Saturday, March 31, 2012
Friday, March 30, 2012
Comparing Body Types to Plants
Apples: Brad Pitt in Troy
Pears: Newt Gingrich
Carrots: All fashion models in Paris, New York, and Milan
Oranges: NJ Gov. Chris Christie
Pears: Newt Gingrich
Carrots: All fashion models in Paris, New York, and Milan
Oranges: NJ Gov. Chris Christie
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Quote of the Day
"Censorship reflects society's lack of confidence in itself. It is a hallmark of an authoritarian regime.” - Former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
How the Democrats will benefit if the health care mandate is struck down
In case people don't know, the Supreme Court is currently deciding on the constitutionality of the health insurance mandate of the Affordable Care Act. Democrats are generally thought to support the mandate's constitutionality and Republicans...the opposite position. Here's why striking down the health care mandate will actually help the Democrats:
In fact, I do think that the Dems will be a lot better off politically if the mandate is shot down. Smart conservatives like Erick Erickson (why would you name your kid this?) of Redstate.com know this.
1. Democratic enthusiasm for 2012 will be up
Nothing galvanizes the party faithful more than a controversial victory by the other side. Democrats will be as enthused as ever to support President Obama, Dem candidates up and down the ballot. This enthusiasm will come in the form of monetary donations, volunteering for campaigns, and voter turnout. Obama wants to capture his 2008 magic again, this is basically the main way that can happen.
2. Republican enthusiasm for 2012 will be down
Given how the economy will be improving. Republicans will have lost 2 of their top 3 issues (no economy, no health care, they will still have gas prices). Without health care to go crazy over and the non-stimulating Mittens Romney at the top of the ticket, conservative activism will not have as much energy as it could have.
Reasons 1 and 2 will not matter IF the Supreme Court hands down its ruling post-election, which it has the right to do.
3. Republicans will own the upcoming health care debacle
Believe me it is a clusterfuck now and it will be megaclusterfuck soon. There is a real problem in this country, too many people don't have health insurance...more and more people are losing health insurance and the cost of healthcare is escalating. 10 years ago, about 70% of people got insurance from their employers...now it's about 60%...yikes...that is not a good trend considering how dependent most people are on employer provided health insurance. Also, according to my medical student friend, most Americans have pretty crappy health insurance and don't realize just how fucked they are if they get really sick. Still, costs are going up and there's no sign of this changing...which can only mean more and more people are going to lose their employer provided health insurance.
With the Democrats turning the ball over with a Supreme Court loss, the GOP will be in charge of this nonsense. Like gas prices and the economy, there is little a government can do to stem this tide. The GOP, likes to entertain the notion of market-based solutions...well...the current situation is what the market came up with... Now, I like to fancy myself as a connoisseur of markets and the current Affordable Care Act is the market-based solution. In fact, this kind of mandate system was advocated by the Republicans of the 90s and by the very conservative Heritage Foundation think tank. This might be the beginning of the path to the public, single-payer health care system of the U.S. Just remember when this happens in 10-20 years...you saw it here first!
Of course this point will be moot if the Supremes vote for the mandate...but it's not looking like it... The bottom line is people need health insurance at some point in their lives and not having it is not a good thing cause you don't when disaster strikes.
Texas has been under Republican stewardship for a while...about 1 in 4 Texans aren't insured... How have the GOP been so successful at keeping people who can't afford health insurance off the rolls???
Here is a quote from David Frum, economic speech writer from W's presidency...the dude's brilliant IMO: Though Republicans are hoping the U.S. Supreme Court declares President Obama's health care law unconstitutional, David Frum points out the GOP has no alternative and says they will be punished for it by voters.
"Republicans will need a Plan B. Unfortunately, they wasted the past three years that might have developed one. If the Supreme Court doesn't rescue them from themselves, they'll be heading into this election season arguing, in effect, Our plan is to take away the government-mandated insurance of millions of people under age 65, and replace it with nothing. And we're doing this so as to better protect the government-mandated insurance of people over 65 -- until we begin to phase out that insurance, too, for everybody now under 55."
The Dems will be off the hook when their plan fails to lower costs substantially.
The current situation reminds me a lot of the 2004 election. George W. Bush won and took ownership over the upcoming clusterfuck that happened in Iraq and in the markets. In case you forgot, the Dems won big time in 2006 and 2008, took ownership over the clusterfuck economy and lost big time in 2010. Politics is about not taking ownership over clusterfucks.
In fact, I do think that the Dems will be a lot better off politically if the mandate is shot down. Smart conservatives like Erick Erickson (why would you name your kid this?) of Redstate.com know this.
1. Democratic enthusiasm for 2012 will be up
Nothing galvanizes the party faithful more than a controversial victory by the other side. Democrats will be as enthused as ever to support President Obama, Dem candidates up and down the ballot. This enthusiasm will come in the form of monetary donations, volunteering for campaigns, and voter turnout. Obama wants to capture his 2008 magic again, this is basically the main way that can happen.
2. Republican enthusiasm for 2012 will be down
Given how the economy will be improving. Republicans will have lost 2 of their top 3 issues (no economy, no health care, they will still have gas prices). Without health care to go crazy over and the non-stimulating Mittens Romney at the top of the ticket, conservative activism will not have as much energy as it could have.
Reasons 1 and 2 will not matter IF the Supreme Court hands down its ruling post-election, which it has the right to do.
3. Republicans will own the upcoming health care debacle
Believe me it is a clusterfuck now and it will be megaclusterfuck soon. There is a real problem in this country, too many people don't have health insurance...more and more people are losing health insurance and the cost of healthcare is escalating. 10 years ago, about 70% of people got insurance from their employers...now it's about 60%...yikes...that is not a good trend considering how dependent most people are on employer provided health insurance. Also, according to my medical student friend, most Americans have pretty crappy health insurance and don't realize just how fucked they are if they get really sick. Still, costs are going up and there's no sign of this changing...which can only mean more and more people are going to lose their employer provided health insurance.
With the Democrats turning the ball over with a Supreme Court loss, the GOP will be in charge of this nonsense. Like gas prices and the economy, there is little a government can do to stem this tide. The GOP, likes to entertain the notion of market-based solutions...well...the current situation is what the market came up with... Now, I like to fancy myself as a connoisseur of markets and the current Affordable Care Act is the market-based solution. In fact, this kind of mandate system was advocated by the Republicans of the 90s and by the very conservative Heritage Foundation think tank. This might be the beginning of the path to the public, single-payer health care system of the U.S. Just remember when this happens in 10-20 years...you saw it here first!
Of course this point will be moot if the Supremes vote for the mandate...but it's not looking like it... The bottom line is people need health insurance at some point in their lives and not having it is not a good thing cause you don't when disaster strikes.
Texas has been under Republican stewardship for a while...about 1 in 4 Texans aren't insured... How have the GOP been so successful at keeping people who can't afford health insurance off the rolls???
Here is a quote from David Frum, economic speech writer from W's presidency...the dude's brilliant IMO: Though Republicans are hoping the U.S. Supreme Court declares President Obama's health care law unconstitutional, David Frum points out the GOP has no alternative and says they will be punished for it by voters.
"Republicans will need a Plan B. Unfortunately, they wasted the past three years that might have developed one. If the Supreme Court doesn't rescue them from themselves, they'll be heading into this election season arguing, in effect, Our plan is to take away the government-mandated insurance of millions of people under age 65, and replace it with nothing. And we're doing this so as to better protect the government-mandated insurance of people over 65 -- until we begin to phase out that insurance, too, for everybody now under 55."
The Dems will be off the hook when their plan fails to lower costs substantially.
The current situation reminds me a lot of the 2004 election. George W. Bush won and took ownership over the upcoming clusterfuck that happened in Iraq and in the markets. In case you forgot, the Dems won big time in 2006 and 2008, took ownership over the clusterfuck economy and lost big time in 2010. Politics is about not taking ownership over clusterfucks.
The Supreme Court and the Health Care Mandate: The World is Decaying Around Us
It's the second day of oral argument in the Supreme Court for Obamacare's health care law. Rumors are swirling that the individual mandate is probably going to be struck down by a partisan 5-4 vote, based on the questions being asked by the justices. After a quick glance at the transcripts, its not looking pretty. Here are some winners and losers.
Winners:
Market Volatility-Today alone, Aetna (one of the most important companies of Obamacare) was at one point, down at least 2%, and has since almost rallied back. The rest of the market has barely moved that much as a whole.
Nut-Job-ery: The system works for nut-jobery!!!
Losers:
Sensibility-Partisanship will be as sharp as ever. Fights over judicial nominees will go from Threat Level Orange to Threat Level Caliente Red. No judges will ever be confirmed to the federal bench again (sarcasm...but hopefully you get the point). Every judicial nominee will be labelled as too extreme.
Aetna-During today's market trading, Aetna went down by over 2%. However, it rallied once speculators and people who don't think the mandate will be struck down got into the action.
The Concept of Insurance-So the mandate is to help insurances have healthy people paying in to the risk pool. Without this, people can just get insurance when they get sick since health insurance cannot be denied because of pre-existing conditions...which is really bad for insurance. Bad things really will happen if the coverage stays and the mandate goes.
"In the rich state of Texas, 27.6% of the population are without health care. Why isn't that number higher?"
Winners:
Market Volatility-Today alone, Aetna (one of the most important companies of Obamacare) was at one point, down at least 2%, and has since almost rallied back. The rest of the market has barely moved that much as a whole.
Nut-Job-ery: The system works for nut-jobery!!!
Losers:
Sensibility-Partisanship will be as sharp as ever. Fights over judicial nominees will go from Threat Level Orange to Threat Level Caliente Red. No judges will ever be confirmed to the federal bench again (sarcasm...but hopefully you get the point). Every judicial nominee will be labelled as too extreme.
Aetna-During today's market trading, Aetna went down by over 2%. However, it rallied once speculators and people who don't think the mandate will be struck down got into the action.
The Concept of Insurance-So the mandate is to help insurances have healthy people paying in to the risk pool. Without this, people can just get insurance when they get sick since health insurance cannot be denied because of pre-existing conditions...which is really bad for insurance. Bad things really will happen if the coverage stays and the mandate goes.
"In the rich state of Texas, 27.6% of the population are without health care. Why isn't that number higher?"
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Moral Hazard and the Mortgage Crisis: A good sounding argument that is really dumb
There is a popular notion that we should do nothing to help out underwater mortgage holders. The theory being that these people knew what they were doing and have to suffer the consequences of their choices. This moral hazard argument suggests that if we do anything to help out underwater mortgage holders, then people will act badly in the future, thinking that they would just get bailed out too.
Here are some holes in that argument for the current mortgage crisis:
1. With more foreclosures, there will be a massive decrease in home values, the whole neighborhood will go downhill. You will have a lot of people moving back in with their parents or moving in with siblings or friends. You will also have lots of empty homes. This is bad since you'll be punishing people who did everything right.
2. No one in their right minds will have a strategic default (meaning purposeful default). After a default, a person is shut out of the credit market (no credit cards, no car loans, no mortgages) for 10 years. After 10 years, they'll be high risk and have to pay far higher interest rates. Can you imagine how crappy that would be?
3. With little hope of keeping their homes, homeowners will not take care of repairs nor keep the home in good condition. Banks know this and they know that they want to keep people in their homes. The only people who don't give a crap are Mitt Romney, Rick Santelli (the Chicago Merchantile Exchange guy on CNBC), and self-interested speculators (me?).
