportional to the population of the state in question), then it follows that if Palin has a disproportionate number of classmates serving the state of Alaska government, then it can be shown in probabilistic terms that Palin classmates were chosen to an exponentially greater degree as Nc (Palin classmates serving in the Alaskan government) increases relative to Np.

In other words, you have you're exponential argument exactly backwoods. :wow:

Now for Palin's approval rating, again in probabilistic terms, if each of 610,768 Alaskans were given a check for $3,269 this year as a direct consequence (not a random event by any means) of direct actions of Palin (raising taxes on corporations and giving that private sector money to the public sector), what is the probability that said governor would have a higher than average approval rating versus the other 49 governors, that didn't give each citizen of their respective states a check for $3,269?

Visual inspection suggests that p =1.0 in this case, especially given the fact that Alaska has an extremely high seasonal unemployment population approaching 60% of it's total work force.

In other words, money talks, and LOUDLY in this particular case.

[tonton]

The Gaffe Machine Cranks Out Another... (http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OTliMTNiZjg5ZDEwZWNiZDYwZWFjN2JlNjNjNjkxZmM=)

Good thing Obama isn't running against Dole... he could deride him for not playing more tennis.
Way to look stupid, Barry, you flippant, ignorant, heartless schmuck.
It's Obama's version of "Stand Up, Chuck." Just a hell of a lot worse.

You owe John McCain an apology for this kind of ad. Really.

I hope McCain runs an ad in response to yours that rams your ignorance and lack of sensitivity down your arrogant liberal throat.

Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit.

From the article you linked...

That's absolutely true, I'm sure. But they need to use computers to get through life. McCain doesn't.

FALSE.

Any President of the United States of America in 2008 needs to use computers to get through life. If he doesn't use computers that's a serious, serious disadvantage. That's just a fact.

John McCain: "I don’t e-mail, I’ve never felt the particular need to e-mail."

Yeah. Sounds EXACTLY like the reason he doesn't send email is because of his war injuries. Right.

[trumptman]

Both of these statements are on shaky ground, particularly the first one.

How many of Arnold's schoolmates are currently serving in the California Government? Laugh riot ensues. :lol:

I'd suggest you pick any other state with a governor who is a native of that state before you make such a specious claim wrt the state of CA.

Go ahead pick a state, any state, because the population of any given state is irrelevant in strict probabilistic terms.

And that would be where we disagree. I don't need to rip into what is underneath. It contains numerous assumptions.

The approval rating is much of the same. Playing with assumptions is fun, but certainly isn't reality. Our own Congress handed out some very large checks this year and have an approval rating struggling to stay above single digits.

[franksargent]

And that would be where we disagree. I don't need to rip into what is underneath. It contains numerous assumptions.

The approval rating is much of the same. Playing with assumptions is fun, but certainly isn't reality. Our own Congress handed out some very large checks this year and have an approval rating struggling to stay above single digits.

You are entitled to your opinion, however your opinion goes against all known facts in this case, as I have clearly illustrated with the airtight probabilistic arguments above.

If you want to disprove the above probabilistic arguments shown above please do so at this time.

Otherwise I am 100% correct in my presentation of the above probabilistic arguments.

In other words, show me the math!



I'm waiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . http://www.murray.k12.ga.us/coker/Media%20in%20Coker/clock%20animated.gif

[jimmac]

You are entitled to your opinion, however your opinion goes against all known facts in this case, as I have clearly illustrated with the airtight probabilistic arguments above.

If you want to disprove the above probabilistic arguments shown above please do so at this time.

Otherwise I am 100% correct in my presentation of the above probabilistic arguments.

In other words, show me the math!

I'm waiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


About being entitled to your opinion :

" People are not entitled to their opinion. They're are entitled to their informed opinion. " Harlan Ellison

[trumptman]

You are entitled to your opinion, however your opinion goes against all known facts in this case, as I have clearly illustrated with the airtight probabilistic arguments above.

If you want to disprove the above probabilistic arguments shown above please do so at this time.

Otherwise I am 100% correct in my presentation of the above probabilistic arguments.

In other words, show me the math!

I'm waiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . http://www.murray.k12.ga.us/coker/Media%20in%20Coker/clock%20animated.gif

You can enjoy responding to your own demands.

So if Np = Palin classmates known to Palin at the time of school attendance (which we'll assume is roughly the same for any two random people on average, assuming similar class size populations in either case), and Na = population of Alaskan government employees (which we'll assume is roughly proportional to the population of the state in question), then it follows

Using two assumptions to draw a conclusion is in no form or fashion a fact nor an airtight argument. Running the numbers correct is proof that we can all have fun with conjecture, but I really don't care to waste my time with conjecture.

You are welcome to put your time to use on it though.

[trumptman]

Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit.

From the article you linked...



FALSE.

Any President of the United States of America in 2008 needs to use computers to get through life. If he doesn't use computers that's a serious, serious disadvantage. That's just a fact.

John McCain: "I don’t e-mail, I’ve never felt the particular need to e-mail."

Yeah. Sounds EXACTLY like the reason he doesn't send email is because of his war injuries. Right.

No one need use computers in any fashion to get through life. Computers improve efficiency. Most of us reap the benefits of that efficiency gain but the gain doesn't have to be done personally and likewise one can choose how to use those gains and their preference. One of the big iPhone debates right now is messaging versus email. I do a ton of messaging on my phone and find it more efficient than calling. Others choose to call no matter what and think punching on a keypad is inefficient.

It isn't as if McCain is demanding the budget be calculated on an abacus. He has limitations and prefers to call versus type what is the big deal?

[jimmac]

No one need use computers in any fashion to get through life. Computers improve efficiency. Most of us reap the benefits of that efficiency gain but the gain doesn't have to be done personally and likewise one can choose how to use those gains and their preference. One of the big iPhone debates right now is messaging versus email. I do a ton of messaging on my phone and find it more efficient than calling. Others choose to call no matter what and think punching on a keypad is inefficient.

It isn't as if McCain is demanding the budget be calculated on an abacus. He has limitations and prefers to call versus type what is the big deal?

Funny. I just bought my friend's daughter a computer to use at college. I bought it because there's no way to do the work or function in school without it. Computers are becoming a way of life everywhere. It's expected now days. It's getting be comparable to not knowing how to write or do basic math.

[franksargent]

You can enjoy responding to your own demands.



Using two assumptions to draw a conclusion is in no form or fashion a fact nor an airtight argument. Running the numbers correct is proof that we can all have fun with conjecture, but I really don't care to waste my time with conjecture.

You are welcome to put your time to use on it though.

Those are both excellent a priori assumptions. I know that the total number of each state's government state workers must be proportional to each state's population, I would not be surprised if R^2 > 0.9 in that regard.

No getting around them until proven otherwise.

In fact your exponential argument is 100% incorrect, since you were unable to define the correct statistical populations necessary to buttress your initial claim to begin with.

