On 7/3/2011 10:28 PM, P. Enis Reynaldo wrote:
http://forum.stratovarius.com/userpi..._shorts1_1.jpg


Now you know why a lot of people were so critical of George Bush. After
seeing how you right wing folks are with your nastiness and overt racism
like you demonstrate here, it's not surprising that people will give you
the same medicine when they can. Lots of us remember the crap you all
heaped on Bill Clinton, his wife and his daughter when he was the
president. It was eight years of relentless criticism from really
snotty, right wing, assholes. So when Bush got in office you got to see
how it what you dish out feels like. Now your team is out of power and
you're back to your old tricks. Too bad for you Obama's going to be
around for another term. You're going to run out of ****ty things to say
and you'll have no choice but to just repeat yourselves endlessly over
and over. Too bad.

Hawke

On Jul 4, 5:25*pm, Hawke wrote:

Too bad for you Obama's going to be
around for another term.

Hawke

That is not a sure thing.

Dan

His Chicago style politics has been exceptional, so far. I'd
not want to underestimate his ability to subvert.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


wrote in message
...
On Jul 4, 5:25 pm, Hawke
wrote:

Too bad for you Obama's going to be
around for another term.

Hawke

That is not a sure thing.

Dan

On Jul 4, 4:25*pm, Hawke wrote:
On 7/3/2011 10:28 PM, P. Enis Reynaldo wrote:

http://forum.stratovarius.com/userpi..._shorts1_1.jpg

Now you know why a lot of people were so critical of George Bush. After
seeing how you right wing folks are with your nastiness and overt racism
like you demonstrate here, it's not surprising that people will give you
the same medicine when they can. Lots of us remember the crap you all
heaped on Bill Clinton, his wife and his daughter when he was the
president. It was eight years of relentless criticism from really
snotty, right wing, assholes. So when Bush got in office you got to see
how it what you dish out feels like. Now your team is out of power and
you're back to your old tricks. Too bad for you Obama's going to be
around for another term. You're going to run out of ****ty things to say
and you'll have no choice but to just repeat yourselves endlessly over
and over. Too bad.

Hawke

Well said Hawke.

And right on.

That is why the conservatives just hate your posts.

Keep it up. ;)

TMT

On Jul 4, 6:57*pm, " wrote:
On Jul 4, 5:25*pm, Hawke wrote:

Too bad for you Obama's going to be
around for another term.

Hawke

That is not a sure thing.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dan

No...but it is getting surer and surer with every day.

TMT

On Jul 7, 1:02*pm, Too_Many_Tools wrote:

No...but it is getting surer and surer with every day.

TMT

That is not obvious to me. Take a look at the rasmussen polls.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ..._tracking_poll

Dan

On 2011-07-09, wrote:
On Jul 7, 1:02?pm, Too_Many_Tools wrote:

No...but it is getting surer and surer with every day.

TMT

That is not obvious to me. Take a look at the rasmussen polls.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ..._tracking_poll


Dan, the best predictor I look at is intrade.com. It is a prediction
market where people bet real money on various outcomes.

http://www.intrade.com/v4/markets/co...tractId=743474

Right now Obama victory is traded as if it had a 58% probability.

i

On Jul 8, 10:34*pm, Ignoramus3477
wrote:


Dan, the best predictor I look at is intrade.com. It is a prediction
market where people bet real money on various outcomes.

* * * *http://www.intrade.com/v4/markets/co...tractId=743474

Right now Obama victory is traded as if it had a 58% probability.

i

That is a good place to see what people are predicting, but I do not
see any data that gives trends. The Ramussen site has a graph that
shows how the public changes its opinions Too many Posts said Obama's
chances are improving daily.
I can not see that in the graphs.

Dan

On 2011-07-09, wrote:
On Jul 8, 10:34?pm, Ignoramus3477
wrote:


Dan, the best predictor I look at is intrade.com. It is a prediction
market where people bet real money on various outcomes.

? ? ? ?http://www.intrade.com/v4/markets/co...tractId=743474

Right now Obama victory is traded as if it had a 58% probability.

i

That is a good place to see what people are predicting, but I do not
see any data that gives trends. The Ramussen site has a graph that
shows how the public changes its opinions Too many Posts said Obama's
chances are improving daily.
I can not see that in the graphs.


I do not see it either. I wantch Intrade, and a few months ago the
chances were 59%. Now the market moved to 58%.

i

On 7/7/2011 10:02 AM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
On Jul 4, 4:25 pm, wrote:
On 7/3/2011 10:28 PM, P. Enis Reynaldo wrote:

http://forum.stratovarius.com/userpi..._shorts1_1.jpg

Now you know why a lot of people were so critical of George Bush. After
seeing how you right wing folks are with your nastiness and overt racism
like you demonstrate here, it's not surprising that people will give you
the same medicine when they can. Lots of us remember the crap you all
heaped on Bill Clinton, his wife and his daughter when he was the
president. It was eight years of relentless criticism from really
snotty, right wing, assholes. So when Bush got in office you got to see
how it what you dish out feels like. Now your team is out of power and
you're back to your old tricks. Too bad for you Obama's going to be
around for another term. You're going to run out of ****ty things to say
and you'll have no choice but to just repeat yourselves endlessly over
and over. Too bad.