Only one solution works effectively: principal reduction. When the farm states were having their own mortgage crisis in the late 1990s, the banks reduced principal on the farmers' mortgages and a greater crisis was averted. This idea is highly unpopular with powerful, financial interests because it reduces the potential money that they will be paid back. However, principal reduction increases the chances that the homeowner would be able to afford the mortgage.
Banks should view the current crisis as viewing underwater mortgages as companies in distress. In these situations, companies and banks would negotiate terms to best increase the odds of the company surviving and paying, at least a portion, of the loans owed.
Here are some holes in that argument for the current mortgage crisis:
1. With more foreclosures, there will be a massive decrease in home values, the whole neighborhood will go downhill. You will have a lot of people moving back in with their parents or moving in with siblings or friends. You will also have lots of empty homes. This is bad since you'll be punishing people who did everything right.
2. No one in their right minds will have a strategic default (meaning purposeful default). After a default, a person is shut out of the credit market (no credit cards, no car loans, no mortgages) for 10 years. After 10 years, they'll be high risk and have to pay far higher interest rates. Can you imagine how crappy that would be?
3. With little hope of keeping their homes, homeowners will not take care of repairs nor keep the home in good condition. Banks know this and they know that they want to keep people in their homes. The only people who don't give a crap are Mitt Romney, Rick Santelli (the Chicago Merchantile Exchange guy on CNBC), and self-interested speculators (me?).
Only one solution works effectively: principal reduction. When the farm states were having their own mortgage crisis in the late 1990s, the banks reduced principal on the farmers' mortgages and a greater crisis was averted. This idea is highly unpopular with powerful, financial interests because it reduces the potential money that they will be paid back. However, principal reduction increases the chances that the homeowner would be able to afford the mortgage.
Banks should view the current crisis as viewing underwater mortgages as companies in distress. In these situations, companies and banks would negotiate terms to best increase the odds of the company surviving and paying, at least a portion, of the loans owed.
Monday, March 26, 2012
GOP Primary: The Catholic Vote
Santorum is widely known as the Catholic candidate and if you listen to all the useless pundits on TV...they all say that Catholics will definitely vote for Santorum. However, Romney has won the Catholic vote. This would seem so counter-intuitive. After all...all of the Catholic bishops and cardinals seem to hate contraception, gays, and abortions in any circumstances. Plus, Santorum shares all of those views and Romney pretty much doesn't. Catholics who vote in the GOP primary also tend to be more socially conservative than Catholics in general... So...what gives?
That's because the "conservative" Catholics are just Catholic, not Catholic Catholic. Not that many Catholic people share the same viewpoints as the bishops and cardinals. Surprised?...don't be... People who don't get laid (Catholic bishops and cardinals) tend to go crazy.
That's because the "conservative" Catholics are just Catholic, not Catholic Catholic. Not that many Catholic people share the same viewpoints as the bishops and cardinals. Surprised?...don't be... People who don't get laid (Catholic bishops and cardinals) tend to go crazy.
Sunday, March 25, 2012
Saturday, March 24, 2012
Party Primaries: A Source of Polarization and a Potential Solution
Ever wonder why everyone is such a nutjob in Congress? It is because of the party primary system. Most seats in the House and in the Senate are pretty safe for either the Democratic or the Republican primary. This usually means the action is at the primary election stage where the parties are trying to pick their nominees.
Primary elections are low voter turnout where only the most nut-jobish, angry people vote. For example, as a normal person, I've voted in 5 general elections and 0 primaries. This is where the most-left leaning and most-right leaning people get their chance to ruin the country. Usually, to win the nomination, candidates have to say crazy things...like...the Voting Rights Act is unconstitutional...notice all the mega-right wing stuff Mittens has to say. With all this Tea party nonsense, the real action now is in the primary and not the general election which means that the most extreme candidates are often the candidates for the general election. Then they become our elected officials are go crazy and think that everything is the end of the world.
Here are some examples of how dumb people are who go crazy in these primary elections.
On the right: There are lots of people who don't think that dollars aren't legal tender...wtf do you want to be paid in? beaver pelts?
On the left: the state attorney general couldn't get rid of the nuclear power plant in our state because there is a federal law allowing that power plant (which pre-empts state action for you non-law people)...therefore, he sucks and we should get rid of him.
The Republicans are getting pretty good at this nonsense. They selected "witch-lady" Christine O'Donnell over the far more electable Mike Castle for the 2010 DE Senate Race. They unseated conservative Utah Senator Bob Bennett because he wasn't super mega-conservative enough. Now they are trying to get rid of Sens. Orrin Hatch and Dick Lugar for not punching Obama in the face or something... They also lost NY-25 this way...because the second most conservative member of the NY legislature as their congressional nominee was not conservative enough. So...pretty much to win a Republican primary...you have to think that women have to stay virgins until marriage, poor people should just die, immigrants should get the fuck out, and the world is flat. (I'm exaggerating...or am I?)
The Democrats are not as good at it so far, but I believe they'll get there. ObamaGirl is now out of love with Obama because he isn't socialist enough or something. Here is a Dem example of trying to do this ideological purity BS...in IL-10 an upper middle class 60%+ Obama District, a 25-year-old guy whose only experience is working for MoveOn.org (a nutjob left-wing organization) ran against a rich, pragmatic business consultant in the Democratic primary. The 25-year old lost! showing that sanity is not dead in the Democratic Party. To win a Democratic primary you have to think that all corporations are evil, all brown people are good and decent (most are but some aren't), everyone is being victimized all the time, all corporations, banks, and rich people are super evil.
Remember when I said the Dems are not as good at it...I lied...the most left-wing Dems voted for fucking Ralph Nader in 2000, handing the election to Bush. Al Gore would've paid off the deficit, protected the environment, not had a wasteful Iraq War...you idiots...(as you can see, I'm a huge Al Gore fan) Gore lost in Florida by about 537 votes. Nader won 97k votes in Florida...
We're totally fucked.
The potential solution is the "top-2 primary" which throws all the candidates, regardless of party onto the same ballot, with the top 2 vote-getters moving on to the general election. Theoretically, this gives more moderate candidates a chance since the whole, wide electorate gets the chance to vote for any of the candidates.
Here are the pitfalls of the top-2 primary system:
1. It destroys 3rd parties from getting attention. This might not be a bad thing (see my Al Gore example). Also, its not like 3rd parties were getting attention anyways.
2. Theoretically, this could happen...lets say that there is a district that is 60% Dem 40% GOP. The candidates could split the vote in the following way.
R1-20%
R2-20%
D1-10%
D2-10%
D3-10%
D4-10%
D5-10%
D6-10%
In this situation, the two Republicans would move on to the general election even though its a 60% Dem district. This is only theoretical, I have yet to find an example where this actually happened.
Primary elections are low voter turnout where only the most nut-jobish, angry people vote. For example, as a normal person, I've voted in 5 general elections and 0 primaries. This is where the most-left leaning and most-right leaning people get their chance to ruin the country. Usually, to win the nomination, candidates have to say crazy things...like...the Voting Rights Act is unconstitutional...notice all the mega-right wing stuff Mittens has to say. With all this Tea party nonsense, the real action now is in the primary and not the general election which means that the most extreme candidates are often the candidates for the general election. Then they become our elected officials are go crazy and think that everything is the end of the world.
Here are some examples of how dumb people are who go crazy in these primary elections.
On the right: There are lots of people who don't think that dollars aren't legal tender...wtf do you want to be paid in? beaver pelts?
On the left: the state attorney general couldn't get rid of the nuclear power plant in our state because there is a federal law allowing that power plant (which pre-empts state action for you non-law people)...therefore, he sucks and we should get rid of him.
The Republicans are getting pretty good at this nonsense. They selected "witch-lady" Christine O'Donnell over the far more electable Mike Castle for the 2010 DE Senate Race. They unseated conservative Utah Senator Bob Bennett because he wasn't super mega-conservative enough. Now they are trying to get rid of Sens. Orrin Hatch and Dick Lugar for not punching Obama in the face or something... They also lost NY-25 this way...because the second most conservative member of the NY legislature as their congressional nominee was not conservative enough. So...pretty much to win a Republican primary...you have to think that women have to stay virgins until marriage, poor people should just die, immigrants should get the fuck out, and the world is flat. (I'm exaggerating...or am I?)
The Democrats are not as good at it so far, but I believe they'll get there. ObamaGirl is now out of love with Obama because he isn't socialist enough or something. Here is a Dem example of trying to do this ideological purity BS...in IL-10 an upper middle class 60%+ Obama District, a 25-year-old guy whose only experience is working for MoveOn.org (a nutjob left-wing organization) ran against a rich, pragmatic business consultant in the Democratic primary. The 25-year old lost! showing that sanity is not dead in the Democratic Party. To win a Democratic primary you have to think that all corporations are evil, all brown people are good and decent (most are but some aren't), everyone is being victimized all the time, all corporations, banks, and rich people are super evil.
Remember when I said the Dems are not as good at it...I lied...the most left-wing Dems voted for fucking Ralph Nader in 2000, handing the election to Bush. Al Gore would've paid off the deficit, protected the environment, not had a wasteful Iraq War...you idiots...(as you can see, I'm a huge Al Gore fan) Gore lost in Florida by about 537 votes. Nader won 97k votes in Florida...
We're totally fucked.
The potential solution is the "top-2 primary" which throws all the candidates, regardless of party onto the same ballot, with the top 2 vote-getters moving on to the general election. Theoretically, this gives more moderate candidates a chance since the whole, wide electorate gets the chance to vote for any of the candidates.
Here are the pitfalls of the top-2 primary system:
1. It destroys 3rd parties from getting attention. This might not be a bad thing (see my Al Gore example). Also, its not like 3rd parties were getting attention anyways.
2. Theoretically, this could happen...lets say that there is a district that is 60% Dem 40% GOP. The candidates could split the vote in the following way.
R1-20%
R2-20%
D1-10%
D2-10%
D3-10%
D4-10%
D5-10%
D6-10%
In this situation, the two Republicans would move on to the general election even though its a 60% Dem district. This is only theoretical, I have yet to find an example where this actually happened.
Friday, March 23, 2012
Obama v. Romney: It will be close, but not that close
Despite Mitt's new aura of inevitability, his candidacy has been remarkably inept. He is having a lot of trouble beating horrendous rivals. His rivals are all super-flawed and have no money. Let's examine his rivals:
1. Rick Santorum: This guy is really dumb and runs a pretty amateur campaign. He's had trouble qualifying for ballots and making the most of his opportunities to get delegates. This shows incredibly bad oversight by his legal team and general lack of any sort of campaign organization. The guy talks about porn, speaking English, and contraception. Those are losing issues. First off, pretty much everyone is, at least secretly, pro-porn and pro-contraception. Secondly, the vast majority of voters speak English and have no problems with the language. Watching this guy's campaign is like watching Tim Tebow throw the ball. Sometimes its surprisingly impressive, most of the time you're left thinking...WTF???
2. Newt Gingrich: This guy has done a lot of cheating on his spouses. He thinks that his current wife, Callista, will help his image out. However, Callista was "the other woman" for 6 years. Do you think married women are going to trust someone who was be the woman that a husband cheated with for 6 years? Secondly, this guy has a lot of issues and has only one donor...Sheldon Adelson.
3. Ron Paul: The dude doesn't talk about popular issues. While his point of view has intellectual consistency, a value most of us crave, they are an example of logic gone wild. I mean, who is against Secret Service protection.