That is a bone fide fact.

For instance Palin attended Wasilla High School and probably attended other public schools in her youth in Wasilla, starting in 1972. Therefore, we can set reasonable bounds from known a posteriori data available in the public domain.

You have, as of yet, not shown any probabilistic, statistical, or mathematical arguments to support your initial specious claims.

I'm still waiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . http://www.murray.k12.ga.us/coker/Media%20in%20Coker/clock%20animated.gif

[franksargent]

http://meaningfuldistractions.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/natenquierersarahpalin.jpg?w=450&h=533&h=533

[trumptman]

Funny. I just bought my friend's daughter a computer to use at college. I bought it because there's no way to do the work or function in school without it. Computers are becoming a way of life everywhere. It's expected now days. It's getting be comparable to not knowing how to write or do basic math.

I understand your point and sympathize with it. I am also your friend and want you to buy me a laptop right now Uncle Jimmac.

It is not that the work cannot be done without it. It is just likely that given the demands, the student would be too inefficient to keep up with the others without the computer and thus it is "required." However it isn't like the student is at the top of a chain of computer using underlings who then bring the information to that person and ask for decisions on it.

It isn't like all learning would cease if computers disappeared tomorrow. Professors might have to get used to essays written in blue books again and add cards versus what we have now, but things would continue on. They have and they will. I find online banking fantastic but others worry about the privacy issues. I've jumped very hard on cells in the last two years because I realized I was starting to get left behind because cell phones ARE the computers of the young. Technology is increasingly about getting information in a timely manner and being able to act on it. This is why smaller has begun to beat bigger. Laptop over desktop, cell phone over laptop.

It also isn't like I am trying to ignore all technology in life. Technology and computers specifically help us improve our productivity, but if the demands were so overwhelming that we personally cannot do it, there will be no difference between our help or us using the technology. Even if McCain personally prefers phone calls to email, that doesn't mean his campaign doesn't use email, or that they don't send out emails, etc.

I'm really desperately trying to see the point here beyond the smear. If someone can show that McCain personally won't get information because of technology use, then they have a point, but other than picking at personal habits, what is the point?

[franksargent]

I understand your point and sympathize with it. I am also your friend and want you to buy me a laptop right now Uncle Jimmac.

It is not that the work cannot be done without it. It is just likely that given the demands, the student would be too inefficient to keep up with the others without the computer and thus it is "required." However it isn't like the student is at the top of a chain of computer using underlings who then bring the information to that person and ask for decisions on it.

It isn't like all learning would cease if computers disappeared tomorrow. Professors might have to get used to essays written in blue books again and add cards versus what we have now, but things would continue on. They have and they will. I find online banking fantastic but others worry about the privacy issues. I've jumped very hard on cells in the last two years because I realized I was starting to get left behind because cell phones ARE the computers of the young. Technology is increasingly about getting information in a timely manner and being able to act on it. This is why smaller has begun to beat bigger. Laptop over desktop, cell phone over laptop.

It also isn't like I am trying to ignore all technology in life. Technology and computers specifically help us improve our productivity, but if the demands were so overwhelming that we personally cannot do it, there will be no difference between our help or us using the technology. Even if McCain personally prefers phone calls to email, that doesn't mean his campaign doesn't use email, or that they don't send out emails, etc.

I'm really desperately trying to see the point here beyond the smear. If someone can show that McCain personally won't get information because of technology use, then they have a point, but other than picking at personal habits, what is the point?

I haven't read your above reply, but I would agree that knowledge of computers, and their use, is not a requirement for POTUS.

Particularly given McCain's severely advanced age and known mental and physical disabilities.

Actually, it is, in a way to his advantage, and Palin's, as both would circumvent the e-mail audit trails a la Bush, Cheney, Palin, , et. al. anyway. :wow:

[trumptman]

Those are both excellent a priori assumptions. I know that the total number of each state's government state workers must be proportional to each state's population, I would not be surprised if R^2 > 0.9 in that regard.

No getting around them until proven otherwise.

In fact your exponential argument is 100% incorrect, since you were unable to define the correct statistical populations necessary to buttress your initial claim to begin with.

That is a bone fide fact.

For instance Palin attended Wasilla High School and probably attended other public schools in her youth in Wasilla, starting in 1972. Therefore, we can set reasonable bounds from known a posteriori data available in the public domain.

You have, as of yet, not shown any probabilistic, statistical, or mathematical arguments to support your initial specious claims.

I'm still waiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . http://www.murray.k12.ga.us/coker/Media%20in%20Coker/clock%20animated.gif

That must is another huge assumption.

Keep waiting Frank, keep waiting.http://www.murray.k12.ga.us/coker/Media%20in%20Coker/clock%20animated.gif:lol::lol:

[franksargent]

That must is another huge assumption.

Keep waiting Frank, keep waiting.http://www.murray.k12.ga.us/coker/Media%20in%20Coker/clock%20animated.gif:lol::lol:

But an excellent a priori assumption.

Still waiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . http://www.murray.k12.ga.us/coker/Media%20in%20Coker/clock%20animated.gif

EDIT: In fact the above excellent a priori assumption is so good it has an R^2 = 0.9858, much better than even I could have imagined. (Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2006 calander year data).

[jimmac]

I understand your point and sympathize with it. I am also your friend and want you to buy me a laptop right now Uncle Jimmac.

It is not that the work cannot be done without it. It is just likely that given the demands, the student would be too inefficient to keep up with the others without the computer and thus it is "required." However it isn't like the student is at the top of a chain of computer using underlings who then bring the information to that person and ask for decisions on it.

It isn't like all learning would cease if computers disappeared tomorrow. Professors might have to get used to essays written in blue books again and add cards versus what we have now, but things would continue on. They have and they will. I find online banking fantastic but others worry about the privacy issues. I've jumped very hard on cells in the last two years because I realized I was starting to get left behind because cell phones ARE the computers of the young. Technology is increasingly about getting information in a timely manner and being able to act on it. This is why smaller has begun to beat bigger. Laptop over desktop, cell phone over laptop.

It also isn't like I am trying to ignore all technology in life. Technology and computers specifically help us improve our productivity, but if the demands were so overwhelming that we personally cannot do it, there will be no difference between our help or us using the technology. Even if McCain personally prefers phone calls to email, that doesn't mean his campaign doesn't use email, or that they don't send out emails, etc.

I'm really desperately trying to see the point here beyond the smear. If someone can show that McCain personally won't get information because of technology use, then they have a point, but other than picking at personal habits, what is the point?


It is not that the work cannot be done without it. It is just likely that given the demands, the student would be too inefficient to keep up with the others without the computer and thus it is "required."

Hence the " no way to do the work or function in school without it ".

I understand your point and sympathize with it. I am also your friend and want you to buy me a laptop right now Uncle Jimmac.


She got the Macbook with the iPod Touch for free ( after rebate ) offer and an HP printer/scanner.:p This will get her off of my computer.;)

[Bergermeister]

Just cheerleading for the home team...

