It's looking like Obama/Biden may not finish at all...

On Wed, 01 Oct 2008 19:03:46 -0700, mb wrote:

In article ,
wrote:

Can you say McGovern/Eagleton...

Sheesh,
R

On top of that, unrelated surveys show Obama beating McCain in several
battlegrounds, including Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania -- three states
critical in the state-by-state fight for the presidency.

Several GOP strategists close to McCain's campaign privately fret that
his chances for victory are starting to slip away.

These Republicans, speaking on condition of anonymity to avoid angering
the campaign, point to several factors: Obama's gains nationally and in
traditionally GOP states, no McCain gain from the first debate, McCain's
struggles with economic issues as the financial crisis has unfolded and
deepening public skepticism about his running mate, Sarah Palin.

They said McCain's options for shaking up the race are essentially
limited to game-changing performances in the final presidential debates
or in Palin's vice presidential debate with Joe Biden Thursday night.
Short of that, they said, McCain can do little but hope Obama stumbles
or an outside event breaks the GOP nominee's way

Good points, but perhaps a bit too over-aggressive in thinking. Obama's
supposed "gains" have eroded _slightly_ in the last 24-48 hours, and the
whole bailout bull**** will keep things unusually stirred for the next
few days or so. I'd say that if Palin wins, McCain wins bigger, and if
she loses badly, it might well trend toward a hard road for him. But,
hey, this is politics, so a coupla days is like years in the real world.
Evidence is pretty clear that both have a _solid_ 40 percent or so, and
another 4-ish as probables. Nader and Barr will split something like 5
percent. That leaves 10-ish percent deciding. Here's a wild prediction
- if the election were tomorrow, Obama would take Florida and Georgia,
but McCain would take...are you ready, NY, NJ, and sorry, Tom, but PA.

TC,
R

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 01 Oct 2008 19:03:46 -0700, mb wrote:

In article ,
wrote:

Can you say McGovern/Eagleton...

Sheesh,
R

On top of that, unrelated surveys show Obama beating McCain in several
battlegrounds, including Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania -- three states
critical in the state-by-state fight for the presidency.

Several GOP strategists close to McCain's campaign privately fret that
his chances for victory are starting to slip away.

These Republicans, speaking on condition of anonymity to avoid angering
the campaign, point to several factors: Obama's gains nationally and in
traditionally GOP states, no McCain gain from the first debate, McCain's
struggles with economic issues as the financial crisis has unfolded and
deepening public skepticism about his running mate, Sarah Palin.

They said McCain's options for shaking up the race are essentially
limited to game-changing performances in the final presidential debates
or in Palin's vice presidential debate with Joe Biden Thursday night.
Short of that, they said, McCain can do little but hope Obama stumbles
or an outside event breaks the GOP nominee's way

Good points, but perhaps a bit too over-aggressive in thinking. Obama's
supposed "gains" have eroded _slightly_ in the last 24-48 hours, and the
whole bailout bull**** will keep things unusually stirred for the next
few days or so. I'd say that if Palin wins, McCain wins bigger, and if
she loses badly, it might well trend toward a hard road for him. But,
hey, this is politics, so a coupla days is like years in the real world.
Evidence is pretty clear that both have a _solid_ 40 percent or so, and
another 4-ish as probables. Nader and Barr will split something like 5
percent. That leaves 10-ish percent deciding. Here's a wild prediction
- if the election were tomorrow, Obama would take Florida and Georgia,
but McCain would take...are you ready, NY, NJ, and sorry, Tom, but PA.

On the other hand, what if Eleanor Roosevelt could fly?

Wolfgang
who confesses that he's about THIS close to getting bored with watching
everybody lob softballs at one another.

wrote in
:

Good points, but perhaps a bit too over-aggressive in thinking.

You're sounding just a bit like a left-at-the-altar bride, sitting in
darkened room in a wedding dress years after the tragic event.

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

On 2 Oct 2008 13:21:55 GMT, Scott Seidman
wrote:

wrote in
:

Good points, but perhaps a bit too over-aggressive in thinking.

You're sounding just a bit like a left-at-the-altar bride, sitting in
darkened room in a wedding dress years after the tragic event.

You're sounding a whole lot like someone who desperately hopes I am...