You might say...but Mitt is a moderate who is having trouble connecting with the increasingly conservative GOP electorate. However, Mitt was easily considered a conservative in 2008. Don't believe me, take a look at all of the county-based election maps. John McCain took all of the moderate counties while Mitt and Mike Huckabee split the conservative ones. For example, 2008 Mitt Romney won all of those conservative counties in Florida that 2012 Newt Gingrich won. Mitt has been the conservative candidate before and has no one to blame but his own messaging team this time around for his troubles with very conservative voters. Mitt is not having trouble with conservatives because of his "moderate" views, it's because of his bad image control in a primary where he's outspending all of his rivals combined by many multiples.
The fact that Mitt is having so much trouble dispatching this band of misfits is troubling at best for the Romney campaign.
Here are some of the other reasons Romney will have trouble with Obama (these are purely process-oriented reasons, as opposed to substance-based reasons):
1. He lacks a wide fundraising base. Only 10% of his money has come from donors donating less than $200 (compared with 40%+ for Obama, Santorum, Gingrich, and Paul). There are only so many wealthy people out there wanted to cut Romney's SuperPAC a check for $50k. His campaign and his SuperPAC have also been cash-flow negative for the past 2 months.
2. People "like" Mitt Romney (including both of my lovely office mates...at my work...they are both great people...I swear). But no one "loves" Mitt. Despite the difficulties of his first term, there are a lot of people who "love" Obama. That love manifests itself in a lot of ways which help campaigns win close elections such as campaign volunteering, door to door canvassing, driving old ladies to the polling place, phone banking, and voter turnout in general.
3. There is a lot of doubt over Romney's sincerity. He seems to have changed his views on about every divisive issue and the dog story isn't helping.
4. Mitt is like a crappy NFL team like the Cleveland Browns playing against Div. III college football programs. Obama is more like the Denver Broncos with Peyton Manning. Mitt having trouble with such weak competition doesn't bode well for the main event.
1. Rick Santorum: This guy is really dumb and runs a pretty amateur campaign. He's had trouble qualifying for ballots and making the most of his opportunities to get delegates. This shows incredibly bad oversight by his legal team and general lack of any sort of campaign organization. The guy talks about porn, speaking English, and contraception. Those are losing issues. First off, pretty much everyone is, at least secretly, pro-porn and pro-contraception. Secondly, the vast majority of voters speak English and have no problems with the language. Watching this guy's campaign is like watching Tim Tebow throw the ball. Sometimes its surprisingly impressive, most of the time you're left thinking...WTF???
2. Newt Gingrich: This guy has done a lot of cheating on his spouses. He thinks that his current wife, Callista, will help his image out. However, Callista was "the other woman" for 6 years. Do you think married women are going to trust someone who was be the woman that a husband cheated with for 6 years? Secondly, this guy has a lot of issues and has only one donor...Sheldon Adelson.
3. Ron Paul: The dude doesn't talk about popular issues. While his point of view has intellectual consistency, a value most of us crave, they are an example of logic gone wild. I mean, who is against Secret Service protection.
You might say...but Mitt is a moderate who is having trouble connecting with the increasingly conservative GOP electorate. However, Mitt was easily considered a conservative in 2008. Don't believe me, take a look at all of the county-based election maps. John McCain took all of the moderate counties while Mitt and Mike Huckabee split the conservative ones. For example, 2008 Mitt Romney won all of those conservative counties in Florida that 2012 Newt Gingrich won. Mitt has been the conservative candidate before and has no one to blame but his own messaging team this time around for his troubles with very conservative voters. Mitt is not having trouble with conservatives because of his "moderate" views, it's because of his bad image control in a primary where he's outspending all of his rivals combined by many multiples.
The fact that Mitt is having so much trouble dispatching this band of misfits is troubling at best for the Romney campaign.
Here are some of the other reasons Romney will have trouble with Obama (these are purely process-oriented reasons, as opposed to substance-based reasons):
1. He lacks a wide fundraising base. Only 10% of his money has come from donors donating less than $200 (compared with 40%+ for Obama, Santorum, Gingrich, and Paul). There are only so many wealthy people out there wanted to cut Romney's SuperPAC a check for $50k. His campaign and his SuperPAC have also been cash-flow negative for the past 2 months.
2. People "like" Mitt Romney (including both of my lovely office mates...at my work...they are both great people...I swear). But no one "loves" Mitt. Despite the difficulties of his first term, there are a lot of people who "love" Obama. That love manifests itself in a lot of ways which help campaigns win close elections such as campaign volunteering, door to door canvassing, driving old ladies to the polling place, phone banking, and voter turnout in general.
3. There is a lot of doubt over Romney's sincerity. He seems to have changed his views on about every divisive issue and the dog story isn't helping.
4. Mitt is like a crappy NFL team like the Cleveland Browns playing against Div. III college football programs. Obama is more like the Denver Broncos with Peyton Manning. Mitt having trouble with such weak competition doesn't bode well for the main event.
Some Funny Pictures
I wonder what Obama and Sarkozy are looking at...
What they were thinking (from left to right):
Japanese Prime Minister Taro Aso: "Those are some fun looking papers"
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper: "I'm too oblivious to what's going on"
American President Barack Obama: "Stopping looking Sarkozy"
French President Nicolas Sarkozy: "Look at that ass"
Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi: "I'm looking, it looks nice"
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev: "Where am I again?"
Song of the Day
I really like the One Direction sound. They are way too touchy, feely with each other.
Thursday, March 22, 2012
A Curious Post About Capitalism
Recently, I read a very fascinating blog post about capitalism. This author broke down the functions of capitalism as follows:
Capital formation is important to generate assets to get profits, either through Production or Extraction. Think of this step as setting up the system for producing an in-demand good or service. The best jobs (or at least the best paying ones) in capitalism are usually in capital formation. These jobs tend to present a lot of variation and intellectual vigor which many of us want.
Productive capital formation is about R&D, innovation, bright ideas, making what previously didn’t exist or wasn’t possible. Productive capital is seen as a beacon of hope and progress for humanity, and great store is set by it wittingly or unwittingly. The best economies should have a society's smartest citizens in productive capital formation. America has so many smart people working in these capacities and continuously attracts smart immigrants to instill vigor into our economy. Generally, politicians refer to productive capital formation when they speak about how great capitalism is. This is the positive story of capitalism since productive capital formation leads to superior goods and services, which can lead to a dominant market position (ex: Apple and the iPod).
Extraction capital formation is the use of law, finance, asymmetric bargaining position, and government corruption to gain an advantage over the rest of the market. This is the ugly sister of productive capital formation. All the obscene money is made in extractive capital formation (aka Wall Street bonuses for guys who just push money around). Don't get me wrong, as individuals, we would all want to be on the dominant side of extraction capital formation. Everyone (every company) professes love of openness and competition, but seeks extractive rights and market distortion. A good example of this is the American Airlines government-provided windfall in mid to late 20th century. American Airlines, whose main hub is the Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport, got the federal government to ban a bunch of flights from Love Airport, where their weaker competitor Southwest Airlines had operations. Another example is...musician=productive capital formation; record label that sues copyright infringers=extraction capital formation. Let me emphasize that while some extraction capital formation practices are evil, many are not. Extraction capital formation is a necessary step in functional capitalism.
Production is boring. When you think of production...think of being in an assembly line or picking vegetables for 12 hours a day or doing people's nails for a job. It is generally very low paying and not that much fun. Marxist schools of thought have yielded an excellent analysis of production, almost 200 years ago. Human labor is alienated and subjugated to competitively-driven cost minimization. The root cause is the separation of personal, inner productive capital from labor as the artisan economy gave way to the industrial. Their solution has been to re-apportion the means of production to the people. But here’s the problem: Production is boring. Everyone feels for the proletariat, but no-one wants to be the proletariat (cause it really sucks).
Communist attempts to regulate the relations of production, despite good intentions, have been on the whole backward – denying or fighting the separation of production from productive capital, the reduced need for and correspondingly fading status of labor, and the creative destruction needed to move to more modern forms of economy better fitting the aspirations and wishes of people as both consumers and professionals. Trade unions are a case in point. A union holds an extractive right, a quasi-formal monopoly over a specific domain of production. As such, it conflicts with efficiency.
Left wing politics should not advocate for this kind of backwards thinking. I will definitely be an evil, conservative Republican if the Democrats are ever this stupid. Current left-wing ideology focuses on how we should give production a bigger piece of the pie. This is a super losing argument. I am thinking about being evil, conservative Republican since a lot of Democrats focus on this. In lieu of this retardedness, the Left should advocate for workers and the poor to own a piece of capital. This is will be least distortive to the economy and give some semblance of a rising tide lifting all boats.
You might also be asking, why do we care so much about manufacturing if it just provides boring jobs that no one wants to do? Well, cause its relatively low skill and doesn't require much education. It provides jobs to the masses, who are otherwise unqualified to do the cool capital formation jobs.
- Capital formation:In capital formation the firm consumes financial assets (usually cash) and builds real assets that it will later use for production or extraction. Capital formation thus takes two forms:
- Productive capital formation, such as technical innovation, the building of customer relationships and goodwill, channels to market, facilities or machinery, organizational and human capital. (i.e. computer programmers, fashion design, genetic research)
- Extractive capital formation, such as the
acquisition of monopoly licenses or exclusivities, financial muscle,
commodity stocks, control over suppliers or distributors, land, and all
IP assets. (i.e. investment banking, finance, patent attorneys, government corruption)
- Production: Production is what an industrial, agricultural, or service firm does. Resources come in, labor and and devices are applied, and goods or services come out. The goal of production is to sell the goods or services at a profit, while minimizing the share paid to suppliers and labor, and the running cost of devices. (i.e. factory workers, fruit pickers, fishermen)
- Extraction: Extraction is what a landlord, bank, media company, utility, mining company, or retailer does. These firms have a productive function, but their dominant mode of business is to extract rents from assets that they own, while rationing those assets so as to command the maximum price.
Capital formation is important to generate assets to get profits, either through Production or Extraction. Think of this step as setting up the system for producing an in-demand good or service. The best jobs (or at least the best paying ones) in capitalism are usually in capital formation. These jobs tend to present a lot of variation and intellectual vigor which many of us want.
Productive capital formation is about R&D, innovation, bright ideas, making what previously didn’t exist or wasn’t possible. Productive capital is seen as a beacon of hope and progress for humanity, and great store is set by it wittingly or unwittingly. The best economies should have a society's smartest citizens in productive capital formation. America has so many smart people working in these capacities and continuously attracts smart immigrants to instill vigor into our economy. Generally, politicians refer to productive capital formation when they speak about how great capitalism is. This is the positive story of capitalism since productive capital formation leads to superior goods and services, which can lead to a dominant market position (ex: Apple and the iPod).
Extraction capital formation is the use of law, finance, asymmetric bargaining position, and government corruption to gain an advantage over the rest of the market. This is the ugly sister of productive capital formation. All the obscene money is made in extractive capital formation (aka Wall Street bonuses for guys who just push money around). Don't get me wrong, as individuals, we would all want to be on the dominant side of extraction capital formation. Everyone (every company) professes love of openness and competition, but seeks extractive rights and market distortion. A good example of this is the American Airlines government-provided windfall in mid to late 20th century. American Airlines, whose main hub is the Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport, got the federal government to ban a bunch of flights from Love Airport, where their weaker competitor Southwest Airlines had operations. Another example is...musician=productive capital formation; record label that sues copyright infringers=extraction capital formation. Let me emphasize that while some extraction capital formation practices are evil, many are not. Extraction capital formation is a necessary step in functional capitalism.