I thin they know Camp McCain is getting disgusting and that Palin will fade as soon as facts about her come out and become known. The cheerleaders will sing their songs until the bitter end, though. If they win, a year from now they will be complaining about McPalin, and then repeat the cycle a few yeas later.

[Bergermeister]

Don't many colleges around the country require incoming freshmen to have notebook computers? Some even give the newbies iPods so they can catch podcasts made by their profs. Hmm... computers could be claimed to be essential to a good education.

Many jobs require basic computer skills. Such is life.

This is about one college back in 2000:

http://www.allbusiness.com/electronics/computer-equipment-laptop-computers/6560227-1.html

Yeah, not Macs, but...

[franksargent]

Wasilla, Alaska ... total population 1,559 (1980 census), total population ages 15-18 (high school age bracket) ~100.

Sarah Heath's 1982 yearbook photos (http://www.whs.matsuk12.us/palin.htm) (for all her adoring fans)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b5/Hee_Haw.jpg

Based on this new found data, I see that I overestimated Np (population of people of similar age known to Palin at that time) by at least an order of magnitude.

Statistically speaking, this doesn't bode well for Palin's CRONY-O-METER reading! :lol:

[jimmac]

I haven't read the thread, but I've seen this "meltdown" stuff elsewhere in the media:



Graham's characterization (http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=fd685f57-8a3a-4a28-be31-a662b522b589) here as a "meltdown" is just hysteria on his part. There's no logical explanation for it.


Well it's kind of like the Iraq / 911 connection. It doesn't really exist but maybe if you say it enough........:rolleyes:

[SpamSandwich]

Do computers even exist in a Creationist universe?

[jimmac]

Don't many colleges around the country require incoming freshmen to have notebook computers? Some even give the newbies iPods so they can catch podcasts made by their profs. Hmm... computers could be claimed to be essential to a good education.

Many jobs require basic computer skills. Such is life.

This is about one college back in 2000:

http://www.allbusiness.com/electronics/computer-equipment-laptop-computers/6560227-1.html

Yeah, not Macs, but...

The college my friend's daughter is attending prefers Macs as the university I work for used to. When I started there in 1988 everyone was buying a Mac. This continued through the early 90's but then when Apple looked like it was failing they went to PC. People still buy Macs there. The music dept. still is Mac perfered. I've noticed lately people in offices seem to be purchasing more Macs.

[trumptman]

Do computers even exist in a Creationist universe?

They do but instead of doubling speed every 18 months, it only takes seven days.

Creationist computers totally kick ass.

[tonton]

They do but instead of doubling speed every 18 months, it only takes seven days.

Creationist computers totally kick ass.

But they refuse to run sacrilegious titles like Spore.

[trumptman]

Wasilla, Alaska ... total population 1,559 (1980 census), total population ages 15-18 (high school age bracket) ~100.

Sarah Heath's 1982 yearbook photos (http://www.whs.matsuk12.us/palin.htm) (for all her adoring fans)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b5/Hee_Haw.jpg

Based on this new found data, I see that I overestimated Np (population of people of similar age known to Palin at that time) by at least an order of magnitude.

Statistically speaking, this doesn't bode well for Palin's CRONY-O-METER reading! :lol:

Actually it does and you make my point for me. It means that the pool of people who are of age, know the area, and will represent local interests above the interests of those new to the area is relatively small period. It would be small regardless of whether she went to school with them. Even if you note (as I do) that it doesn't mean just high school and could be k-12 you still have a very small pool. Alaska is still relatively small population-wise but it was even moreso then.

[groverat]

Palin isn't really the female version of George W, that's an insult to George W.

- At least W's cronies are captains of industry and government.
- At least W had some actual international experience (and legitimate) and didn't have to say embarrassing shit like "you can see Mexico from the UT tower!"

She's likeable, and it ends there. And even that will fade.

[franksargent]

Actually it does and you make my point for me. It means that the pool of people who are of age, know the area, and will represent local interests above the interests of those new to the area is relatively small period. It would be small regardless of whether she went to school with them. Even if you note (as I do) that it doesn't mean just high school and could be k-12 you still have a very small pool. Alaska is still relatively small population-wise but it was even moreso then.

Your first statement, I don't understand at all, because it is not formalized in terms understandable in scientific, engineering, statistical, mathematical, or probabilistic frameworks.

Your second (and third and fourth and fifth for that matter) sentence is a non sequitur, or a moot point, because we are not discussing new residents to Wasilla, but the entire pool of residents of Wasilla known to Palin.

We could examine and discuss her tenure at the local level as a councilperson or mayor, we do know that Wasilla was a very small pond indeed.

However, if political appointments during her four year tenure as mayor, were made by placing her cronies in local municipal offices, who were less experienced or qualified for those positions, relative to those individuals serving at and prior to that time, that were longterm Wasilla residents, then this smacks of cronyism.

However, in this particular case we are discussing her political and/or other appointments, or influencing other Alaska positions at the state level based on this article;

Once Elected, Palin Hired Friends and Lashed Foes (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html?pagewanted=print) (NYT article dated September 14, 2008)

So when there was a vacancy at the top of the State Division of Agriculture, she appointed a high school classmate, Franci Havemeister, to the $95,000-a-year directorship. A former real estate agent, Ms. Havemeister cited her childhood love of cows as a qualification for running the roughly $2 million agency.

Ms. Havemeister was one of at least five schoolmates Ms. Palin hired, often at salaries far exceeding their private sector wages.

So much for being a maverick, when all you are really doing is small old school :lol: cronyism.

A statewide pool of 300,000 to 600,000 people is still a much larger pool O(1000) versus Palen's infinitesimal pool O(1) of cronies (note orders of magnitude shown have been normalized).

[vinea]

Reality isn't as important as perception. The perception is that Palin has democrats in a tizzy and Obama is losing. Perceptions like that have the ability to become reality as some dems appear to be losing hope.

You folks need to pull it together and keep your eye on the ball.

[SDW2001]

You are taking the swing post-DNC as opposed to pre-DNC... The pre-DNC swing is only 3 points (a classic post-convention bounce)

Uh, no. During the month of August, Obama was up 3-5 points. Immediately before and during the convention, it went to a tie (negative bounce). The polls then showed Obama with 7-9 point lead, before the RNC. That means OBama got a post-convention bounce of 4-5 points.

McCain is now up by 2-4 points, showing a 5-7 point swing. Granted, it's after the RNC, so the only argument you could make is that his bounce will fade. Even if it does and race returns to a tie, he and Obama were not tied during August.




Sorry, but it is tied -- all of the polls say its tied (likely voter corrections by the polling agency take into account the bias you refer to)...

