So....Will Biden Be VP?

@nimh,

nimh wrote:

Actually, I would have identified some of the biggest knocks on picking Hillary as:

I disagree, I think everything you list only really matters in the soap opera world of politics junkies and that none of it would make a significant difference in the campaign, much less the election.

Hillary's supporters are enough to make a real difference, and they are the only kingmakers in this election that Obama should be courting, not flirting with righties or worrying about egos. The right and independents are not his constituencies. Hillary's supporters are.

So while the combo of Hillary and Obama might energize the right a bit more, I think their combined supporters are enough to win the election even if they campaign in less than perfect sync from here to the general election. They already have a winning constituency from their primary marathon.

Edit: and as to the hyperbole about Bill Clinton, he can do all that without Hillary being on the ticket anyway and with her on the ticket he's less likely to do so, not more.

0 Replies

@nimh,

Quote:

A combo bump ... hhmmm I could do with a combo bump.

Yeah, McCain will get more than one bump from the Republican convention Cool

0 Replies

@Lash,

Lash wrote:

Here's a guy who says there will be no bounce for either convention....http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap_campaignplus/20080825/ap_ca/on_deadline;_ylt=AqQlatGMf1cdbzj0zFyykqbCw5R4

Hey, that was interesting. Good points in there, and historical precedents I didnt know of. Ta.

1 Reply

@nimh,

nimh wrote:

This near-obsession, in fact, with the "known unknowns and unknown unknowns", so to speak, involved in polling has led pollsters, statisticians etc to analyse their data and analyse any divergent patterns. The Wilder/Bradley effect, as a thesis, is one of those analyses. It's based on extensive comparisons between all the ways in which polling data diverge from actual results; they can diverge in countless ways, but when there's a sudden, collective spike of divergency in one direction, across all pollsters, they will look again. At some point, it turned out that the same, non-random, collective divergence took place time after time when a black candidate ran - different from all the regular ways in which results diverged from polls. Not just statistical noise.

Anyway, you're not interested in any of this. Which is perfectly your right. But if you prefer not to learn about the analyses underpinning a thesis, could you please just be honest and say, hey, I dont know bout all this and frankly, I dont care -- so I cant say anything about this? Rather than first, choose to be ignorant about the subject, and then sweepingly claiming that anyway, it's all BS anyway? I mean, that's like me quickly Googling some economic theory, reading a para or two and saying - ah - I'm not interested in this stuff and I'm not going to bother about learning about it - but it's obviously all bunkum anyway.

Re the Bradley/Wilder effect, in any case, for those who are interested -- it should be kept in mind that there is no conclusive evidence at hand that this effect is still at work today. The theory dates, as the name indicates, from races that took place fifteen, twenty, thirty years ago; data from recent elections are much more ambiguous.

Thanks for the tutorial. However there is nothing particularly remarkable (or that was unknown to me) about the problem of posing questions for polling data that yield results that reliably correlate with subsequent behavior - whether that behavior involves voter preferences or the preferences of shoppers for cereal boxes. Statistally significanct phenomena of potential voters (or shoppers) indicating preferences in polls that don't correlate well with subsequent voting (or shopping) patterns are neither novel nor new. In the case of the issues with black candidates, only the name assigned to the effect was unknown to me. Your assertions that this indicates a dismissal of either the phenominon or elementary statistical analysis is - as I suspect you already know - completely unwarranted.

As you indicate these "effects" are often very ephemeral, varying over time, place and even the manner in which questions are formed. There is a certain arrogance however in blithely assigning the "problem" to the people being polled when the forecasts based on them don't live up to the expectations of those who framed the structure of the poll and the questions involved.

As you have indicated, there is nothing like a "law" of human behavior involved here. The effect is a result of an unknown combination of the beliefs of the people polled and the structure of the poll itself, and subject to any number of factors that change rapidly over time. As some sort of demonstration of the supposed enduring "latent racism" of American people it is laughably inadequate. Indeed the assumption that it represents a necessarily enduring rule of human behavior itself is indicative of the same kind of presumption that it supposedly measures.

OCCOM BILL is evidently very pessimistic anout the potential of Americans to rise above or discard racist attitudes that have existed here and evidently believes (or at least implies) that other countries will surpass us in this. I wonder what countries he has in mind. The UK?? Brazil?? France?? South Africa?? Zimbabwe?? Japan??