Production is boring. When you think of production...think of being in an assembly line or picking vegetables for 12 hours a day or doing people's nails for a job. It is generally very low paying and not that much fun. Marxist schools of thought have yielded an excellent analysis of production, almost 200 years ago. Human labor is alienated and subjugated to competitively-driven cost minimization. The root cause is the separation of personal, inner productive capital from labor as the artisan economy gave way to the industrial. Their solution has been to re-apportion the means of production to the people. But here’s the problem: Production is boring. Everyone feels for the proletariat, but no-one wants to be the proletariat (cause it really sucks).
Communist attempts to regulate the relations of production, despite good intentions, have been on the whole backward – denying or fighting the separation of production from productive capital, the reduced need for and correspondingly fading status of labor, and the creative destruction needed to move to more modern forms of economy better fitting the aspirations and wishes of people as both consumers and professionals. Trade unions are a case in point. A union holds an extractive right, a quasi-formal monopoly over a specific domain of production. As such, it conflicts with efficiency.
Left wing politics should not advocate for this kind of backwards thinking. I will definitely be an evil, conservative Republican if the Democrats are ever this stupid. Current left-wing ideology focuses on how we should give production a bigger piece of the pie. This is a super losing argument. I am thinking about being evil, conservative Republican since a lot of Democrats focus on this. In lieu of this retardedness, the Left should advocate for workers and the poor to own a piece of capital. This is will be least distortive to the economy and give some semblance of a rising tide lifting all boats.
You might also be asking, why do we care so much about manufacturing if it just provides boring jobs that no one wants to do? Well, cause its relatively low skill and doesn't require much education. It provides jobs to the masses, who are otherwise unqualified to do the cool capital formation jobs.
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Song of the Day
Here's is an amateur video about Jeremy Lin. It's super catchy.
Linsanity has come and gone, showing the fickle nature of public support. It is important to remember that this is only the first season in which Lin has had significant playing time and that the Knicks play horrible D, especially against the 3. The Knicks need to gel more as a team. Carmelo is not on the same level as Kobe, D-Wade, or Lebron. If the Knicks are going to be better, Carmelo needs to step up. Also, Amare takes too many long jumpers...he needs to rediscover his post game.
Linsanity has come and gone, showing the fickle nature of public support. It is important to remember that this is only the first season in which Lin has had significant playing time and that the Knicks play horrible D, especially against the 3. The Knicks need to gel more as a team. Carmelo is not on the same level as Kobe, D-Wade, or Lebron. If the Knicks are going to be better, Carmelo needs to step up. Also, Amare takes too many long jumpers...he needs to rediscover his post game.
Why Good People Disagree on Politics and Religion?
People can't even agree on the facts and are seemingly super divided. Every time politics comes up, people generally become further entrenched in their own views. It's important to note both liberals and conservatives are generally good people (or at least mostly not evil) and not Hitler. Most people are not crazy. Unfortunately, the political class on both sides on the national and state levels fully realize that playing polarizing "us versus them" politics is very profitable. Therefore, there is very little incentive to change the current way of doing business (aka good v. evil, let's take every opportunity to demonize and humiliate the other side). Since people can usually be herded like sheep by the higher ups, the behavior of the political class is very influential on the masses.
One way of thinking about how good people can disagree on Politics and Religion is to note that there are 2 competing narratives that good, reasonable people can generally believe in.
One way of thinking about how good people can disagree on Politics and Religion is to note that there are 2 competing narratives that good, reasonable people can generally believe in.
Romney wins Illinois
Romney has taken control of the GOP race again. He has an insurmountable delegate lead and is definitely the overwhelming favorite to win the GOP nod. Don't expect an easy road ahead though. Romney may still lose some states to Santorum in the South and Midwest such as Louisiana, Wisconsin, and Kentucky. However, the biggest states remaining are out West (CA) and in the Northeast (NY, NJ), Romney's strongest areas.
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Quote of the Day
You know you are running a shady business if it suffers when your customers start making more intelligent decisions.
Market Test for the Importance of the Individual Mandate
The U.S. Supreme Court is set to rule soon on the constitutionality of the individual mandate for health insurance from the Affordable Care Act. The act is part of the effort to get everyone on health insurance (including 29% of Texas...that's a really high percentage...how embarrassing for a rich state). The individual mandate is a pro-health insurance provision that encourages all people to basically pay into the health insurance system so that the system can insurance more sickly people without too much of a hit to profit margins. Those who do not have health insurance have to pay a small tax penalty.
How will you know if the individual mandate is important to health insurance companies?
How will you know if the individual mandate is important to health insurance companies?
Monday, March 19, 2012
A Unique Marriage Proposal at a Sporting Event
It was like any typical hockey game. During the second intermission (like halftime), a couple was brought out to center ice and one person proposed to the other...she said yes.
So what was unique about this? Well, the person who proposed was a woman, not a dude.
Granted this was in Canada. But its not like everyone in Canada supports gay marriage.
Afterwards, Ottawa collapsed into hell and the liberal media covered it up.
So what was unique about this? Well, the person who proposed was a woman, not a dude.
Granted this was in Canada. But its not like everyone in Canada supports gay marriage.
Afterwards, Ottawa collapsed into hell and the liberal media covered it up.
A Really Funny Video
At least this guy's wife has her looks going for her.
Also, click "like" at the bottom if you think this is real, click "dislike" at the bottom if you think this is fake.
Potential Romney-Paul Conspiracy
If Romney gets close to 1144 but not quite there, look for a potential deal with Ron Paul...assuming that Romney's and Paul's delegates add up to over 1144. Paul hasn't spent that much time attacking Romney in the debates, so I assume that their relationship isn't toxic.
Paul could pledge his delegates to Romney to push Romney over the top. Here are some possible things Ron Paul can ask for return: deep spending cuts that lead to a balanced budget; the restoration of civil liberties; a commitment to reclaim the legislative branch's right to declare war, which it abdicated to the executive branch in recent decades; and reforms that shore up the U.S. monetary system, such an audit of the Federal Reserve or competing-currency legislation.
Paul might also be enticed by the prospect of serving as a presidential adviser, a Cabinet position for someone in his orbit or 'perhaps a vice presidency.' Not for himself, but rather his son (how thoughtful). Rand Paul, the junior senator from Kentucky and a Tea Party icon, is expected to launch his own White House bid in 2016. Being on the ticket now - or even being mentioned for it - would be a helpful step.
Paul could pledge his delegates to Romney to push Romney over the top. Here are some possible things Ron Paul can ask for return: deep spending cuts that lead to a balanced budget; the restoration of civil liberties; a commitment to reclaim the legislative branch's right to declare war, which it abdicated to the executive branch in recent decades; and reforms that shore up the U.S. monetary system, such an audit of the Federal Reserve or competing-currency legislation.
Paul might also be enticed by the prospect of serving as a presidential adviser, a Cabinet position for someone in his orbit or 'perhaps a vice presidency.' Not for himself, but rather his son (how thoughtful). Rand Paul, the junior senator from Kentucky and a Tea Party icon, is expected to launch his own White House bid in 2016. Being on the ticket now - or even being mentioned for it - would be a helpful step.
Sunday, March 18, 2012
The Beginning of the End for Rick Santorum
Today is the moment...Curious Capitalist is predicting that it's all downhill from here on out for Rick Santorum.
Romney Wins Puerto Rico
Mittens will get about 80% of the vote there. Because Mitt gets over 50%, he gets all of the delegates. Why did Rick waste 2 days campaigning there??? Reason...cause he's stupid.
The former Goldman banker who criticized the firm is NOT an Executive
Recently, a vice president quit his job at Goldman Sachs' London Office. In doing so, he wrote a very scathing criticism over the bank's more dubious practices.
The main stream media has labeled him as a Goldman Sachs executive. Even though his title is vice president, he is not an executive. Over 12,000 employees at Goldman Sachs has the title of vice president; there are definitely NOT 12,000+ executives at Goldman Sachs. "Vice President" is just a fancy title to make people feel special.
The main stream media has labeled him as a Goldman Sachs executive. Even though his title is vice president, he is not an executive. Over 12,000 employees at Goldman Sachs has the title of vice president; there are definitely NOT 12,000+ executives at Goldman Sachs. "Vice President" is just a fancy title to make people feel special.
Song of the Day
Let's do some market analysis:
Justin Bieber is the obvious loser from this band. The tween/teenage girl population can only handle so much. Also, Bieber's post-puberty voice is noticeable less attractive. Bieber fever has already peaked.
Let's do some stupid (probably wrong) political analysis of this song:
Let me first emphasize that these people are British, which gives them a lot of excuses. There are a lot of elements of the radical homosexual/metrosexual agenda here. There's the clothing, body types, hair cuts, the presence of a dog, general body language, the ironic dance moves, the various silly activities, and the high tenor voices. Pat Buchanan would probably freak out that our children are being indoctrinated with this agenda. This band is apparently going to be super popular in the states.
They also do acoustic.
Saturday, March 17, 2012
Financial Investment: A Interesting Idea if the GOP wins
If the GOP wins in 2012, look for weakening of the Affordable Care Act, dismantling of Medicare as we know it, and decreased funding for Medicaid. So how can you take advantage of these sucker punches to people who aren't me (aka the old, sickly, and poor)?
Weakening of the Affordable Care Act
Weakening of the Affordable Care Act
- Go long on health insurance stocks WellPoint (WLP), Coventry Health Care (CVH), UnitedHealth Group (UNH), Aetna (AET), CIGNA (CI) and Health Net (HNT)
- These are Humana (HUM), HealthSpring (HS), Universal American (UAM) and WellCare (WCG)
- Those who provide Medicaid will lose out on business, like AMERIGROUP (AGP)
Other than being famous, being President sucks, Why?
You get blamed for sh*t you can't control. Here are two impediments to the Obama re-election:
(1) Gas prices: They are going up because of (1) investor uncertainty over Middle East violence (aka Iran, Israel) and (2) the shutdowns of unprofitable refineries that result in increased refining profit margins and higher gas prices at the pump in relation to oil prices. What is the President supposed to be doing about this? Well, for item (1) he can try to calm everyone the fuck down...but that's super impossible... For item (2), he can turn our government socialist and commandeer the oil refineries and either force them not to be shut down or have the government run them. That will be very bad for the market since it will introduce further threat of nationalization of industries and bring more uncertainty to the market.
(2) The crumbling situation in Afghanistan. With the Quran burning, the grenade in the base, the US Sergent going rogue, and the mounting casualties with no end in sight, the situation is not looking good.
But...you can take credit for things you didn't do...
(1) Gas prices: They are going up because of (1) investor uncertainty over Middle East violence (aka Iran, Israel) and (2) the shutdowns of unprofitable refineries that result in increased refining profit margins and higher gas prices at the pump in relation to oil prices. What is the President supposed to be doing about this? Well, for item (1) he can try to calm everyone the fuck down...but that's super impossible... For item (2), he can turn our government socialist and commandeer the oil refineries and either force them not to be shut down or have the government run them. That will be very bad for the market since it will introduce further threat of nationalization of industries and bring more uncertainty to the market.
(2) The crumbling situation in Afghanistan. With the Quran burning, the grenade in the base, the US Sergent going rogue, and the mounting casualties with no end in sight, the situation is not looking good.