And I'll repeat - it won't make much difference to me who wins, and, we
can cite all the oft-changing polls we want, but I still maintain that
given the current info, come Election Day (or the day after), it's gonna
be _close_. Of course, that's subject to change at any moment if
something _BIG_ were to happen. Neither of these guys (and really, none
of the four) shows any real sign whatsoever of being the fabled "real
thing," they're all just plain ol' garden-variety pols and none of the
four, if past performance can be used, shows any signs of being a
historically great or memorable Prez on their merits. Obviously, the
first mixed-race Prez or if Palin were to take over, the first woman
would be "historic" as a separate thing. I will acknowledge a _slight_
bias toward McCain as having done a _few_ moderately impressive things
as a pol in the past, coupled with his time as a POW, but not so much so
that I would say he is clearly and absolutely a better choice over
Obama.

HTH,
R

wrote in message
...
On 2 Oct 2008 13:21:55 GMT, Scott Seidman
wrote:

wrote in
m:

Good points, but perhaps a bit too over-aggressive in thinking.

You're sounding just a bit like a left-at-the-altar bride, sitting in
darkened room in a wedding dress years after the tragic event.

You're sounding a whole lot like someone who desperately hopes I am...

Hope has little to do with it. The image of dicklet sitting in a dark room
in a wedding gown is one which we are sure comes readily, if unbidden, to
many a mind all too frequently.

And I'll repeat - it won't make much difference to me who wins,

Yes, this is evident not only from your steadfast refusal to get sucked into
virtually infinite vapid "discussions" of mind-numblingly useless
conflicting polls reflecting whatever their authors (and quoters) want them
to, begun as often as not by a miscreant cad using your sanctified name, but
also by the exemplary non-partisan even-handedness with which you invariably
ignore all offerings from all sides of the "debate," else we would expect to
see (at least occasionally) something like this:

and, we
can cite all the oft-changing polls we want, but I still maintain that
given the current info, come Election Day (or the day after), it's gonna
be _close_. Of course, that's subject to change at any moment if
something _BIG_ were to happen. Neither of these guys (and really, none
of the four) shows any real sign whatsoever of being the fabled "real
thing," they're all just plain ol' garden-variety pols and none of the
four, if past performance can be used, shows any signs of being a
historically great or memorable Prez on their merits. Obviously, the
first mixed-race Prez or if Palin were to take over, the first woman
would be "historic" as a separate thing. I will acknowledge a _slight_
bias toward McCain as having done a _few_ moderately impressive things
as a pol in the past, coupled with his time as a POW, but not so much so
that I would say he is clearly and absolutely a better choice over
Obama.

which, as nothing like it ever appears on my screen or yours (let alone
those of the folks who actually participate in these drivel-fests) proves
our point beyond contravention.

Ainna?

Imbecile.

Wolfgang

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 01 Oct 2008 19:03:46 -0700, mb wrote:

In article ,
wrote:

Can you say McGovern/Eagleton...

Sheesh,
R

On top of that, unrelated surveys show Obama beating McCain in several
battlegrounds, including Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania -- three states
critical in the state-by-state fight for the presidency.

Several GOP strategists close to McCain's campaign privately fret that
his chances for victory are starting to slip away.

These Republicans, speaking on condition of anonymity to avoid angering
the campaign, point to several factors: Obama's gains nationally and in
traditionally GOP states, no McCain gain from the first debate, McCain's
struggles with economic issues as the financial crisis has unfolded and
deepening public skepticism about his running mate, Sarah Palin.

They said McCain's options for shaking up the race are essentially
limited to game-changing performances in the final presidential debates
or in Palin's vice presidential debate with Joe Biden Thursday night.
Short of that, they said, McCain can do little but hope Obama stumbles
or an outside event breaks the GOP nominee's way

Good points, but perhaps a bit too over-aggressive in thinking. Obama's
supposed "gains" have eroded _slightly_ in the last 24-48 hours, and the
whole bailout bull**** will keep things unusually stirred for the next
few days or so. I'd say that if Palin wins, McCain wins bigger, and if
she loses badly, it might well trend toward a hard road for him. But,
hey, this is politics, so a coupla days is like years in the real world.
Evidence is pretty clear that both have a _solid_ 40 percent or so, and
another 4-ish as probables. Nader and Barr will split something like 5
percent. That leaves 10-ish percent deciding. Here's a wild prediction
- if the election were tomorrow, Obama would take Florida and Georgia,
but McCain would take...are you ready, NY, NJ, and sorry, Tom, but PA.