No, it's not. RCP average shows McCain +2. As for Obama needing a lead, that's a bit more complicated. First, the polls do not adequately or accurately take into account bias. There are formulas to do so, but they vary. They'll often survey more Democrats than Republicans and adjust for it statisically. But that's not exact science, either. Take the year 2000, where everyone who knew the VNS system knews that the polls always were biased to the Dem side...even the people running the VNS exit pollling themselves. They actually had to start manually accounting for it in their reporting of data.

Even if those methods were exact, there are other factors. People, believe it or not, lie to pollsters. The Dems know it. The Reps know it. In this race, you have a number of people who are "leaning Obama" or say they will vote for him who (the theory goes) actually won't. You also have other issues knocking Obama's real vote totals down.

Unfortunately, one of these is race. There is a small but sigifnificant number of people who are racist enough to refuse to vote for a black man. These kind of people are not represented in the polls. What is that number? Who knows, but 1/2 percent would be signifcant. Also, Obama is popular. Populism takes on a life of its own, contributing to a "winning team" factor in his support. Additionally, McCain is being portrayed as an incumbent. That's a double-edged sword though, because while incumbents are easy to blame, they also have certain advantages. Lastly, there's an old and complex axiom to keep in mind about polling: "Democrats don't vote." ;) Really...they've had this problem for years and it must be acknowledged. They've tried to win on the youth vote for some time, but it never seems to materialize.

The bottom line is this: Even the Obama campaign knows they must be up by at least 5 points to win the election. Preferably, they'd like a ten point lead. If you look at the last several elections, you'll see that some "challengers" (which is what I'm saying Obama really is) have had large covention-time leads only to see them fade completely. Notably, this happened in 1988 and 1996. Clinton was down like 30 points at one point after the GOP takeover of the Congress. Dukakis was up by 17 at one point and still lost. This is why the Obama folks are very worried. They had the same problem with HRC and the nomination process...he couldn't put her away. In the general election, that's not just a problem, it's a recipe for a loss.



This doesn't make sense. You are claiming that Obama is now losing because he is trailing (slightly) in the polls which is completely explainable by a post-convention bounce. You then remark that this represents a change in the race. THEN you claim that it cannot be a post-convention bounce because this represents a change in the race.

It's logical fallacy time.

There is no logical fallacy. I'm saying that the race has fundamentally shifted and that we're not just seeing the typical post-convention bounce. You disagree, which is fine. But I hope for your sake that the Obama people don't actually believe this.


Palin isn't really the female version of George W, that's an insult to George W.

- At least W's cronies are captains of industry and government.
- At least W had some actual international experience (and legitimate) and didn't have to say embarrassing shit like "you can see Mexico from the UT tower!"

She's likeable, and it ends there. And even that will fade.

Let me ask: Do you believe that Barack Obama has a record that qualifies him to be President when compared with ALL THREE of the other candidates (McCain, Biden, Palin)?

You critizize candidate A for not having enough experience to be Vice President. But you support candidate B for President, who has even less eperience than candidate B. Huh?

And again, why do you dismiss Palin's experience as Governor of Alaska? What in Obama's background compares with this experience ? Biden's background?

[Hassan i Sabbah]

Uh, no. During the month of August, Obama was up 3-5 points. Immediately before and during the convention, it went to a tie (negative bounce). The polls then showed Obama with 7-9 point lead, before the RNC. That means OBama got a post-convention bounce of 4-5 points.

snip

And again, why do you dismiss Palin's experience as Governor of Alaska? What in Obama's background compares with this experience ? Biden's background?
Another really curious post!

Can I just confirm that you are suggesting that Sarah Palin has more experience than Barack Obama?

Also, I note that Gore won the popular vote and lost, and even Rasmussen, when including leaners, has Obama winning the electoral college at the moment, and that John McCain is a colossal, unscrupulous liar?

Edit: It's just that, seen from abroad, it doesn't look like the Democratic Party is in any sort of "meltdown." It looks like they've ceded a couple of opinion poll points after the Republicans very adroitly played some identity politics of their own and then played it to perfection before going horribly, appallingly negative five weeks too soon and it's now about to bite them on the balls.

[BRussell]

Eh, my sense is that Obama was up a couple points in August, and is now down a couple points. Anything else is probably reading too much into things. I'm just hoping that McCain's current lead is a bubble - that it's based on a positive perception of Palin from her speech and the negative ads he's using, neither of which can sustain. The fundamentals are just too strong for Democrats this year for McCain to overcome. Sure it would have been easier for Dems to nominate someone other than a black guy with a Muslim-y sounding name, but it wouldn't have been nearly as much fun.

[Hassan i Sabbah]

Sure it would have been easier for Dems to nominate someone other than a black guy with a Muslim-y sounding name, but it wouldn't have been nearly as much fun.
Brilliant.

At first I thought the campaign slogan 'Jihaad We Can Believe In' was too much, but I have to say that David Axelrod... is clearly a genius.

[Flounder]

Using two assumptions to draw a conclusion is in no form or fashion a fact nor an airtight argument. Running the numbers correct is proof that we can all have fun with conjecture, but I really don't care to waste my time with conjecture.


I completely agree.

It's like the dual assumption that:

1) the media is in the bag for Obama and is desperate for him to win

and

2) they're so stupid in their implementation that they only help McCain

Self fulfilling prophecies. Wheee!

[trumptman]

Brilliant.

At first I thought the campaign slogan 'Jihaad We Can Believe In' was too much, but I have to say that David Axelrod... is clearly a genius.

:lol::lol:

You know you have to double-down and come up with something for hope now too.

One of the main reasons for this, "meltdown" is the fact that on all measures but the most recent, the generic ballot question has crushingly favored Democrats all year and even with the most recent closing it is still heavily favored. I'm not sure if they mention that overseas but a golf handicap is a good way to think about it. Obama basically starts off with a 9 point advantage. Instead he is down by two which means McCain has somehow swung 11 points worth of voters who have indicated they prefer Democrats govern. That is significant in my view.

[trumptman]

I completely agree.

It's like the dual assumption that:

1) the media is in the bag for Obama and is desperate for him to win

and

2) they're so stupid in their implementation that they only help McCain

Self fulfilling prophecies. Wheee!

I didn't know that stupid was a synonym for biased.

[Frank777]

Ok, this thread was inevitable. We all know the Democratic party, and a 'meltdown' is not surprising to anybody.
It's almost a regular part of Democratic election strategy.

I still think Obama will ultimately win. But the election that should have been a cakewalk has turned into a real race because Democratic party brass continue to be welded to a policy of abortion on demand, giving tens of millions of religious, voting Americans nowhere to go but the GOP.

This disadvantage led directly to the stunning selection of Sarah Palin, who is currently kicking Obama's popularity numbers into the abyss. Frantic Democratic supporters are now grasping at straws, and suggesting that McCain is unfit to lead because he doesn't spending two hours a day clearing a Junk Mailbox of 1400 messages so that he can get thirteen real emails.

It's not the best example of democracy in action, but it's certainly fun to watch.