But...you can take credit for things you didn't do...
Friday, March 16, 2012
Illinois: Republican Primary Vote Breakdown
Despite previous reports that about 70% of the vote will come from the Chicago are, this is incorrect. Although 70% of the population of Illinois lives in the Chicago area, the vast majority of these people are Democrats, unlikely to vote in the Republican primary.
A more accurate estimate is that about 50-55% of the vote in the Republican primary will come from Chicagoland area and 45-50% will come from downstate. This is more positive news for Rick Santorum since he will likely beat Romney in the downstate counties and lost to Romney in the Chicago area.
A more accurate estimate is that about 50-55% of the vote in the Republican primary will come from Chicagoland area and 45-50% will come from downstate. This is more positive news for Rick Santorum since he will likely beat Romney in the downstate counties and lost to Romney in the Chicago area.
Will the real GOP please stand up?
Which view better exemplifies the GOP?
View 1: "I want regulators to see businesses and enterprises of all kinds as their friends, and to encourage them and to move them along." -- Mitt Romney
I agree with this view. Regulators shouldn't view businesses as enemies or as the police view the mob. Instead, regulators should see businesses as friends. To me, this means helping them along and calling them out when they are doing shady and stupid stuff.
View 2: Just published: The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future by Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK).
Inhofe's defense of his thesis is the Bible, not science.
On a radio show yesterday, Inhofe explained: "Well actually the Genesis 8:22 that I use in there is that 'as long as the earth remains there will be seed time and harvest, cold and heat, winter and summer, day and night,' my point is, God's still up there. The arrogance of people to think that we, human beings, would be able to change what He is doing in the climate is to me outrageous."
How many people actually believe this nonsense?
View 1: "I want regulators to see businesses and enterprises of all kinds as their friends, and to encourage them and to move them along." -- Mitt Romney
I agree with this view. Regulators shouldn't view businesses as enemies or as the police view the mob. Instead, regulators should see businesses as friends. To me, this means helping them along and calling them out when they are doing shady and stupid stuff.
View 2: Just published: The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future by Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK).
Inhofe's defense of his thesis is the Bible, not science.
On a radio show yesterday, Inhofe explained: "Well actually the Genesis 8:22 that I use in there is that 'as long as the earth remains there will be seed time and harvest, cold and heat, winter and summer, day and night,' my point is, God's still up there. The arrogance of people to think that we, human beings, would be able to change what He is doing in the climate is to me outrageous."
How many people actually believe this nonsense?
Thursday, March 15, 2012
One thing that Christian Conservatives and Many Muslims have in common
Love of traditional family values.
Muslims voted overwhelmingly for Team Red before all this nonsense about hating Muslims started to take hold in this country.
Muslims voted overwhelmingly for Team Red before all this nonsense about hating Muslims started to take hold in this country.
The Greatest Threat to Rush Limbaugh
Mike Huckabee has a new radio show premiering soon in the same time-slot as Rush (noon to 3pm). I know that a lot of people think the way to get rid of something is with boycotts, petitions, and protests, but superior substitute goods can be just as effective (and likely a lot more so).
Mike Huckabee has pretty much all of the same viewpoints as Rush, he just says it in a very non-offensive way (usually). Huckabee is a great communicator and my personal favorite for the 2008 Republican nomination (I have a thing for plain spoken social conservatives who think everything is a threat to religion.) Unlike Rush, Mike Huckabee isn't morbidly obese; if fact, Huckabee was obese and then lost a lot of weight.
Mike Huckabee has pretty much all of the same viewpoints as Rush, he just says it in a very non-offensive way (usually). Huckabee is a great communicator and my personal favorite for the 2008 Republican nomination (I have a thing for plain spoken social conservatives who think everything is a threat to religion.) Unlike Rush, Mike Huckabee isn't morbidly obese; if fact, Huckabee was obese and then lost a lot of weight.
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Illinois Primary Preview
Illinois is next important contest. There are the Missouri caucuses and the Puerto Rico primary before Illinois, but they are significantly less important.
The Illinois primary is coming up on Tuesday, 3/20/2012 and presents the best chance for Santorum to completely turn the tables on Romney. This is basically like Michigan and Ohio. Here are the two most important factors each candidate has going for them.
For Romney: 70% of the vote is expected to come from Chicago and the surrounding suburbs. Romney's best areas in a state are urban and suburban areas (see Mississippi, Alabama, Ohio, Nevada, Iowa, Michigan). This is a very big advantage. Santorum will have to compete in the collar counties around Chicago in order to have a change since downstate voters only represent 30% of all voters.
For Santorum: In past states where Romney had to win (Ohio, Florida), he had an opportunity to build momentum. In Florida, it was the debate. In Ohio, it was Romney's victories in Michigan and Arizona. Romney has no such event this time around. In fact, Santorum has the momentum from his unexpected victories in Mississippi and Alabama.
The Illinois primary is coming up on Tuesday, 3/20/2012 and presents the best chance for Santorum to completely turn the tables on Romney. This is basically like Michigan and Ohio. Here are the two most important factors each candidate has going for them.
For Romney: 70% of the vote is expected to come from Chicago and the surrounding suburbs. Romney's best areas in a state are urban and suburban areas (see Mississippi, Alabama, Ohio, Nevada, Iowa, Michigan). This is a very big advantage. Santorum will have to compete in the collar counties around Chicago in order to have a change since downstate voters only represent 30% of all voters.
For Santorum: In past states where Romney had to win (Ohio, Florida), he had an opportunity to build momentum. In Florida, it was the debate. In Ohio, it was Romney's victories in Michigan and Arizona. Romney has no such event this time around. In fact, Santorum has the momentum from his unexpected victories in Mississippi and Alabama.
Song of the Day
Some of you might be wondering: what would happen if Hungarians sang Backstreet Boys. Especially if said Hungarians looked like a thicker version of Vin Diesel, a less attractive Orlando Bloom, and Lisbeth from the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.
1936's Mitt Romney
In 1936, President Franklin Roosevelt faced his first reelection.
Roosevelt began the year sliding in the polls, facing an increasingly
hostile media, a still sluggish economy, and the big business-friendly
Supreme Court had recently knocked down an array of New Deal legislative
accomplishments, particularly the National Recovery Administration. The Republicans had an excellent chance to retake the White House.
The chief dividing issue at the time was the New Deal. The Democrats supported it in general; the Republicans disliked it in general. Instead of nominating someone on the fringe ideologically as their 1936 Presidential nominee, the Republicans picked a "moderate who sought simply to make the message that he would run the New Deal in a more efficient manner.
That man was Alf Landon, the 1936 version of Mitt Romney.
The chief dividing issue at the time was the New Deal. The Democrats supported it in general; the Republicans disliked it in general. Instead of nominating someone on the fringe ideologically as their 1936 Presidential nominee, the Republicans picked a "moderate who sought simply to make the message that he would run the New Deal in a more efficient manner.
That man was Alf Landon, the 1936 version of Mitt Romney.
Obama's NCAA Bracket Picks: Pandering
President Obama just revealed his Final Four: North Carolina (swing state), Missouri (swing state), Ohio State (swing state), Kentucky (the best team in the nation). In the final, he picked the swing state school North Carolina over the "better" Kentucky. He could have picked other good teams like Baylor (TX), Syracuse (NY), Michigan State, or Kansas,aka other good teams that are not from swing states, but he didn't.
This is better pandering than Mitt Romney's "I like grits" comment.
This is better pandering than Mitt Romney's "I like grits" comment.
Culture Wars Update
This law from Arizona is pro-freedom. The freedom of employers to curtail the freedom of employees!!! Just think of it as a condition of employment.
Where is the sister bill that allows employers to require proof that any flirting by males is done with the intent to marry and have children and not for lust.
Where is the sister bill that allows employers to require proof that any flirting by males is done with the intent to marry and have children and not for lust.
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
March 13 Primaries Review
Alabama: Santorum wins. This is good for Santorum and bad for Romney and especially bad for Gingrich. I am a genius predictor.
Mississippi: See Alabama.
Hawaii: who cares? the Republicans are treating it like it's Kenya. Here is why Hawaii matters...DELEGATES...it is imperative that Romney's rivals prevent him from getting 1,144 delegates. Also, if Romney gets pretty close, it will be pretty difficult to deny him the nomination. However, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich are still running JV teams out there to play the Romney conference all-stars.
American Samoa: see Hawaii.
Make no mistake about it, even though Romney wins a good amount of delegates, this is a GREAT NIGHT for Santorum. He is going to build momentum. Let me make a few comments about the speeches. Rick Santorum wore a pink tie...what's up with that? There was one black guy and one asian guy (minorities at a GOP rally...whaaaaa?????) at the Newt Gingrich. The Gingrich handlers got them to stand right behind the lecturn so that they would be in all of the camera angles of Gingrich's speech.
What does my boy, Rick Santorum need to do next?
1. Win the Missouri caucuses-I doubt this will be a problem.
2. Be competitive in Puerto Rico, Santorum needs to compete for delegates!!
3. Win the Illinois primary-Illinois will be very hard. It's like Michigan and Ohio all over again. Romney will be able to rack up huge margins in the Chicago area (just like the Detroit area, Cleveland area, Cincinnati area, and the Columbus area). Like every other contest, Santorum will be outspent and out organized.
4. Get Gingrich to Drop the Fu*k Out.
Obama needs to be the biggest Santorum fan out there. Let's say Obama is the NFL. Santorum would be like the Mountain West Conference in college football. Romney is the SEC (the Southeastern Conference, not the Securities & Exchange Commission).
Even against Romney, Obama just needs to weather this Middle East tension stuff to die down to gas prices can calm down.
Mississippi: See Alabama.
Hawaii: who cares? the Republicans are treating it like it's Kenya. Here is why Hawaii matters...DELEGATES...it is imperative that Romney's rivals prevent him from getting 1,144 delegates. Also, if Romney gets pretty close, it will be pretty difficult to deny him the nomination. However, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich are still running JV teams out there to play the Romney conference all-stars.
American Samoa: see Hawaii.
Make no mistake about it, even though Romney wins a good amount of delegates, this is a GREAT NIGHT for Santorum. He is going to build momentum. Let me make a few comments about the speeches. Rick Santorum wore a pink tie...what's up with that? There was one black guy and one asian guy (minorities at a GOP rally...whaaaaa?????) at the Newt Gingrich. The Gingrich handlers got them to stand right behind the lecturn so that they would be in all of the camera angles of Gingrich's speech.
What does my boy, Rick Santorum need to do next?
1. Win the Missouri caucuses-I doubt this will be a problem.
2. Be competitive in Puerto Rico, Santorum needs to compete for delegates!!
3. Win the Illinois primary-Illinois will be very hard. It's like Michigan and Ohio all over again. Romney will be able to rack up huge margins in the Chicago area (just like the Detroit area, Cleveland area, Cincinnati area, and the Columbus area). Like every other contest, Santorum will be outspent and out organized.
4. Get Gingrich to Drop the Fu*k Out.
Obama needs to be the biggest Santorum fan out there. Let's say Obama is the NFL. Santorum would be like the Mountain West Conference in college football. Romney is the SEC (the Southeastern Conference, not the Securities & Exchange Commission).
Even against Romney, Obama just needs to weather this Middle East tension stuff to die down to gas prices can calm down.
