|
|
|
|
Baseball Primer Newsblog— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand
Wednesday, October 31, 2012
Come next Tuesday night, we’ll get a resolution (let’s hope) to a great ongoing battle of 2012: not just the Presidential election between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, but the one between the pundits trying to analyze that race with their guts and a new breed of statistics gurus trying to forecast it with data.
In Election 2012 as seen by the pundits–political journalists on the trail, commentators in cable-news studios–the campaign is a jump ball. There’s a slight lead for Mitt Romney in national polls and slight leads for Barack Obama in swing-state polls, and no good way of predicting next Tuesday’s outcome beyond flipping a coin. ...
Bonus link: Esquire - The Enemies of Nate Silver
|
Bookmarks
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.
Hot Topics
Newsblog: BBTF SOFTBALL GAME IN NEW YORK--AUG 17 (293 - 12:02am, May 19)Last:  CrosbyBirdNewsblog: PressBox: Boog Powell: Meat Of The Order (15 - 11:58pm, May 18)Last: toratoratoraNewsblog: Powerball odds? Juan Pierre's homers are long shots, too (15 - 11:50pm, May 18)Last: bobmNewsblog: Draft Features Rarest of Prospects: Redheads (13 - 11:49pm, May 18)Last: MefistoNewsblog: [OTP-May] Politico: Congressional baseball game, May 1, 1926 (3276 - 11:44pm, May 18)Last:  CrosbyBirdNewsblog: Holmes: Where does Miguel Cabrera rank among Tiger greats? (26 - 11:42pm, May 18)Last: Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams)Newsblog: OT: NBA Monthly Thread - May 2013 (932 - 11:33pm, May 18)Last:  The District AttorneyNewsblog: OMNICHATTER for MAY 18, 2013 (145 - 11:05pm, May 18)Last:  botemanNewsblog: Phil Wood: It's time for baseball to use technology to make sure umps get it right (3 - 10:34pm, May 18)Last: Kiko SakataNewsblog: Brian Cashman is keeping Ben Francisco around to “piss everybody off” (6 - 10:32pm, May 18)Last: Knock on any IorgNewsblog: SoE (Megdal): It's Time to Finally Believe in the Orioles (16 - 10:08pm, May 18)Last: DJ Funky and the Smile Time Variety PlayersNewsblog: Bradford: Could this be the smartest Red Sox team since '07? (8 - 8:57pm, May 18)Last: TVerikNewsblog: Josh Hamilton's allergies not linked to drug use, doctors say (35 - 8:36pm, May 18)Last: smileyyNewsblog: Generation K: Baseball’s strikeout trend is growing at record pace (59 - 8:32pm, May 18)Last: Eric J can SABER all he wants toNewsblog: Babcock: Can The 2013 Cubs Channel The Turnaround Artists Of 1967? (10 - 8:14pm, May 18)Last: Walt Davis
|
|
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
"I have appeared twice on Nancy Grace's show"
me too - when she was on CourtTV
I wish they had the "amount of time speaking" ticker on the bottom, like CNN did with the Obama-Romney debates.
If I got 5 minutes out of 30 in each appearance, it was a lot.
I was on during a trial of someone I covered extensively for eight years; I had even been at "the scene of the later crime" several times prior. Was never once asked a question, iirc, that was relevant to those potential insights.
But what about how panicky Huffington Post has been about some of the voting irregularities like that voting machine or the long waits and how Governor Scott looks like Voldemort and....
I had the same thought.
I'm a statistician.
Well, it might not mean much as far as the election goes. Breitbart has been very quiet as well.
This demonstrates not only a misunderstanding of libertarian thought, but also a misunderstanding of your own position. Libertarians as a rule do not worship corporate power; it's typically preferable to government power because corporations can't send armed men to kill you, but "better than" does not necessarily equate to approval.
The bigger issue is the failure to recognize that the modern liberal welfare/regulatory state is primarily responsible for the huge increase in corporate power and influence. Increasing the size and power of government creates incentives for corporations to gain access to that government for welfare handouts, lucrative contracts and regulatory buy-in. Politicians get bought, campaign contributions get massive, lobbyists become increasingly important. Regulation creates barriers to entry for potential competition and results in regulatory capture, which creates even more corporate power as they write the regulations (and tax code) that governs them.