[Flounder]

I didn't know that stupid was a synonym for biased.

That's good, because I asserted no such claim.

[Bergermeister]

Ok, this thread was inevitable. We all know the Democratic party, and a 'meltdown' is not surprising to anybody.
It's almost a regular part of Democratic election strategy.

I still think Obama will ultimately win. But the election that should have been a cakewalk has turned into a real race because Democratic party brass continue to be welded to a policy of abortion on demand, giving tens of millions of religious, voting Americans nowhere to go but the GOP.

This disadvantage led directly to the stunning selection of Sarah Palin, who is currently kicking Obama's popularity numbers into the abyss. Frantic Democratic supporters are now grasping at straws, and suggesting that McCain is unfit to lead because he doesn't spending two hours a day clearing a Junk Mailbox of 1400 messages so that he can get thirteen real emails.

It's not the best example of democracy in action, but it's certainly fun to watch.


The reasons he's unfit to lead are numerous; the computer issue is but one.

The direction that he has turned the campaign as of late is plenty reason to keep him out of public service, period. Hopefully, the sheep of America will see that. Sadly, your average Joe and Jane don't really care and can't be bothered to do anything than watch the boob tube.

[screener]

The reasons he's unfit to lead are numerous; the computer issue is but one.

The direction that he has turned the campaign as of late is plenty reason to keep him out of public service, period. Hopefully, the sheep of America will see that. Sadly, your average Joe and Jane don't really care and can't be bothered to do anything than watch the boob tube.
Yeah, Long Live American Idol, fucking retarded.
The last of American manufacturing.

[FormerLurker]

Indeed.

Joe and Jane's votes will be most influenced by one factor - which of the two candidates' TV commercials they saw the most of in the last 48 hours before voting.

[franksargent]

I completely agree.

It's like the dual assumption that:

1) the media is in the bag for Obama and is desperate for him to win

and

2) they're so stupid in their implementation that they only help McCain

Self fulfilling prophecies. Wheee!

Run John run. See John run. Run Sarah run. See Sarah run. Run Hoover run. See Hoover run.

[screener]

I still think Obama will ultimately win. But the election that should have been a cakewalk has turned into a real race because Democratic party brass continue to be welded to a policy of abortion on demand, giving tens of millions of religious, voting Americans nowhere to go but the GOP.

It's not the best example of democracy in action, but it's certainly fun to watch.
Religion and abortion,
another example of taking belief to extremes and expecting understanding, in Canada.
http://www.torontosun.com/news/torontoandgta/2008/09/15/6774176.html
What kind of fucking retarded idiots believe this shit.

So Frank, what should be done to save this baby? Pray?

[franksargent]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/97/Herbert_Hoover.jpg/471px-Herbert_Hoover.jpg
This is not John McCain

http://thehoot.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/the_hoot_03-14-08_page_03_image_0001.jpg
This is not Herbert Hoover

http://images.encarta.msn.com/xrefmedia/sharemed/targets/images/pho/t029/T029195A.jpg
This is not a future Palinville

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/139/351026641_fc5e536a48.jpg?v=0
This is not a past Hooverville

[jimmac]

Uh, no. During the month of August, Obama was up 3-5 points. Immediately before and during the convention, it went to a tie (negative bounce). The polls then showed Obama with 7-9 point lead, before the RNC. That means OBama got a post-convention bounce of 4-5 points.

McCain is now up by 2-4 points, showing a 5-7 point swing. Granted, it's after the RNC, so the only argument you could make is that his bounce will fade. Even if it does and race returns to a tie, he and Obama were not tied during August.



No, it's not. RCP average shows McCain +2. As for Obama needing a lead, that's a bit more complicated. First, the polls do not adequately or accurately take into account bias. There are formulas to do so, but they vary. They'll often survey more Democrats than Republicans and adjust for it statisically. But that's not exact science, either. Take the year 2000, where everyone who knew the VNS system knews that the polls always were biased to the Dem side...even the people running the VNS exit pollling themselves. They actually had to start manually accounting for it in their reporting of data.

Even if those methods were exact, there are other factors. People, believe it or not, lie to pollsters. The Dems know it. The Reps know it. In this race, you have a number of people who are "leaning Obama" or say they will vote for him who (the theory goes) actually won't. You also have other issues knocking Obama's real vote totals down.

Unfortunately, one of these is race. There is a small but sigifnificant number of people who are racist enough to refuse to vote for a black man. These kind of people are not represented in the polls. What is that number? Who knows, but 1/2 percent would be signifcant. Also, Obama is popular. Populism takes on a life of its own, contributing to a "winning team" factor in his support. Additionally, McCain is being portrayed as an incumbent. That's a double-edged sword though, because while incumbents are easy to blame, they also have certain advantages. Lastly, there's an old and complex axiom to keep in mind about polling: "Democrats don't vote." ;) Really...they've had this problem for years and it must be acknowledged. They've tried to win on the youth vote for some time, but it never seems to materialize.

The bottom line is this: Even the Obama campaign knows they must be up by at least 5 points to win the election. Preferably, they'd like a ten point lead. If you look at the last several elections, you'll see that some "challengers" (which is what I'm saying Obama really is) have had large covention-time leads only to see them fade completely. Notably, this happened in 1988 and 1996. Clinton was down like 30 points at one point after the GOP takeover of the Congress. Dukakis was up by 17 at one point and still lost. This is why the Obama folks are very worried. They had the same problem with HRC and the nomination process...he couldn't put her away. In the general election, that's not just a problem, it's a recipe for a loss.



There is no logical fallacy. I'm saying that the race has fundamentally shifted and that we're not just seeing the typical post-convention bounce. You disagree, which is fine. But I hope for your sake that the Obama people don't actually believe this.




Let me ask: Do you believe that Barack Obama has a record that qualifies him to be President when compared with ALL THREE of the other candidates (McCain, Biden, Palin)?

You critizize candidate A for not having enough experience to be Vice President. But you support candidate B for President, who has even less eperience than candidate B. Huh?

And again, why do you dismiss Palin's experience as Governor of Alaska? What in Obama's background compares with this experience ? Biden's background?


Well we'll see what the question of the economy does to this now that two of the largest financial institutions have failed or been bought up. The way things are going I don't think they'll want to stay the course. People will be voting with their pocket books more than ever now. And who's been in charge while this all happened?

[Bergermeister]

Interesting the timing. One candidate has been trying to discuss the issues important to the country while the other has been focusing on finding excuses why not to by focusing on war, lip-stick and other crap.

Now they will have to talk about the issues. Hopefully, the crap is over because it was getting tiresome.

[jimmac]

Interesting the timing. One candidate has been trying to discuss the issues important to the country while the other has been focusing on finding excuses why not to by focusing on war, lip-stick and other crap.

Now they will have to talk about the issues. Hopefully, the crap is over because it was getting tiresome.


The crap was getting tiresome for me also. Finally it takes the failure of 2 major financial institutions to get Palin out of the lime light.