Mississippi and Alabama GOP voters are really smart
Public Policy Polling (PDF). March 10-11, 2012. Alabama and Mississippi Republican primary voters. ±4.0% in Alabama. ±3.8% in Mississippi. Maybe this is why they don't realize that they need to abandon Gingrich for Santorum so that Romney, their least liked candidate, doesn't win.
Alabama Republican Primary voters: Do you think Barack Obama is a Christian or a Muslim, or are you not sure?
Christian: 14
Muslim: 45
Not sure: 41
Do you believe in evolution, or not?
Believe in evolution: 26
Do not: 60
Not sure: 13
Mississippi Republican Primary voters:This lack of smartness (I'm sure there are plenty of individual smart people voting today) generally is probably why Mitt Romney has a chance of being a 34% winner in tonight's contests...why can't they start backing Rick Santorum??????
Do you think Barack Obama is a Christian or a Muslim, or are you not sure?
Christian: 12
Muslim: 52
Not sure: 36
Do you believe in evolution, or not?
Believe in evolution: 22
Do not: 66
Not sure: 11
If Santorum loses Mississippi, Alabama, it will be because of Gingrich
Gingrich is ruining everything!!!!
Public Policy Polling (PDF). March 10-11, 2012. Alabama and Mississippi Republican primary voters. ±4.0% in Alabama. ±3.8% in Mississippi. No trendlines.
Public Policy Polling (PDF). March 10-11, 2012. Alabama and Mississippi Republican primary voters. ±4.0% in Alabama. ±3.8% in Mississippi. No trendlines.
Alabama
Romney: 31
Gingrich: 30
Santorum: 29
Paul: 8
MississippiHowever, check out the favorability ratings
Gingrich: 33
Romney: 31
Santorum: 27
Paul: 7
Net favorable rating, Alabama (fav/unfav):
Santorum: +32 (63/31)
Gingrich: +26 (58/32)
Romney: +13 (53/40)
Net favorable rating, Mississippi (fav/unfav):Here's what the race would look like without Gingrich
Gingrich: +33 (62/29)
Santorum: +32 (60/28)
Romney: +10 (51/41)
Alabama hypothetical without Gingrich (change from w/Gingrich):
Santorum: 43 (+14)
Romney: 40 (+9)
Paul: 12 (+4)
Not sure: 6 (+4)
Mississippi hypothetical without Gingrich (change from w/Gingrich):
Santorum: 41 (+14)
Romney: 38 (+7)
Paul: 11 (+4)
Not sure: 10 (+8)
Why you shouldn't eat Margarine
If it's not good enough for ants, it's not good enough for you.
Left is margarine, Top Right is reduced fat margarine, Bottom right are ants and butter.
I hope this picture is self-explanatory.
Left is margarine, Top Right is reduced fat margarine, Bottom right are ants and butter.
I hope this picture is self-explanatory.
Monday, March 12, 2012
The Myth of the Decline of American Manufacturing
The current narrative is that (1) America is declining in manufacturing, (2) all the factories are moving overseas, (3) there are going to be very few manufacturing jobs in the future, and (4) America is not going to make any stuff anymore.
This narrative is simply not true or at least mostly not true (item 3 might be true). The economic output from American manufacturing is greater than ever (mostly). American GDP from manufacturing is growing and American manufacturing production is still #1, way ahead of China.
Here are some things that America makes:
This narrative is simply not true or at least mostly not true (item 3 might be true). The economic output from American manufacturing is greater than ever (mostly). American GDP from manufacturing is growing and American manufacturing production is still #1, way ahead of China.
Here are some things that America makes:
One Good Aspect of the Service Economy
This is slightly related to my earlier post about manufacturing and the decreasing number of manufacturing jobs in America.
We are now largely a service-based economy. Unlike manufacturing, many service economy jobs are not easily automated. Therefore, service based industries require large numbers of employees meaning that they provide more jobs.
We are now largely a service-based economy. Unlike manufacturing, many service economy jobs are not easily automated. Therefore, service based industries require large numbers of employees meaning that they provide more jobs.
Evidence that Mitt Romney Doesn't Expect to Win Mississippi
Instead of campaigning during dinner on Sunday, Romney had dinner with his biggest Mississippi supporters. When asked whether he expected to win, Romney responded only with "the Governor expects us to win" (Gov. Phil Bryant is a Romney backer). Likely, the Romney campaign is trying to temper expectations.
I am still predicting a double dose of Santorum surprise for Mississippi and Alabama on Tuesday.
I am still predicting a double dose of Santorum surprise for Mississippi and Alabama on Tuesday.
Sunday, March 11, 2012
A List of Mitt Romney's Elitist Remarks
As an elitist, I don't particularly care about these gaffes. Others may not be so forgiving.
Ron Paul Revolution has Landed
Ron Paul has won his first contest in the Republican primary!!!!
In the U.S. Virgin Islands!!!!!!
In the U.S. Virgin Islands!!!!!!
Saturday, March 10, 2012
Santorum Wins Kansas
Perhaps the greatest accomplishment of man-kind.
In less important news, Romney wins the Northern Mariana Islands. I'm 3 for 3 in predictions post-Super Tuesday.
In less important news, Romney wins the Northern Mariana Islands. I'm 3 for 3 in predictions post-Super Tuesday.
The Only Choice for Pro-Obamacare and Anti-Obamacare Voters
Have an opinion on Health Care Reform?
Live in a place that has yet to vote in the 2012 Republican Primary?
Your choice should be....
Live in a place that has yet to vote in the 2012 Republican Primary?
Your choice should be....
Song of the Day
Some people need to be left behind. Also, check out the SNL parody. See if you tell which one is the real version by just listening to the lyrics.
How to be a Prosperous Nation with Energy
Step 1: Determine where your strengths are (i.e. natural resources, human capital).
Step 2: Translate those strengths to systems and processes that the world can't live without.
Step 3: Get the rest of the world to adopt said systems.
Here's an illustrative example that turns into a babbling, true story.
Step 2: Translate those strengths to systems and processes that the world can't live without.
Step 3: Get the rest of the world to adopt said systems.
Here's an illustrative example that turns into a babbling, true story.
2012 GOP Primary: Guam Edition
Guam gave 9 delegates to Mitt Romney. They had a caucus like function and everybody voted for Mittens.
As per my prediction, Romney wins Guam!!!!!!
For those of you who are confused, both parties have delegates from all U.S. territories to help select a presidential candidate.
As per my prediction, Romney wins Guam!!!!!!
For those of you who are confused, both parties have delegates from all U.S. territories to help select a presidential candidate.
Friday, March 9, 2012
Conspiracy Theory: The Business Version of Peacocking
Have you ever noticed that a lot of sophisticated corporate professionals comb their hair back like this:
This kind of hairstyle exposes the hairline on men.
Is this kind of hairstyle very popular as a way for non-balding men to make balding/bald men feel inferior?
Could it be that this makes all men with a healthy hairline make a hairstyle that exposes their frontline hair roots?
Side note: Doesn't smoking look really cool?
This kind of hairstyle exposes the hairline on men.
Is this kind of hairstyle very popular as a way for non-balding men to make balding/bald men feel inferior?
Could it be that this makes all men with a healthy hairline make a hairstyle that exposes their frontline hair roots?
Side note: Doesn't smoking look really cool?
Polling Update: Friday
Kansas: Romney and Gingrich are punting to Santorum
Mississippi: A new American Research Group poll in Mississippi finds Newt Gingrich leading the Republican presidential primary with 35%, followed by Mitt Romney at 31%, Rick Santorum at 20%, and Ron Paul at 7%.
Alabama: A new Rasmussen survey in Alabama shows a very tight Republican presidential race. Newt Gingrich is barely ahead with 30%, followed by Rick Santorum at 29%, Mitt Romney at 28% and Ron Paul at 7%.
Mississippi: A new American Research Group poll in Mississippi finds Newt Gingrich leading the Republican presidential primary with 35%, followed by Mitt Romney at 31%, Rick Santorum at 20%, and Ron Paul at 7%.
Alabama: A new Rasmussen survey in Alabama shows a very tight Republican presidential race. Newt Gingrich is barely ahead with 30%, followed by Rick Santorum at 29%, Mitt Romney at 28% and Ron Paul at 7%.
Why Eliminating the Minimum Wage is a Stupid Idea
This is what the mainstream, anti-minimum wage economic reasoning is...
This image implies that there will be more jobs available at a lower wage. The unemployment rate is 8+% so to lower that we need to get rid of the minimum wage right?
This image implies that there will be more jobs available at a lower wage. The unemployment rate is 8+% so to lower that we need to get rid of the minimum wage right?
Obamneycare: The Market Test for Truth
Applying the Market Test to Political Arguments to see if they are true or pre-text.
Argument #1: Obamneycare is going to ration doctor pay and significantly bring it down. Is this true?
Look at the current pay for doctors in Massachusetts. Has it declined a lot in relation to the median salary since 2004? Is doctor pay in a downward trend? Is doctor pay lower relatively to doctor pay in other states? The answer to all of these questions is no. Myth Debunked!
Argument #2: Obamneycare is going to ruin the health care industry and make it worse on everybody so that they'll be a complete government take over of health care. Is this true?
How are the stocks doing for health insurance companies like Aetna and hospital stocks like Health Management Associations going? Well, they are not collapsing. In fact, no articles are usually written about their performance post-Obamacare including those on right-wing blogs. Myth Debunked!
Disclaimer: Now, I don't know much about Obamneycare, it could ruin the world?...unlikely. As a normal person, I haven't read the law and am not planning on doing so.
Argument #1: Obamneycare is going to ration doctor pay and significantly bring it down. Is this true?
Look at the current pay for doctors in Massachusetts. Has it declined a lot in relation to the median salary since 2004? Is doctor pay in a downward trend? Is doctor pay lower relatively to doctor pay in other states? The answer to all of these questions is no. Myth Debunked!
Argument #2: Obamneycare is going to ruin the health care industry and make it worse on everybody so that they'll be a complete government take over of health care. Is this true?
How are the stocks doing for health insurance companies like Aetna and hospital stocks like Health Management Associations going? Well, they are not collapsing. In fact, no articles are usually written about their performance post-Obamacare including those on right-wing blogs. Myth Debunked!
Disclaimer: Now, I don't know much about Obamneycare, it could ruin the world?...unlikely. As a normal person, I haven't read the law and am not planning on doing so.
Thursday, March 8, 2012
A "Rick Santorum" Song of Day
As a Rick Santorum supporter, I have to put this really funny song up.
Here are some Fact Check anomalies with this song:
1. There are factories in America. American Manufacturing is as productive as ever. They are just employing fewer workers. Is Rick going to force these companies to be less profitable and hire more people? Is Rick going to lower taxes on manufacturing in relation to other businesses (that's what Barack Obama is doing)?
2. What's more important: cutting taxes so low that they are the lowest we've had for 50 years/47% don't pay the federal income tax (which would include the parents of these girls if their family made $53,000 or less) OR cutting the deficit? The answer: cutting taxes because that's what Reagan prioritized. Of course, we could better afford deficits during Reagan times.
3. There are plenty of people who stand for what is right, not just my boy, Rick Santorum.
4. Did God give a Bill of Rights, or was that a carefully negotiated piece of the Constitution between Federalists like Alexander Hamilton and Anti-Federalists like Thomas Jefferson. "God pre-destinated that the exact language of what is there appear on the Bill of Rights", Right? Oh well, I'm thinking about converting to Calvinism any ways. Also, shout-out to my other boy/Revolutionary War Hero, Patrick Henry.