These are near universal problems of human behavior over which innumerable wars have been fought and people slaughtered. The American version is no better or worse than most, but we have indeed exerted substantial effort to overcome it and have much to show for these efforts, of which the so far remarkable successful Obama candidacy is but a prominent example. I don't know of any comparable phenomena in other large countries. Do you??

1 Reply

@Lash,

Thanks for that link, I had been wondering about why the Democrats were having their convention first.

0 Replies

@nimh,

nimh, I don't know if you understand how many people here are frankly tired of the race issue. There are some people that insist on picking at the scar, picking at the sore, and some of us are tired of it, period. You have a whole host of people voting FOR Obama, simply because of race, and the suggestion here that if he loses, it could be because of race. As I have pointed out more than once, it is politics, stupid, not meaning you stupid, but in the same way that the phrase was "its the economy, stupid."

Further, every time somebody voices an opposition to illegal immigration, due to being in favor of enforcing the law, O Bill is right on the spot accusing people of being bigots and racists. If you don't remember, go back and read all the threads. Again, alot of people are frankly very tired of such people.

Yet, when a good conservative like Clarence Thomas was nominated for the Supreme Court, who was it that was viciously opposed to him, yes, it was the Democrats, and many liberal blacks, they called him an Uncle Tom, some of the same ones that now want to play the race card for Obama.

I think the mantra is wearing thin, and that is one reason I am tired of that stuff from Bill. I would love it if some good conservative black person would run for president, he or she would get my vote over any Democrat. Hispanic too, Bill, you got that in your thick head.

1 Reply

@okie,

+1 for okie

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

As you have indicated, there is nothing like a "law" of human behavior involved here. The effect is a result of an unknown combination of the beliefs of the people polled and the structure of the poll itself, and subject to any number of factors that change rapidly over time. As some sort of demonstration of the supposed enduring "latent racism" of American people it is laughably inadequate. Indeed the assumption that it represents a necessarily enduring rule of human behavior itself is indicative of the same kind of presumption that it supposedly measures.

I can't believe you're still trying to peddle this utter bullshit. Data shows: Black candidates have faired worse in the voting booth than they do in polls consistently enough to have not one, but two names for the phenomenon. Which part of that don't you understand? Exit polls show: Older voters have consistently been less receptive to black candidates. Which part of this don't you understand? This is latent racism George. My 10 year old niece could understand it. How can you admit in one breath that racism still exists, and in the next compare the rational consideration of same to the irrational hatred of bigots? How can you not see how stupid, illogical, and ridiculous that is?

georgeob1 wrote:

OCCOM BILL is evidently very pessimistic anout the potential of Americans to rise above or discard racist attitudes that have existed here and evidently believes (or at least implies) that other countries will surpass us in this.

I simply don't see the U.S. as the front runner at overcoming racism in the first place... probably do to our being late in outlawing slavery and late in recognizing the rights of the black man.

georgeob1 wrote:

I wonder what countries he has in mind. The UK?? Brazil?? France?? South Africa?? Zimbabwe?? Japan??

Actually I was thinking of Costa Rica.

0 Replies

I'm still having a hard time navigating. Is there a thread on the convention?

2 Replies

@Lash,

You posted on the only one I've seen so far. Someone get something started, I'm having no luck finding youtube videos for it (and don't want to watch TV).

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

Robert Gentel wrote:

I'm having no luck finding youtube videos for it (and don't want to watch TV).

C-SPAN has a live stream. (Right now: the community activist who hired Barack).

They also have a video up there of "Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) at New York Delegation Breakfast in Denver, CO"; I suppose they'll put up other separate vids too.

Not that I'm watching.. having enough trouble to get myself to get some sleep as it is. Its dark thirty here.

0 Replies

And now it's Tom Harkin - who, Soz will be pleased to hear, started off giving a few sentences of welcome and thanks in sign language before starting to speak.

0 Replies

@Lash,

Quote:

I'm still having a hard time navigating. Is there a thread on the convention?

I don't like this new site format, let's protest!