[SDW2001]

Another really curious post!

Can I just confirm that you are suggesting that Sarah Palin has more experience than Barack Obama?

Yes, I absolutely am. She has been a Governor and Mayor. He has zero executive experience.



Also, I note that Gore won the popular vote and lost, and even Rasmussen, when including leaners, has Obama winning the electoral college at the moment,

You're not reading. I encourage you to really read my previous post on the topic.




and that John McCain is a colossal, unscrupulous liar?

Show me how so. Meanwhile, please see my Sleazy Campaign thread. Obama has lied through his teeth, or at least his campaign has.



Edit: It's just that, seen from abroad, it doesn't look like the Democratic Party is in any sort of "meltdown.

Then you're not following what's happened. For example, the last time independent women were polled (pre-Palin), Obama was up 8 points. Now McCain is up 12. That's a 20 point swing. McCain is now within 3 points in New Jersey. That state has not gone "red" since 1988. It's a meltdown, and Obama knows it. That's why he's gone negative.




It looks like they've ceded a couple of opinion poll points after the Republicans very adroitly played some identity politics of their own and then played it to perfection before going horribly, appallingly negative five weeks too soon and it's now about to bite them on the balls.

You mean the GOP has gone negative? They have, but not as much as the other side. I mean, Obama actually ran an ad claiming McCain couldn't send an e-mail or use a computer. He ran an ad (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CK3Y1KPzW9k) saying McCain was running "the sleaziest ads ever....truly vile" and that he continues to repeat these smears even after they "are exposed as lies." He called the man a liar, Hassan. Negative?

[SDW2001]

Ok, this thread was inevitable. We all know the Democratic party, and a 'meltdown' is not surprising to anybody.
It's almost a regular part of Democratic election strategy.

I still think Obama will ultimately win. But the election that should have been a cakewalk has turned into a real race because Democratic party brass continue to be welded to a policy of abortion on demand, giving tens of millions of religious, voting Americans nowhere to go but the GOP.

This disadvantage led directly to the stunning selection of Sarah Palin, who is currently kicking Obama's popularity numbers into the abyss. Frantic Democratic supporters are now grasping at straws, and suggesting that McCain is unfit to lead because he doesn't spending two hours a day clearing a Junk Mailbox of 1400 messages so that he can get thirteen real emails.

It's not the best example of democracy in action, but it's certainly fun to watch.

:lol::lol::lol: Nice. Well done.


The reasons he's unfit to lead are numerous; the computer issue is but one.

Name them.



The direction that he has turned the campaign as of late is plenty reason to keep him out of public service, period. Hopefully, the sheep of America will see that. Sadly, your average Joe and Jane don't really care and can't be bothered to do anything than watch the boob tube.

Now hold on. What does J6P know about Obama other than he stands for Change™??? The people not thinking here are the Obama-tards.



Well we'll see what the question of the economy does to this now that two of the largest financial institutions have failed or been bought up. The way things are going I don't think they'll want to stay the course. People will be voting with their pocket books more than ever now. And who's been in charge while this all happened?

Good question. Answer: Both parties. You can try and blame on party if you want, but it's not even mostly the government's fault.

Interesting the timing. One candidate has been trying to discuss the issues important to the country while the other has been focusing on finding excuses why not to by focusing on war, lip-stick and other crap.

Now they will have to talk about the issues. Hopefully, the crap is over because it was getting tiresome.

Really. What issues, Berg? I can't wait to here what issues Obama has been focusing on. He's been attacking McCain mercilessly. He's been off message, and that's exactly why he's now losing.

The crap was getting tiresome for me also. Finally it takes the failure of 2 major financial institutions to get Palin out of the lime light.

Yes, because we can't have her in the limelight! That's Obama's spot!

[jimmac]

:lol::lol::lol: Nice. Well done.




Name them.



Now hold on. What does J6P know about Obama other than he stands for Change™??? The people not thinking here are the Obama-tards.





Good question. Answer: Both parties. You can try and blame on party if you want, but it's not even mostly the government's fault.



Really. What issues, Berg? I can't wait to here what issues Obama has been focusing on. He's been attacking McCain mercilessly. He's been off message, and that's exactly why he's now losing.



Yes, because we can't have her in the limelight! That's Obama's spot!

SDW she's a joke! Kind of a scary joke because she could be president someday but a joke.

[Frank777]

SDW she's a joke! Kind of a scary joke because she could be president someday but a joke.

Now you know how Republicans feel about Obama. :lol:

Don't worry guys. Gas may be pricey, but phone calls are cheap.

Whichever ticket wins, they can call Canada's Prime Minister for advice if they get overwhelmed! :D

Harper is so going to crush Dion...

[tonton]

Now you know how Republicans feel about Obama. :lol:

Except the reason Republicans feel that way about Obama is because he's a Democrat, who believes in Democratic Social, Economic, and International policy.

The reasons Democrats feel that way about Palin is that she's grotesquely underqualified and underachieved, and also because she believes in the same Republican policies that have worked out SO well for Bush.

[tonton]

The "Change" we need in Washington is...

"Trickle down economics" -- FAIL. Change.
"Preemptive war, fuck diplomacy" -- FAIL. Change.
"Borrow and spend" -- FAIL. Change.
"Deregulate" -- FAIL. Change.

These are all things Obama will change that McCain will not.

[Frank777]

Except the reason Republicans feel that way about Obama is because he's a Democrat, who believes in Democratic Social, Economic, and International policy.

Are you sure it's not because he's a junior Senator who has absolutely no executive experience and has no significant record of accomplishment outside of his campaign for President?

That could be it too.


The reasons Democrats feel that way about Palin is that she's grotesquely underqualified and underachieved...

Pot, please see Kettle discussion above.


...and also because she believes in the same Republican policies that have worked out SO well for Bush.

I thought she was too new and inexperienced to have developed an approach to national politics and economics?
That what the talking points said...

[tonton]

Are you sure it's not because he's a junior Senator who has absolutely no executive experience and has no significant record of accomplishment outside of his campaign for President?

He has very few failures, and no major ones, and a long list of amazing achievements, from being President of HLR, to his great contributions to the city of Chicago, to an excellent record in the Illinois State Legislature, to an excellent record in the United States Senate.

Junior Senator means a fuck of a lot more than Senior internet poster, or failed Mayor, or Freshman Governor of one of the smallest states in the nation.

[tonton]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/26/AR2007012600970.html

'"I can't pretend that I had any idea then that he would be a serious presidential candidate _ that would have been a crazy thing for anyone to project at that stage of a career _ but he was certainly the most all-around impressive student I had seen in decades," said Laurence Tribe, a constitutional scholar at Harvard for whom Obama served as a research assistant.'

'Obama analyzed and integrated Einstein's theory of relativity, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, as well as the concept of curved space as an alternative to gravity, for a Law Review article that Tribe wrote titled, "The Curvature of Constitutional Space."'