5. The people still rule the land. We have one vote/one person. Some people might say that money rules the land. But money has to rule through people to rule the land. Therefore, people rule the land.
I'm assuming that it's just because of the rhyming scheme.
The Wave is Building Against Rush Limbaugh
Mitt Romney said the issue was over word choice (does that mean he would use a fancy word like "promiscuous" instead of "slut"?). Here are some other words: "hussy", "scarlet lady", "trollop". Whoever is responsible for this really dumb response should get fired!
Over 40 advertisers have pulled out (get it?) from Rush's show. It was just 7 two days ago. Rush's remarks not only fosters a social conservative war against pre-marital sex, but also marital sex whose purpose is not to conceive a child. He also showed grave insensitivity towards women. In my social sphere, I don't interact too much with social conservatives (are there any at my law school?). But among the social conservatives I do know, exactly 100% of them agree that its ok to have pre-marital sex or to have sex in marriage when the purpose is not for child creation.
Rush's reasoning is so stupid. So what if people use birth control and its paid by health insurance. This helps with lowering the number of abortions and morning after pills, both issues social conservatives care deeply about. We communalize many other things like fire protection and roads. It hasn't led to the end of the world, like people causing fires all over the place. If people are so into preserving the sanctity of the world, why not outlaw gambling. Gambling is very destructive to many people's lives and has a regressive relationship with the income spectrum. Better yet, lets outlaw insurance too. If only we didn't have employer-preference-based health insurance.
"Maud and I don't believe in insurance. It's Satan's way of getting us to gamble" - Ned Flanders (from "The Simpsons")
Over 40 advertisers have pulled out (get it?) from Rush's show. It was just 7 two days ago. Rush's remarks not only fosters a social conservative war against pre-marital sex, but also marital sex whose purpose is not to conceive a child. He also showed grave insensitivity towards women. In my social sphere, I don't interact too much with social conservatives (are there any at my law school?). But among the social conservatives I do know, exactly 100% of them agree that its ok to have pre-marital sex or to have sex in marriage when the purpose is not for child creation.
Rush's reasoning is so stupid. So what if people use birth control and its paid by health insurance. This helps with lowering the number of abortions and morning after pills, both issues social conservatives care deeply about. We communalize many other things like fire protection and roads. It hasn't led to the end of the world, like people causing fires all over the place. If people are so into preserving the sanctity of the world, why not outlaw gambling. Gambling is very destructive to many people's lives and has a regressive relationship with the income spectrum. Better yet, lets outlaw insurance too. If only we didn't have employer-preference-based health insurance.
"Maud and I don't believe in insurance. It's Satan's way of getting us to gamble" - Ned Flanders (from "The Simpsons")
Santorum's shot at Victory
Rick Santorum needs Gingrich to drop out and stop playing spoiler. To do this Rick needs to win Kansas, Mississippi, and Alabama. Rick Santorum then needs to keep the momentum going by winning the Missouri caucuses (which decides delegates). Mitt Romney has an "insurmountable" lead in delegates and states which is surmountable but only if Santorum can win Illinois on March 20th. Mitt Romney will likely camp out in Illinois, given that the next few contests are very unfavorable to him.
If Santorum can win Illinois, it will give him a lot of street cred that he can actually be the nominee instead of just a tough opponent to occupy Romney's time and money. If Santorum can win Kansas, Alabama, Mississippi, and the Missouri caucuses, he'll build a lot of momentum to win Illinois, whose GOP has gotten a lot more conservative as sane people flee that non-sense.
If Santorum can win Illinois, it will give him a lot of street cred that he can actually be the nominee instead of just a tough opponent to occupy Romney's time and money. If Santorum can win Kansas, Alabama, Mississippi, and the Missouri caucuses, he'll build a lot of momentum to win Illinois, whose GOP has gotten a lot more conservative as sane people flee that non-sense.
Tell Gingrich to Drop Out!
Newt Gingrich's campaign really sucks. For example, his website is down today. He also finished in the top 2 in just 1 out of the 10 states yesterday.
As a supporter of Rick Santorum's campaign for the Republican Nomination, I am urging Newt to drop out and allow Rick Santorum to be Romney's only rival for the Republican Nomination for President.
You can contact Newt here.
As a supporter of Rick Santorum's campaign for the Republican Nomination, I am urging Newt to drop out and allow Rick Santorum to be Romney's only rival for the Republican Nomination for President.
You can contact Newt here.
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
Why do I support Rick Santorum?
Let me give you three theories and you can decide in the comments.
1. I am a mega right-wing nutjob and actually believe in Rick Santorum (it's possible).
2. I am a secret/not-so-secret Barack Obama supporter and think Rick Santorum is the best candidate to drive millions of suburban/women/educated votes for Team Blue.
3. I think that the general election for President deserves a choice between two distinct versions of the world. A decision between educated (college indoctrinated) social progressives and less educated social conservatives. As I discussed in this post, Obama and Santorum represent different halves in the have/have-not dichotomy. Preferably, both sides need a champion in the general election. Also, we've already had a contest between a so-called moderate and Barack Obama in 2008. Let's give the "very conservative" Rick Santorum a chance. The tea-party revolted in 2010. Pretty much every establishment Republican is getting tea-party primaried. The Republicans are now in the hands of populist, very conservative base where there is no such thing as too conservative. Let's see how popular that worldview is. Also, Rick has the power to motivate people, Mitt really doesn't. Rick may be the more dangerous general election opponent.
1. I am a mega right-wing nutjob and actually believe in Rick Santorum (it's possible).
2. I am a secret/not-so-secret Barack Obama supporter and think Rick Santorum is the best candidate to drive millions of suburban/women/educated votes for Team Blue.
3. I think that the general election for President deserves a choice between two distinct versions of the world. A decision between educated (college indoctrinated) social progressives and less educated social conservatives. As I discussed in this post, Obama and Santorum represent different halves in the have/have-not dichotomy. Preferably, both sides need a champion in the general election. Also, we've already had a contest between a so-called moderate and Barack Obama in 2008. Let's give the "very conservative" Rick Santorum a chance. The tea-party revolted in 2010. Pretty much every establishment Republican is getting tea-party primaried. The Republicans are now in the hands of populist, very conservative base where there is no such thing as too conservative. Let's see how popular that worldview is. Also, Rick has the power to motivate people, Mitt really doesn't. Rick may be the more dangerous general election opponent.
What's Next for the GOP Race: March 10 and March 13
Here's how the score is so far:
Mitt "Perfect Hair" Romney: New Hampshire, Florida, Nevada, Maine, Washington, Wyoming, Arizona, Michigan, Ohio, Virginia, Idaho, Massachusetts, Vermont, Alaska
Rick "The Swest" Santorum: Iowa, Colorado, Minnesota, Missouri (non-binding primary), Tennessee, Oklahoma, North Dakota
Newt "I'm fat" Gingrich: South Carolina, Georgia
March 10th (Saturday)
Mitt "Perfect Hair" Romney: New Hampshire, Florida, Nevada, Maine, Washington, Wyoming, Arizona, Michigan, Ohio, Virginia, Idaho, Massachusetts, Vermont, Alaska
Rick "The Swest" Santorum: Iowa, Colorado, Minnesota, Missouri (non-binding primary), Tennessee, Oklahoma, North Dakota
Newt "I'm fat" Gingrich: South Carolina, Georgia
March 10th (Saturday)
Why Santorum Had Trouble Finding Delegates for Ohio's Congressional Districts
This was because the Ohio Congressional District map was highly contentious. It was a massive Republican Gerrymander (ensuring a 12 to 4 advantage in a swing state). Because of the threat of legal challenges and political roadblocks, the map was constantly in flux with the borders between congressional districts constantly changing. The map was only finalized recently and by then, I reckon, Rick Santorum couldn't find the right people in the right location to fill out full delegate slates for the congressional districts that were in flux.
Super Tuesday: Winners and Losers
Winners
1. Curious Capitalist: got his predictions spot on for everything that mattered last night. Overall I've called 11 out of 13 races accurately...correctly calling Ohio and Michigan and incorrectly calling smaller caucuses (much more difficult) in Alaska and Washington.
2. Barack Obama: the Republican contest will continue, so the guns will not be aimed squarely at Obama. Obama might have the best shot against Romney, as opposed to Santorum. I am of this persuasion now.
3. Mitt Romney: he won Ohio and padded his delegate lead. It is very difficult for either Santorum and Gingrich to have a path to a majority of delegates. Ohio was very close. Romney has spent a lot of money and still can't land the knockout punch. Romney is not winning well and is bleeding money, unfortunately. However, he did get 6 wins on Super Tuesday and has a seemingly insurmountable lead in delegates even if he doesn't get a majority. The most important win for Romney is Gingrich staying in the race and winning Georgia.
Neither Winners nor Losers
1. Rick Santorum: He won some key states such as OK and TN. However, he didn't win OH and while he came close, close doesn't cut it in this cutthroat world. The reason Santorum isn't a winner is because Gingrich is not dropping out. Santorum will have to use some of his precious resources to butt heads with Gingrich in Kansas, Alabama, and Mississippi. Gingrich got 15% in Ohio, in a state that Romney barely won. Gingrich is spoiling Santorum's potential. I really feel bad for Santorum because he is not fighting on a fair playing field. He is being outspent by Romney by many multiples and money obviously matters.
2. Newt Gingrich: Gingrich won GA and nothing else. He has no path to victory but gets to stay in the race. Also, see conspiracy theory. Gingrich didn't even have any second place finishes in the evening. Essentially, he did well in his home state and no where else.
To quote Rick Perry: "no one won tonight", although I think Mitt Romney won the evening
Losers
1. Ron Paul: he is not going to win any state. He could have made a serious play in Virginia and decided too punt it entirely. His delegate count is lagging behind all of the other candidates.
1. Curious Capitalist: got his predictions spot on for everything that mattered last night. Overall I've called 11 out of 13 races accurately...correctly calling Ohio and Michigan and incorrectly calling smaller caucuses (much more difficult) in Alaska and Washington.
2. Barack Obama: the Republican contest will continue, so the guns will not be aimed squarely at Obama. Obama might have the best shot against Romney, as opposed to Santorum. I am of this persuasion now.
3. Mitt Romney: he won Ohio and padded his delegate lead. It is very difficult for either Santorum and Gingrich to have a path to a majority of delegates. Ohio was very close. Romney has spent a lot of money and still can't land the knockout punch. Romney is not winning well and is bleeding money, unfortunately. However, he did get 6 wins on Super Tuesday and has a seemingly insurmountable lead in delegates even if he doesn't get a majority. The most important win for Romney is Gingrich staying in the race and winning Georgia.
Neither Winners nor Losers
1. Rick Santorum: He won some key states such as OK and TN. However, he didn't win OH and while he came close, close doesn't cut it in this cutthroat world. The reason Santorum isn't a winner is because Gingrich is not dropping out. Santorum will have to use some of his precious resources to butt heads with Gingrich in Kansas, Alabama, and Mississippi. Gingrich got 15% in Ohio, in a state that Romney barely won. Gingrich is spoiling Santorum's potential. I really feel bad for Santorum because he is not fighting on a fair playing field. He is being outspent by Romney by many multiples and money obviously matters.
2. Newt Gingrich: Gingrich won GA and nothing else. He has no path to victory but gets to stay in the race. Also, see conspiracy theory. Gingrich didn't even have any second place finishes in the evening. Essentially, he did well in his home state and no where else.