A reasonable person could believe that having a generous welfare state is of paramount importance and living with massive corporate power is a necessary evil to achieve that goal. It's not reasonable to believe that corporate power is a problem that must be reigned in with a bigger, more powerful government. That's simply fighting fire with gasoline.
There have been a lot of subtle and some not so subtle attempts to portray Obama and his wife as Angry Blacks!!!! since they burst onto the scene. Beck is just staying on point.
If I want to drive, from say, New York to Indiana (say I am fleeing a hurricane). I am not a citizen or resident of any state that I enter. I have to pay several tolls to use interstate highway systems. Is this legitimate fee-for-service? I never agreed, implicitly or explicitly that either local, state, or federal government could charge me to use "it's" road (let alone negotiate the price)
Is it voluntary or unvoluntary of me to pay the toll? Does it matter if there is an alternate route (presumably of some high level of cost and inconvenience). Is it even theoretically possible to drive from Queens to New Jersey without a toll? Most turnpikes probably have some sort of free service road in parallel you could theoretically use.
I know in the Bay Area, you *can* drive from say, San Francisco to Marin "the long way 'round" to avoid bridge tolls, but of course you would burn way more than the bridge toll in gas.
Does it matter if the bridge is privately owned, instead of a government?
Michigan man revived in Michigan asks "Did I vote?"
Illinois woman whose water broke and contractions were 5 minutes apart stays in line to vote...
Corporations are creations of the state. They're barely consistent with libertarian thought, much less creditors to it.
THAT is definitely going in the file for future use...
I have to get back downtown in order to turn in the extra 500 ballots ACORN gave me to cast. I believe some of them have to be faxed to swing states whose polls close soon.
Ta ta!
Back to gloat or ##### later....
If only :)
I have a couple of friends in the midwest and west who will be absolutely certain that, should he win, Obama stole the election. Nothing factual matters in the least to them.
What increase? Corporate power and influence was at an apogee in the late 19th century, when the modern liberal/welfare regulatory state did not exist. Business interests were also massively powerful in Britain after the Industrial Revolution, Medieval Flanders, and Renaissance Venice. In none of those cases do I see liberalism mucking things up behind the scenes. What they have in common is wealth based largely on mercantile activity rather than land ownership. But the wealthy have always had more power, more so in the past than today.
Children and domestic animals are always interfering with others. It takes an advanced adult to leave others alone.(*) The oft-cited idea that a libertarian bent is something you "grow out of" is laughable.
(*) Because, among other reasons, the benefits to the person doing it are more subtle and less immediate.
What do you call those people? The Guamish? Guamy bears?
Certainly a lot of them are polygamists. No wonder most corporate money supports the Mormon! (I kid, I kid...)
True dat. As that advanced libertarian Jesus told us, we are not our brother's keeper. He did say that, right? I'm pretty sure he did.
My son and I were having this conversation one time. You know, those days when you're feeling down and frustrated and upset, nothing's going your way, you just have to remind yourself that somewhere, somebody has it worse than you.
Which is always true for almost everyone in the world. Almost everyone. But what if you were that one guy, feeling down and frustrated and upset, nothing's going your way, and -- guess what: nobody, anywhere, has it worse than you. You are in fact the most miserable, wretched, luckless human being on the planet.
It's got to be somebody.
Did he say Caesar was our brother's keeper?
But that having been said, someone like Dan would kind of accept that fourth one; he'd quibble with the phrasing but he'd accept the idea of property taxes. But of course our government doesn't merely require us to pay property taxes in exchange for owning government property; it requires us to pay income taxes, sales taxes, licensing taxes, excise taxes, death taxes... all "in exchange for" nothing more than being alive.
It's making me nostalgic for root canal work.
Some beer company should get on that for a commercial.
Have you ever done a title search? You go all the way back to the sovereign.
Well there's a dead giveaway.
I don't get it. If you can vote anyway, then what's the point of the ID?
It's making me nostalgic for root canal work.
Okay, then, Nate's final pitch--see video of his appearance on Colbert
A poor attempt to combat pesky voter fraud by instead trying to dissuade voters from voting.