Hawke

Well said Hawke.

And right on.

That is why the conservatives just hate your posts.

Keep it up. ;)

TMT


Thanks!, and you know why they hate me? It's because the truth hurts. I
give the credit to Truman though. He said it best when he said that he
wasn't giving the republicans hell. He was just telling the truth and
they thought it was hell. I like doing that too. Funny, when I tell the
truth to other Democrats and independents they don't seem to mind it at
all. It's just the republicans who hate it.

Hawke

On 7/8/2011 7:16 PM, wrote:
On Jul 7, 1:02 pm, wrote:

No...but it is getting surer and surer with every day.

TMT

That is not obvious to me. Take a look at the rasmussen polls.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ..._tracking_poll

Dan



Presidential polls taken this far before the election are worth nothing.

Hawke

On Jul 9, 5:53*pm, Hawke wrote:


Presidential polls taken this far before the election are worth nothing.

Hawke

I agree. But you need to be addressing Too Many Posts. He is the one
saying that Obama is getting more likely to be elected everyday.

Dan

On Jul 9, 4:43*pm, Hawke wrote:
On 7/7/2011 10:02 AM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:





On Jul 4, 4:25 pm, *wrote:
On 7/3/2011 10:28 PM, P. Enis Reynaldo wrote:

http://forum.stratovarius.com/userpi..._shorts1_1.jpg

Now you know why a lot of people were so critical of George Bush. After
seeing how you right wing folks are with your nastiness and overt racism
like you demonstrate here, it's not surprising that people will give you
the same medicine when they can. Lots of us remember the crap you all
heaped on Bill Clinton, his wife and his daughter when he was the
president. It was eight years of relentless criticism from really
snotty, right wing, assholes. So when Bush got in office you got to see
how it what you dish out feels like. Now your team is out of power and
you're back to your old tricks. Too bad for you Obama's going to be
around for another term. You're going to run out of ****ty things to say
and you'll have no choice but to just repeat yourselves endlessly over
and over. Too bad.

Hawke

Well said Hawke.

And right on.

That is why the conservatives just hate your posts.

Keep it up. ;)

TMT

Thanks!, and you know why they hate me? It's because the truth hurts. I
give the credit to Truman though. He said it best when he said that he
wasn't giving the republicans hell. He was just telling the truth and
they thought it was hell. I like doing that too. Funny, when I tell the
truth to other Democrats and independents they don't seem to mind it at
all. It's just the republicans who hate it.

Hawke- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The Truth hurts. ;)

TMT

On Jul 9, 7:37*pm, " wrote:
On Jul 9, 5:53*pm, Hawke wrote:



Presidential polls taken this far before the election are worth nothing..

Hawke

I agree. *But you need to be addressing Too Many Posts. *He is the one
saying that Obama is getting more likely to be elected everyday.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *Dan

All trends indicate that Obama wil be reelected.

Trends, not polls, forecast the future.

That is why we have President Obama and no President McCain.

TMT

On 7/9/2011 5:37 PM, wrote:
On Jul 9, 5:53 pm, wrote:


Presidential polls taken this far before the election are worth nothing.

Hawke

I agree. But you need to be addressing Too Many Posts. He is the one
saying that Obama is getting more likely to be elected everyday.

Dan



Looking at the polling at this point in time is of no value. But there
are a lot of other indicators out there that should give you some clues
as to who is going to win in 2012. A lot of indicators do tend to favor
Obama winning again. For one thing, he's a great campaigner. See any of
those on the other side?

Another factor is the disarray in the republican party, the lack of
appeal of any of their candidates to a larger constituency, and that
they are on the wrong side of many issues the American public wants. If
you understand what to look for you will see the odds favor Obama
winning again. It's possible one of the republican candidates could win
but I wouldn't bet on any of them. When it comes down to it every
election is about one candidate against another. Obama is personally
popular, which is a big plus for him. Nobody on the other side is even
really likable. So in this case I have to agree with TMT, Obama will
probably be reelected. I don't get that idea from any of the polls though.

Hawke

On Jul 12, 2:29*am, Hawke wrote:


Looking at the polling at this point in time is of no value. But there
are a lot of other indicators out there that should give you some clues
as to who is going to win in 2012. A lot of indicators do tend to favor
Obama winning again. For one thing, he's a great campaigner. See any of
those on the other side?

So in this case I have to agree with TMT, Obama will
probably be reelected. I don't get that idea from any of the polls though..

Hawke

And then of course there are a lot of indicators that Obama will not
be re elected.
The economy for one thing.

When there is a definite Republican candidate a lot of what you call
disarray will vanish. Right now they are competing with each other to
become the candidate.