Please. Name one thing Sarah Palin, or John McCain, for that matter, has done that is even in the same ballpark.

We need this kind of intelligence in our presidency.

Of course, I'm just being "elitist". Translated to mean that I think an intelligent President is better than a stupid one.

[jimmac]

Except the reason Republicans feel that way about Obama is because he's a Democrat, who believes in Democratic Social, Economic, and International policy.

The reasons Democrats feel that way about Palin is that she's grotesquely underqualified and underachieved, and also because she believes in the same Republican policies that have worked out SO well for Bush.

Exactly. All of the republican's arguments fall apart once you look around.

All you have to do is look at the bottom line. Look around. Do you like what you see?

If you do you're in denial. The country is really in poor shape. Who's been in Total control for quite some time now? They can't blame this on Clinton or the democratic congress. Funny thing that. I can blame Clinton a bit since if it wasn't for his lack of control we wouldn't have had 8 years of the Apeman running the show.

McSame is just that. Palin is a joke! Very scary since some seem to be taking her seriously ( because it's all about winning ).

The republicans are trying to sell their platform as change but we've already tried their way. We know what the outcome will be. We're there already.

No need to rinse / repeat.

[franksargent]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/26/AR2007012600970.html

'"I can't pretend that I had any idea then that he would be a serious presidential candidate _ that would have been a crazy thing for anyone to project at that stage of a career _ but he was certainly the most all-around impressive student I had seen in decades," said Laurence Tribe, a constitutional scholar at Harvard for whom Obama served as a research assistant.'

'Obama analyzed and integrated Einstein's theory of relativity, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, as well as the concept of curved space as an alternative to gravity, for a Law Review article that Tribe wrote titled, "The Curvature of Constitutional Space."'

Please. Name one thing Sarah Palin, or John McCain, for that matter, has done that is even in the same ballpark.

We need this kind of intelligence in our presidency.

Of course, I'm just being "elitist". Translated to mean that I think an intelligent President is better than a stupid one.

... by definition the average IQ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ) is 100.

The IQ bell curve of the population of people that support McCain is undoubtedly below the IQ bell curve of the population of people that support Obama.

This follows from authoritarian principles where people will unquestionably follow others because they are unable to acquire knowledge firsthand themselves.

Sapere aude

[trumptman]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/26/AR2007012600970.html

'"I can't pretend that I had any idea then that he would be a serious presidential candidate _ that would have been a crazy thing for anyone to project at that stage of a career _ but he was certainly the most all-around impressive student I had seen in decades," said Laurence Tribe, a constitutional scholar at Harvard for whom Obama served as a research assistant.'

'Obama analyzed and integrated Einstein's theory of relativity, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, as well as the concept of curved space as an alternative to gravity, for a Law Review article that Tribe wrote titled, "The Curvature of Constitutional Space."'

Please. Name one thing Sarah Palin, or John McCain, for that matter, has done that is even in the same ballpark.

We need this kind of intelligence in our presidency.

Of course, I'm just being "elitist". Translated to mean that I think an intelligent President is better than a stupid one.

As is par for the course with regard to Obama taking credit for things, he didn't author the article. He didn't co-author the article. He is thanked in a footnote. (http://motls.blogspot.com/2007/01/barack-obama-didnt-discover-general.html)

Talk about having to turn something into nothing. Some are making it sound like he actually did graduate work in those fields.

So have Palin or McCain ever done anything that is in the same ballpark as being thanked in a footnote? I'm going to have to say yes.

[jimmac]

As is par for the course with regard to Obama taking credit for things, he didn't author the article. He didn't co-author the article. He is thanked in a footnote. (http://motls.blogspot.com/2007/01/barack-obama-didnt-discover-general.html)

Talk about having to turn something into nothing. Some are making it sound like he actually did graduate work in those fields.

So have Palin or McCain ever done anything that is in the same ballpark as being thanked in a footnote? I'm going to have to say yes.


Like what? I'm waiting.

And as I've said before we already know what life would be like under those two. Only worse.

[Jubelum]

Who's been in Total control for quite some time now?

psst... the Democrats have run the congress since 2006. Single digit approval numbers, jimmac.

[tonton]

As is par for the course with regard to Obama taking credit for things, he didn't author the article. He didn't co-author the article. He is thanked in a footnote. (http://motls.blogspot.com/2007/01/barack-obama-didnt-discover-general.html)

Talk about having to turn something into nothing. Some are making it sound like he actually did graduate work in those fields.

So have Palin or McCain ever done anything that is in the same ballpark as being thanked in a footnote? I'm going to have to say yes.

The above quote was from the author of the article, stating exactly how Obama helped with his research. Yes. I'd like to see a single instance where McCain or Palin were thanked for something comparable. I'm waiting too.

[franksargent]

As is par for the course with regard to Obama taking credit for things, he didn't author the article. He didn't co-author the article. He is thanked in a footnote. (http://motls.blogspot.com/2007/01/barack-obama-didnt-discover-general.html)

Talk about having to turn something into nothing. Some are making it sound like he actually did graduate work in those fields.

So have Palin or McCain ever done anything that is in the same ballpark as being thanked in a footnote? I'm going to have to say yes.

I'm going to have to say no. :p

Where is(are) a(the) link(s) where Obama himself took credit for this?

You do realize this is an article by a lawyer for lawyers. :rolleyes:

[trumptman]

Like what? I'm waiting.

And as I've said before we already know what life would be like under those two. Only worse.

Please don't include me in your we.

The above quote was from the author of the article, stating exactly how Obama helped with his research. Yes. I'd like to see a single instance where McCain or Palin were thanked for something comparable. I'm waiting too.

Keep waiting. The guy has written four books and has loads of legislative accomplishments.(Some which I strongly disagree with even.)

If Obama wants to run an ad comparing the number of times each candidate has been thanked in a footnote, let him. I don't have enough hours in the day.

I'm going to have to say no. :p

Where is(are) a(the) link(s) where Obama himself took credit for this?

You do realize this is an article by a lawyer for lawyers. :rolleyes:

Exactly which is why trying to pass it off as some sort of measure of scientific understanding is not credible.

[franksargent]

Exactly which is why trying to pass it off as some sort of measure of scientific understanding is not credible.

Who exactly is "trying to pass it off as some sort of measure of scientific understanding" Obama, his professor, both, or neither?

Remember the word "integrate" is clearly meant to be used figuratively and is not meant (or implied) in the literal sense of the word, since his professor doesn't have a PhD in physics to begin with and is not a SME on said subject matter.

[trumptman]

Who exactly is "trying to pass it off as some sort of measure of scientific understanding" Obama, his professor, both, or neither?

Remember the word "integrate" is clearly meant to be used figuratively and is not meant (or implied) in the literal sense of the word, since his professor doesn't have a PhD in physics to begin with and is not a SME on said subject matter.