1 Reply

@nimh,

nimh, I've lived long enough to learn a universal truth. Cultural change usually does not come about until a new generation arises in power and influence. You have to have the patience to wait for the old stuck-in-their-ways generation to die. It's easier than fighting a revolution, but takes a little longer. Usually, no one gets killed in the process.

Obama is successful because he understands this truth and built an organization from the bottom up instead of from the top down. It's the only way he could bring change, through generational change.

BBB

1 Reply

@Brand WTF,

HI YA BRAND!!!! <waves frantically in the midst of a crowd>

0 Replies

@BumbleBeeBoogie,

So if a revolution and killing people would be easier, would you be in favor, or is it just too much work in your opinion?

Another question, bbb, what is so terrible about todays's world that it has to be changed? Are you that miserable? Are all liberal Democrats miserable?

Most everybody I know is pretty happy about the world we live in, and not complaining 24/7. Sure, adversity occurs, people get sick, die, life requires effort, marriages require effort, making a living requires effort and work and the need to get up every day, but the blessings are pretty abundant. Nothing valuable is ever achieved without effort. What are you looking for, utopia, to sit on your behind and do nothing and have Obama take care of you? Are you looking for a nanny state, is that it?

0 Replies

Bill and Nimh -
I heartily empathize with your befuddlement at the bulldog-like determination of some to erect strawmen; to obfuscate - to do anything but simply acknowledge those 3 little (still significant) points. It is reminiscent of what I ran into a year or so ago when I said that black men could understand better than anyone else how black men are regarded in the US. I thought it was a no-brainer. Boy, was I in for some education...

2 Replies

@snood,

Snood, I think Georges point, and my point as well, is that the obsession with race will go away alot sooner if people quit obsessing with it, and that includes you and Bill. The thing that I object to, that when people insist upon bringing this up over and over, that somehow people are supposed to think they are entitled to a special break, or that somehow alot of us should have some kind of a guilt complex or something. I have no guilt complex, and I won't vote for anyone based on race. For any candidate to suggest they are special in some way because of race is a turnoff.

Same with Hillary, she thought she was special because of being a woman. Sorry, I looked at her accomplishments as a candidate, and I didn't see any, and I don't agree with her, so I couldn't care less if she was a woman, I wouldn't vote for her.

Same with Palin. Being a woman is not what determines whether she is any good or not. The jury is still out in my opinion, but I will give her a chance, based upon what I learn about her.

Continue to be befuddled if you want to, snood, but frankly I think alot of people are sick of being called racists and bigots as Bill routinely does. We all acknowledge a few people vote with race being a factor, but it may occur both ways wouldn't you admit? Some people vote for some pretty inconsequential reasons, many and varied. Alot higher percentage of whites will vote for Obama than blacks will vote for McCain. I just think it is time for people to grow up and get over it.

I am reminded of an old saying, nothing breeds success like success. The best thing the black community could do for itself instead of looking for reasons to feel disenfanchised is to succeed, look at those that have succeeded, such as Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas, even Obama, get an education, work hard, and perhaps most importantly encourage two parent famileis, and succeed. You would be surprised at how fast things would change. Will the government do this for you, no. I realize you are a success, but the black community in general has alot of work to do. I would suggest focusing on that instead of looking for injustice. All of us have suffered injustice at some point or another.

Snood, peace. If you want to elect a black man, how about voting for a black Republican? As soon as one runs, it is incredible how viciously they are attacked by the black community. Do me a favor and read the following link, discussing how MLK was a Republican, and what the Democratic Party is, the party of 4 S's: "the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S's: Slavery, Secession, Segregation and now Socialism."

http://www.nationalblackrepublicans.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=pages.DYK-Why%20MLK%20was%20a%20Republican

0 Replies

Will Biden be VP?

God, I hope not.

1 Reply

@snood,

Words are like leaves
where they most about
much fruit of sense
is rarely found--- ( Wordsworth.)
Issues are aplenty.
problems are himalayan height.
Is A2K podium is not for critical participants( who are thirsty for logical discussion)?
I have been here and I try with my pathetic command of English to know something about the issues.
Under politics no issues are being discussed but about the dancing dolls nose and other non-issues.
NO WONDER i hear the same old songs of Epithalemium.
Rama

0 Replies

So....Will Biden Be VP?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know