Glen and I disagree. The one unifying thing about the people I discuss politics with is that they are angry
Not sure all his fellow conservatives agree, because Mark Levin was spitting mad last night urging his listeners to vote against Obama.
They also insist on cleverly rigging the system so that those with money and access to the legal system have significantly more functional power than those with excellent jiu-jitsu and a desire to slap selfish jerks,
A CHRISTIAN DEMOCRAT: You have two cows. You keep one and give one to your neighbor.
A SOCIALIST: You have two cows. The government takes one and gives it to your neighbor.
AN AMERICAN REPUBLICAN: You have two cows. Your neighbor has none. So what?
AN AMERICAN DEMOCRAT: You have two cows. Your neighbor has none. You feel guilty for being successful. You vote
people into office who tax your cows, forcing you to sell one to raise money to pay the tax. The people you voted for then take the tax money and buy a cow and give it to your neighbor. You feel righteous.
A COMMUNIST: You have two cows. The government seizes both and provides you with milk.
A FASCIST: You have two cows. The government seizes both and sells you the milk. You join the underground and start a campaign of sabotage.
DEMOCRACY, AMERICAN STYLE: You have two cows. The government taxes you to the point you have to sell both to support a man in a foreign country who has only one cow, which was a gift from your government.
CAPITALISM, AMERICAN STYLE: You have two cows. You sell one, buy a bull, and build a herd of cows.
BUREAUCRACY, AMERICAN STYLE: You have two cows. The government takes them both, shoots one, milks the other, pays you for the milk, then pours the milk down the drain.
AN AMERICAN CORPORATION: You have two cows. You sell one, and force the other to produce the milk of four cows. You are surprised when the cow drops dead.
A FRENCH CORPORATION: You have two cows. You go on strike because you want three cows.
A JAPANESE CORPORATION: You have two cows. You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk. You then create clever cow cartoon images called Cowkimon and market them World-Wide.
A GERMAN CORPORATION: You have two cows. You re-engineer them so they live for 100 years, eat once a month, and milk themselves.
A BRITISH CORPORATION: You have two cows. They are mad. They die. Pass the shepherd's pie, please.
AN ITALIAN CORPORATION: You have two cows, but you don't know where they are. You break for lunch.
A RUSSIAN CORPORATION: You have two cows. You count them and learn you have five cows. You count them again and learn you have 42 cows. You count them again and learn you have 12 cows. You stop counting cows and open another bottle of vodka.
A SWISS CORPORATION: You have 5000 cows, none of which belong to you. You charge others for storing them.
A BRAZILIAN CORPORATION: You have two cows. You enter into a partnership with an American corporation. Soon you have 1000 cows and the American corporation declares bankruptcy.
AN INDIAN CORPORATION: You have two cows. You worship both of them.
A CHINESE CORPORATION: You have two cows. You have 300 people milking them. You claim full employment, high bovine productivity, and arrest the newsman who reported on them.
AN ISRAELI CORPORATION: There are these two Jewish cows, right? They open a milk factory, an ice cream store, and then sell the movie rights. They send their calves to Harvard to become doctors. So, who needs people?
AN ARKANSAS CORPORATION: You have two cows. That one on the left is kinda cute.
Some beer company should get on that for a commercial.
Old Oshkosh Beer: it tastes like rancid piss. But that's all you're worth.
To justify paying for a monitor that they can touch.
The trouble with Libertarianism is that it's a lie. It pretends that a sovereign is unnecessary. It depends on the kindness of strangers. It creates a race of lambs in a wolves' world.
Ain't gunna happen, G.I.
Which is always true for almost everyone in the world. Almost everyone. But what if you were that one guy, feeling down and frustrated and upset, nothing's going your way, and -- guess what: nobody, anywhere, has it worse than you. You are in fact the most miserable, wretched, luckless human being on the planet.
It's got to be somebody.
That guy probably isn't online.