PM sent

[Hassan i Sabbah]

It's a meltdown, and Obama knows it. That's why he's gone negative.

OH NOES!

Barack's in such meltdown he's just beating McCain by two points in today's Gallup national tracking poll!!!!! 47% to 45%!!!!

:(


He called the man a liar, Hassan. Negative?
Not if McCain is lying. Then it's 'pointing out an uncomfortable truth. :(

I mean :)

[Frank777]

Junior Senator means...more than Senior internet poster, or failed Mayor, or Freshman Governor of one of the smallest states in the nation.

I've always wondered why the fact that Alaska has a relatively smaller population is such a major deal with those opposing Palin. There are good grounds on which you can disagree with her record, but this would not seem to be one of them.

Does the relatively smaller number of constituents mean that she was somehow less effective?
Are the lives she was responsible for governing somehow less of a responsibility?

Is a parent viewed as a better parent simply because they have more children?

[Flounder]

fivethrityeight also takes a number of days of consistent improvements in polling before they get reflected in the model. We're still seeing a lot of McCain's convention bump. Since it was last, that bump takes significantly longer to fade.

So we'll see. My personal guess is that it will be back to slightly favoring Obama by the end of the month.

[BRussell]

*I can guarantee you that the campaigns don't give a shit about the national polls, they are watching the state polls because those are what count. People forget that we don't elect the President in a national election in this country but rather in a series of coordinated state elections (a quaint reminder that states still have some rights in this federal republic).

I trust the national polls a lot more, because the state polls are such lagging indicators. There are national tracking polls that can take an accurate pulse every day, whereas state polls often go for weeks before being updated. Also state pollsters tend to be less reputable organizations than the national pollsters.

It's true that the national vote can differ from the electoral vote, but it's rare and if it happens it's going to be so close anyway that the polls couldn't pick it up.

[Flounder]

That sounds like conjecture to me, but perhaps you're right.

It is conjecture, true. What a convention bounce looks like is well documented, but having the conventions on top of one another is unique.

This was fivethirtyeight's prediction

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3080/2764497795_36019bb1d1_o.png

He originally had it as an adjustment to his prediction model, but then decided to take it out. In hindsight, however, his prediction is looking quite accurate.

Per that model, we've got about another week to go before McCain's bounce really starts to fade.

[BRussell]

Obama is ahead again in the pollster.com composite.

[franksargent]

We are talking about only one website's predictive polling efforts?

Have all the other pollsters given up?

And if so, why have they given up?

I trust 538 about as much as any other pollster. Meaning I take what they say with a grain of salt.

It appears to me that application of a lag window, at some future point in time will always be correct. Particularly when said lag window reverses sign, as is the case here.

It amounts to taking someone's pulse numerous times in the past, and then predicting and presenting their current and future pulse rates in a deterministic fashion.

When all is said and done, where is the stated MOE of this website's prediction(s)?

Get enough people throwing darts at a dartboard, and a few of them are bound to hit the bullseye.

Let's see how many of these dart throwers can throw a round of nine, a ton-eighty, or 170-out consistently and then I'll start to take their predictive capabilities seriously.

[jimmac]

psst... the Democrats have run the congress since 2006. Single digit approval numbers, jimmac.

Psst That's 2 out of 8 years. So 6 years of total control. Both branches of government. Things didn't get this shitty over night. And we haven't talked about their congressional history going all the way back to 1994. Geez! What have they been doing all this time that things are so screwed up?

[jimmac]

Please don't include me in your we.



Keep waiting. The guy has written four books and has loads of legislative accomplishments.(Some which I strongly disagree with even.)

If Obama wants to run an ad comparing the number of times each candidate has been thanked in a footnote, let him. I don't have enough hours in the day.



Exactly which is why trying to pass it off as some sort of measure of scientific understanding is not credible.

Please don't include me in your we.


I didn't.

I'm guessing by your statement that you think Mr. Bush has made just a wonderful new world for us here in america. You know. The stuff I see on TV everynight on the news.;)

[midwinter]

Obama is ahead again in the pollster.com composite.

Palin fatigue and the end of the convention bump. Plus, Obama seems to have come out of his hidey-hole.

[Hassan i Sabbah]

Oh double noes.

The Democart Party is made from pork fat and it's raining napalm.

Meltdown.

Here's what Rasmussen are saying about John McCain's campaign melt... hang on...

[can't post link: on stupid fucking PC far from home with no way to copy and paste and link won't work when I copy... www.rasmussenreports.com "John McCain and the Meltdown", gloating noises in lieu of headline]


Wait!

Meanwhile, Obama leading in Gallup, NYT, Q and Zoigby, leading in Oregon, level in Florida again and gaining in Ohio.

:(

I can't believe what's happening. :(

[@_@ Artman]

Polls are bullshit. Fuck you Frank! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=If9EWDB_zK4)

[screener]

Oh double noes.

The Democart Party is made from pork fat and it's raining napalm.

Meltdown.

Here's what Rasmussen are saying about John McCain's campaign melt... hang on...

[can't post link: on stupid fucking PC far from home with no way to copy and paste and link won't work when I copy... www.rasmussenreports.com "John McCain and the Meltdown", gloating noises in lieu of headline]


Wait!

Meanwhile, Obama leading in Gallup, NYT, Q and Zoigby, leading in Oregon, level in Florida again and gaining in Ohio.

:(

I can't believe what's happening. :(
I suspect this is the link,
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_froma_harrop/mccain_and_the_meltdown
McCain's former economic adviser is ex-Texas Sen. Phil Gramm. On Dec. 15, 2000, hours before Congress was to leave for Christmas recess, Gramm had a 262-page amendment slipped into the appropriations bill. It forbade federal agencies to regulate the financial derivatives that greased the skids for passing along risky mortgage-backed securities to investors.
And Bush wanted home ownership to increase among low income earners,
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020618-1.html
And so, therefore, I've called -- yesterday, I called upon the private sector to help us and help the home buyers. We need more capital in the private markets for first-time, low-income buyers. And I'm proud to report that Fannie Mae has heard the call and, as I understand, it's about $440 billion over a period of time. They've used their influence to create that much capital available for the type of home buyer we're talking about here. It's in their charter; it now needs to be implemented. Freddie Mac is interested in helping. I appreciate both of those agencies providing the underpinnings of good capital.
And part of the cornerstone of America is the ability for somebody, regardless of where they're from, regardless of where they were born, to say, this is my home; I own this home, it is my piece of property, it is my part of the American experience. It is essential that we stay focused on the goal, and work hard to achieve that goal. And when it's all said and done, we can look back and say, because of my work, because of our collective work, America is a better place. Out of evil came incredible good.

[Hassan i Sabbah]

Re-reading my post, it looks as if I'm serious.

I'm not. John McCain's doing really badly and Obama's not melting down.

Feels really good.

Also apologies for hit-and-run posting and thread starting / not responding... bad etiquette, apologies, but I'm not at home.