Dan

On 7/12/2011 5:12 AM, wrote:
On Jul 12, 2:29 am, wrote:


Looking at the polling at this point in time is of no value. But there
are a lot of other indicators out there that should give you some clues
as to who is going to win in 2012. A lot of indicators do tend to favor
Obama winning again. For one thing, he's a great campaigner. See any of
those on the other side?

So in this case I have to agree with TMT, Obama will
probably be reelected. I don't get that idea from any of the polls though.

Hawke

And then of course there are a lot of indicators that Obama will not
be re elected.
The economy for one thing.

When there is a definite Republican candidate a lot of what you call
disarray will vanish. Right now they are competing with each other to
become the candidate.


Dan


Yes, that's true. But you understand that out of the entire bunch only
two or three of them have any real chance to win the nomination. The
problem is that of the two or three none of them are very good
candidates. Romney has a lot of problems. Pawlenty has no charisma at
all, and Huntsman seems lacking in any fire. So the potential candidates
are not very good. Whoever wins will be going after a president who is a
very good campaigner, and everything else too. So I don't give the
republicans much chance. The only thing that would help is for some kind
of disaster to come along like a double dip recession or some other
unexpected event that hurts Obama. Right now that seems unlikely though.

Hawke

On Jul 13, 2:22*am, Hawke wrote:


So I don't give the
republicans much chance. The only thing that would help is for some kind
of disaster to come along like a double dip recession or some other
unexpected event that hurts Obama. Right now that seems unlikely though.

Hawke

We shall see what happens. I think it is too early to make
predictions.

Dan

On 7/13/2011 4:19 AM, wrote:
On Jul 13, 2:22 am, wrote:


So I don't give the
republicans much chance. The only thing that would help is for some kind
of disaster to come along like a double dip recession or some other
unexpected event that hurts Obama. Right now that seems unlikely though.

Hawke

We shall see what happens. I think it is too early to make
predictions.

Dan



As someone who's been into politics for a very long time, I like to make
predictions before others feel safe to do so. If you think you know more
than others then you ought to be able to predict things ahead of the
pack. My record of predicting who wins presidential elections in the
past has been very good. I am predicting that Obama is reelected. You
can hold me to it.

Hawke

On Jul 13, 6:56*pm, Hawke wrote:



As someone who's been into politics for a very long time, I like to make
predictions before others feel safe to do so. If you think you know more
than others then you ought to be able to predict things ahead of the
pack. My record of predicting who wins presidential elections in the
past has been very good. I am predicting that Obama is reelected. You
can hold me to it.

Hawke

That is nice, but I still think it is too early. What confidence
level do you put on your prediction.

"Statistical measure of the number of times out of 100 that test
results can be expected to be within a specified range. For example, a
confidence level of 95% means that the result of an action will
probably meet expectations 95% of the time. Most analyses of variance
or correlation are described in terms of some level of confidence. See
also chi-square test."

Regardless of what the outcome is, I will not be holding you to it.
Mostly because I do not think you have any significant effect on what
happens.

Dan

wrote in message
...

Regardless of what the outcome is, I will not be holding you to it.
Mostly because I do not think you have any significant effect on what
happens.

And I'm pretty sure that conservative racist nut jobs constantly going on
record as thinking that comparing his wife to a gorilla is somehow humorous
will have any significant effect on what happens, either.

On Jul 13, 10:41*pm, "PrecisionmachinisT"
wrote:

And I'm pretty sure that conservative racist nut jobs constantly going on
record as thinking that comparing his wife to a gorilla is somehow humorous
will have any significant effect on what happens, either.

It may have a slight effect, but not the effect that the racists
want. Things like that make me want to distance myself from the
uncouth.

Dan

On 7/13/2011 4:11 PM, wrote:
On Jul 13, 6:56 pm, wrote:



As someone who's been into politics for a very long time, I like to make
predictions before others feel safe to do so. If you think you know more
than others then you ought to be able to predict things ahead of the
pack. My record of predicting who wins presidential elections in the
past has been very good. I am predicting that Obama is reelected. You
can hold me to it.

Hawke

That is nice, but I still think it is too early. What confidence
level do you put on your prediction.

I wouldn't put a specific number on it because my prediction is not
based on any kind of statistics. It's based on my overall knowledge of
American presidential elections and my education as well as intuition.




"Statistical measure of the number of times out of 100 that test
results can be expected to be within a specified range. For example, a
confidence level of 95% means that the result of an action will
probably meet expectations 95% of the time. Most analyses of variance
or correlation are described in terms of some level of confidence. See
also chi-square test."

It would be arbitrary if I put a degree of confidence number on it but
if I did I'd put it around 90%.



Regardless of what the outcome is, I will not be holding you to it.
Mostly because I do not think you have any significant effect on what
happens.

Obviously my prediction has no effect on any presidential election or
anything else, for that matter. It's just my personal prediction based
on the situation I see right now. That could change in the future if
circumstances change substantially. But I mean you can hold me to it as
far as that is my long term projection. If Obama isn't reelected you can
say I was wrong, or vice versa.

Hawke