It should come as no surprise that as you greatest fan here, I frequently
re-read many of the jewels with which you so graciously bless us. Upon my
third or fourth admiring perusal of the above included sterling example, I
was particularly struck by this part:

"Here's a wild prediction - if the election were tomorrow, Obama would take
Florida and Georgia, but McCain would take...are you ready, NY, NJ, and
sorry, Tom, but PA."

Now, as I know you are a sporting gent, I'd like to propose a friendly
little wager on this prediction. Say, about $4,583,900.56?

Wolfgang
who hardly expects to be taken advantage of by one with a justifiable
iron-clad confidence in his own prognosticatory genius, regardless of the
accuracy (or lack thereof) of the old adage concerning when tomorrow may or
may not be expected to arrive on the scene.

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 01 Oct 2008 19:03:46 -0700, mb wrote:

Here's a wild prediction
- if the election were tomorrow, Obama would take Florida and Georgia,
but McCain would take...are you ready, NY, NJ, and sorry, Tom, but PA.

Looking this over once again and finding myself with a few moments leisure
in which to consider all the rich panoply of its implications, I am struck
by the question that should have been obvious from the outset......well, at
least to a more attentive and thoughtful reader.

What if the election were held tomorrow AND Eleanor Roosevelt could fly?

The mind reels.

Wolfgang

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 01 Oct 2008 19:03:46 -0700, mb wrote:

Here's a wild prediction
- if the election were tomorrow, Obama would take Florida and Georgia,
but McCain would take...are you ready, NY, NJ, and sorry, Tom, but PA.


Hm......

IF I WAS THE KING OF THE FORRREEEEESSSSSSST, I bet there would be "Real
Cajun"® cheesecake for supper EVERY DAY! Betcha.

Wanna bet?

Wolfgang
yum!

wrote in
:

Here's a wild prediction
- if the election were tomorrow, Obama would take Florida and Georgia,
but McCain would take...are you ready, NY, NJ, and sorry, Tom, but PA.


It's more likely that McCain drops of natural causes between now and Nov 4.


--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 01 Oct 2008 19:03:46 -0700, mb wrote:

Here's a wild prediction
- if the election were tomorrow, Obama would take Florida and Georgia,
but McCain would take...are you ready, NY, NJ, and sorry, Tom, but PA.

Hm (redux)........

Then again, through the much neglected (in these latter days) expedient of
assigning to the alphabet a simple rising scale of integer values, starting
with A=1 and proceeding through Z=26, and applying the fundamental
principles of gematria to the names of the candidates we see that "Barack
Obama" = 68 while "John McCain" tips the scale at a whopping 90! Gadzooks!

However, it is naive to suppose that the obvious approach taken above is
necessarily the RIGHT one. After all, if divination were as simple as that,
EVERYBODY would be doing it and there would be no basis at all for the
establishment of a defensible hierarchy among practitioners. No, there
simply HAS TO be more to it than that! Thus, reversing the order of the
assigned of numerical values (a perfectly legitimate technique given that
solutions to knotty problems are rarely perfectly linear and immutable in
all dimensions) yields: "Barack Obama" = 229 and "John McCain" = a paltry
178.

But, again, reason alone (never mind experience) tells us that putting the
cart before the horse will likely result in no greater advantage than doing
it the other way around if no means have been made available to link the two
in one way or another. Let us provide a (provisional) link. Adding the
sums; 68+229 and 90+178 gives a ratio of Obama:McCain = 297:268. Still not
particularly revealing one might suggest, but a moment's reflection reveals
that the numbers in this ratio, when combined, approach to something close
enough to the number of electoral votes available in the upcoming election.
Hm........

Suggestive......highly suggestive. But still not conclusive. What else can
we do?

Well, in fact there are innumerable (if you will pardon the feeble attempt
at humor) other things we can do, with varying degrees of applicability and
resulting in correspondingly variable degrees of revelatory value, but
simply plugging numbers into formulae memorized by rote (or provided on a
"cheat sheet") is hardly the way to teach the neophyte the principles
involved in any complex discipline which requires an ability to assess the
nature of the problem and the available pathways to solution.

Thus, I eagerly await readers' input of ideas about what might qualify as a
next logical step in a series of permutations which could shed light on this
fascinating and potentially economical alternative to all the fuss and
bother of holding elections.

Wolfgang
lambda lemma ding dong.