Not sure if this has already been answered, but in 2000, for the first time in Florida, Cubans were separated from generic hispanics in the exit poll data. The analysts, not realizing this, saw hispanics (now minus the Cubans who generally vote Republican) going overwhelmingly for Gore, which caused them to prematurely call the state for Gore. The networks reported this, despite the polls still being open in the heavily Republican panhandle (another major goof), which depressed the vote there. There were numerous reports of people leaving the line after hearing that their vote didn't matter.
Sign me up for that. Obviously 103 is the most any of us can hope for, but it's still a sad day.
I voted in Howard County at around 3 pm. It took 20 minutes, and that was only because the door was locked, so I had to wait for someone to come out before I could get in. A couple of us asked one of the election officials about it, and she said "yeah, it's been like that all day--I don't know why." There's an interesting voter suppression technique. For the record, Obama, casinos, and gay marriage licenses.
What happens in the ballot box stays in the ballot box.
Obama has ... Lemmy.
I'd say that Lemmy's is likely the ONLY vote that Obama is likely to get from a well-known collector of Nazi memorabilia, but, of course, Lemmy's British.
Still gonna put that one down a solid for Obama, though ...
What you're calling a bug, I think they'd call a feature...
Though that did not work out for Kerry, so take it for what it is worth
I've been through a large group of elections, and this one is making me very very very uneasy, more than any other, I think. I'm not even sure why. I think it's because of this ####### poll thread and knowing more than I've ever known before prior to the election of what's already been forecast. The last one was sort of foregone, and I just wasn't as much all up on the internet for the prior to that.
At least I have a rehearsal for the next few hours.
Drudge might be doing a head fake. Earlier, it said "EXIT POLLS TIGHT," but with Ohio in the Obama column. Now it says "EXIT POLL BOOM FOR O," but Ohio has shifted down to the toss-up column.
Also, the exit polls have 60 percent of respondents naming the economy as their top issue, with just 25 percent saying they're better off than they were four years ago. There seems to be a large disconnect between those economic numbers and the "EXIT POLL BOOM FOR O" headline.
Sam Wang: Ignore exit polls
I think I'll just ignore exit polls.
Though again, we should probably ignore exit polls.
I think Democrats, Republican, liberals, conservatives, libertarians, communists, socialists, fascists, Americans, and foreigners can all agree on two things:
- we should probably ignore exit polls
- Nancy Grace is the terrible person
I like this. She is not a terrible person; she is the terrible person.
His best chance may be to steal all the official logos he can get and hastily make an acceptance speech, hoping to filibuster the rest of the election.
Haha. I'm not going to change that now.
It should be noted that the only places that are currently closed are the two midnight voting places in New Hampshire and some areas of Indiana and Kentucky.
I'll be the nth reason to say this:
IGNORE all exit polls until it's over- what exit polls are good for- is after the fact- telling you the demographics of who voted- adjusting the numbers on the fly to reflect actual turnout etc. is pretty impossible, the margin of error is like +/- 20% at this point
So Romney could be winning 84-14!
Who do you think was leading the charge??
As a Canadian, I have no idea what to think of that movie. Is this something new about him, or are we just going to get the Civil War years? If so, then (just like Titanic) everyone's gonna know how it ends...
It's primarily focused on how he tried to get slavery totally gone, despite the fact that most people thought he was crazy because it would kill peace talks going on with the South at the time.
Also, Daniel Day-Lewis is an acting machine. He even has the voice right! Lots of people have written that Lincoln kind of had a folksy voice, but nobody has ever done it before in a movie!
Coolest. School. Ever.
Yes, someone has: Henry Fonda in John Ford's Young Mr. Lincoln. You only have to compare Fonda with Canadian Raymond Massey in Abe Lincoln in Illinois, released about a year later. Massey had played Lincoln on the stage--someone waggishly said that Massey wouldn't be satisfied until he was assassinated.
Romney better hope so - CNN just apparently reported his showed O+5 in Ohio.
Also, mergers are more like adoptions than marriages. One adopts the other or they share paternity of a newly created corporation.
But if corporations are people, consider the implications of same-sex marriage laws.
If SSM advocates are correct in stating constitutional rights were intended not for individuals, but for their relationships, then why then hold non-profit and for-profit corporations under unequal codes?
The comment section is great. My favorite: christie is nothing more than a sharia compliant big bag of wind.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main