To quote Rick Perry: "no one won tonight", although I think Mitt Romney won the evening
Losers
1. Ron Paul: he is not going to win any state. He could have made a serious play in Virginia and decided too punt it entirely. His delegate count is lagging behind all of the other candidates.
Mitt Romney, Conspiracy Mastermind
Here is a story that might be fact or fiction:
Mittens is a smart guy. He knows his strengths and he knows his weaknesses very well. Mittens knows that his odds increase if both Santorum and Gingrich stay in the race. Mittens knows that Santorum is his biggest threat given the lack of general appeal of Ron Paul's agenda and Gingrich's personal unfavorables.
During the Nevada caucuses, mega-donor Sheldon Adelson, a Gingrich-supporter, met with Gingrich and then Romney. What likely happened at the meeting was Romney urging Adelson to continue supporting Gingrich. Romney's argument likely went like this (1) only I can defeat Obama, (2) I can only win if both Santorum and Gingrich stay in the race, and (3) please keep the Gingrich campaign alive.
After the Nevada caucuses, Gingrich's campaign was on life support and dying. Adelson then donated an additional $10 million to the Gingrich SuperPAC. This has helped Gingrich stay in the race and campaign in Georgia, Tennessee, Oklahoma, and Ohio.
Mittens is a smart guy. He knows his strengths and he knows his weaknesses very well. Mittens knows that his odds increase if both Santorum and Gingrich stay in the race. Mittens knows that Santorum is his biggest threat given the lack of general appeal of Ron Paul's agenda and Gingrich's personal unfavorables.
During the Nevada caucuses, mega-donor Sheldon Adelson, a Gingrich-supporter, met with Gingrich and then Romney. What likely happened at the meeting was Romney urging Adelson to continue supporting Gingrich. Romney's argument likely went like this (1) only I can defeat Obama, (2) I can only win if both Santorum and Gingrich stay in the race, and (3) please keep the Gingrich campaign alive.
After the Nevada caucuses, Gingrich's campaign was on life support and dying. Adelson then donated an additional $10 million to the Gingrich SuperPAC. This has helped Gingrich stay in the race and campaign in Georgia, Tennessee, Oklahoma, and Ohio.
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
Super Tuesday Blog Thread #4
11:45 pm EST: I'm calling it a night for live blogging. I'll do a summary of tonight's events and a preview of what is coming up next. Mitt Romney looks like he's going to win Ohio. Also, who cares about Alaska. Romney wins ID, MA, OH, VA, and VT. Santorum wins ND, TN, and OK. Gingrich wins GA. All accurately predicted by Curious Capitalist.
11:30 pm EST: Romney's margin in Hamilton County is about 16k votes.
11:26 pm EST: Romney's performance is very troubling in Virginia. Ron Paul (a guy who does not have general appeal) got 41% of the vote against Romney. An argument for Romney is that Virginia doesn't really matter which depressed turnout and therefore, the results are not indicative of anything.
11:25 pm EST: Idaho has been called for Romney.
11:23 pm EST: In other news, Santorum has won North Dakota! Curious Capitalist might have a perfect prediction night. So far, I've been right about Vermont, Massachusetts, Virginia, Georgia, Tennessee, Oklahoma, and North Dakota so far. I've been wrong about 0 states so far this Super Tuesday. For the whole cycle, I'm 9 out of 10 right!
11:22 pm EST: Back from the gym. Looks like I need to get out of the "calling states for Santorum" game. Ohio has swung back in Romney's favor by 3k votes.
11:30 pm EST: Romney's margin in Hamilton County is about 16k votes.
11:26 pm EST: Romney's performance is very troubling in Virginia. Ron Paul (a guy who does not have general appeal) got 41% of the vote against Romney. An argument for Romney is that Virginia doesn't really matter which depressed turnout and therefore, the results are not indicative of anything.
11:25 pm EST: Idaho has been called for Romney.
11:23 pm EST: In other news, Santorum has won North Dakota! Curious Capitalist might have a perfect prediction night. So far, I've been right about Vermont, Massachusetts, Virginia, Georgia, Tennessee, Oklahoma, and North Dakota so far. I've been wrong about 0 states so far this Super Tuesday. For the whole cycle, I'm 9 out of 10 right!
11:22 pm EST: Back from the gym. Looks like I need to get out of the "calling states for Santorum" game. Ohio has swung back in Romney's favor by 3k votes.
Conspiracy Theory: Obama and Ohio
FoxNews showed the unemployment percentages in different regions of Ohio. The areas with the lowest unemployment (about 6.5%) are the Cleveland area and the Columbus area, the two best areas for Obama. Could Obama have steered stimulus dollars specifically to those areas at the expense of other areas to help his re-election chances?
Super Tuesday Live Blog Thread #3
10:09 pm EST: I'm going to the gym now. I will be back by 11pm to wrap up the night and will start a new thread.
10:09 pm EST: Santorum is now over 13k votes ahead with 61% reporting.
10:04 pm EST: Mittens is under 11k votes behind.
9:58 pm EST: Maybe Mittens will make a late night comeback in Ohio, he's brought Santorum's lead below 12k now with Hamilton County still largely outstanding.
9:56 pm EST: Mitt Romney has been under-performing his polls. He's had three chances to close things out and he's blown all of them. This guy sucks. The three chances I'm referring are (1) SC, (2) after NV, and (3) Super Tuesday.
9:55 pm EST: Will I be wrong in my most recent prediction?
9:48 pm EST: CNN and FoxNews are too scared to call Ohio for Santorum but Curious Capitalist is going to officially call Ohio for Santorum. Yay!!!!!
9:45 pm EST: Ann Romney says women are worried about the debt. How is that 20% tax cut going to help the deficit? Make it way worse?
9:44 pm EST: All three major candidates will get delegates from Oklahoma. Santorum will get at least 8. Romney and Gingrich will at least get 5 each.
9:38 pm EST: Santorum needs to turn this momentum into contests later in March in Kansas, Mississippi, and Alabama.
9:36 pm EST: This is a great night for Santorum, an ok night for Gingrich, and a disappointing night for Romney. However, don't be surprised if Romney still wins a plurality of the delegates from the night's momentum.
9:33 pm EST: The news is getting worse and worse for Mittens. At least he got all of the delegates from Massachusetts since no other candidate crossed the 15% threshold.
9:31 pm EST: Santorum is leading with 17% in with a substantial lead in North Dakota. Looks like North Dakota's GOP is similar to Minnesota's GOP.
9:30 pm EST: 12.5k lead for Santorum in OH.
9:25 pm EST: 8k lead for Santorum in OH.
9:20 pm EST: Romney's hope is in Hamilton County.
9:15 pm EST: With more rural/small town data in, Santorum has a 6k vote lead in Ohio. YAY!!
9:07 pm EST: Santorum is running strong in the Columbus area and going toe to toe with Romney. Romney needs to rely on Hamilton County and the Cleveland metro area to win.
9:04 pm EST: Santorum has just taken a 2.5k vote lead in Ohio. Whooooo!!!!!!
9:01 pm EST: It's going to be a close on in Ohio. The vest (Santorum) is about 2,000 votes down.
10:09 pm EST: Santorum is now over 13k votes ahead with 61% reporting.
10:04 pm EST: Mittens is under 11k votes behind.
9:58 pm EST: Maybe Mittens will make a late night comeback in Ohio, he's brought Santorum's lead below 12k now with Hamilton County still largely outstanding.
9:56 pm EST: Mitt Romney has been under-performing his polls. He's had three chances to close things out and he's blown all of them. This guy sucks. The three chances I'm referring are (1) SC, (2) after NV, and (3) Super Tuesday.
9:55 pm EST: Will I be wrong in my most recent prediction?
9:48 pm EST: CNN and FoxNews are too scared to call Ohio for Santorum but Curious Capitalist is going to officially call Ohio for Santorum. Yay!!!!!
9:45 pm EST: Ann Romney says women are worried about the debt. How is that 20% tax cut going to help the deficit? Make it way worse?
9:44 pm EST: All three major candidates will get delegates from Oklahoma. Santorum will get at least 8. Romney and Gingrich will at least get 5 each.
9:38 pm EST: Santorum needs to turn this momentum into contests later in March in Kansas, Mississippi, and Alabama.
9:36 pm EST: This is a great night for Santorum, an ok night for Gingrich, and a disappointing night for Romney. However, don't be surprised if Romney still wins a plurality of the delegates from the night's momentum.
9:33 pm EST: The news is getting worse and worse for Mittens. At least he got all of the delegates from Massachusetts since no other candidate crossed the 15% threshold.
9:31 pm EST: Santorum is leading with 17% in with a substantial lead in North Dakota. Looks like North Dakota's GOP is similar to Minnesota's GOP.
9:30 pm EST: 12.5k lead for Santorum in OH.
9:25 pm EST: 8k lead for Santorum in OH.
9:20 pm EST: Romney's hope is in Hamilton County.
9:15 pm EST: With more rural/small town data in, Santorum has a 6k vote lead in Ohio. YAY!!
9:07 pm EST: Santorum is running strong in the Columbus area and going toe to toe with Romney. Romney needs to rely on Hamilton County and the Cleveland metro area to win.
9:04 pm EST: Santorum has just taken a 2.5k vote lead in Ohio. Whooooo!!!!!!
9:01 pm EST: It's going to be a close on in Ohio. The vest (Santorum) is about 2,000 votes down.
Super Tuesday Live Blog Thread #2
9:00 pm EST: New thread soon!
9:00 pm EST: Santorum is staying above the "I'm going to get delegates" line in Georgia.
8:51 pm EST: Oklahoma has just been called by the only true news station around, FoxNews, for Santorum. Curious Capitalist is now 6 for 6 in predictions!!!!!!
8:49 pm EST: Newt's taking shots at everybody tonight...Santorum, Romney, Obama, Wall Street. Newt is really going after Wall Street...yikes...
8:46 pm EST: Newt's quote of the day "Wall Street money can't beat Main Street work." Question #1: what about casino money from Newt's main donor, casino magnate Sheldon Adelson? Question #2: Didn't Wall Street money beat down Newt twice, once before Iowa, second after South Carolina? Question #3: Newt is Main Street work? I thought he was just fat and married an attractive blonde, 23 years his junior...the American Dream for guys right?
8:41 pm EST: About 60 percent of the votes tabulated so far are from Cuyahoga, Franklin and Hamilton counties, home to Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati, respectively. But only about 20 percent of the votes in the Republican primary in 2008 was cast in one of those counties, meaning it the current vote count is disproportionately weighted toward these areas. Look for Romney's current margin in Ohio as the night wears on.
8:39 pm EST: This evening will likely not be decisive for the GOP primary. Tennessee is Santorum's first primary win that counts!!!
8:38 pm EST: Curious Capitalist-endorsed candidate, Rick Santorum, has just won Tennessee!!!! WHOOOOO!!!!!! I'm 5 for 5!
8:35 pm EST: Right now, Santorum is leading in all of the counties where the vote has come in. Counties from West, Central, and East Tennessee.
8:32 pm EST: Santorum is still leading in Oklahoma and Tennessee. The liberal mainstream media just won't call it for my boy.
8:29 pm EST: This just in...Palin says that her door is open if there is a brokered convention. If my boy, Rick Santorum won't be the nominee, I'll be throwing my hat behind Sarah Palin.
8:26 pm EST: Palin speaks in such a folksy style. She has got to be super stupid...I think she has no original, substantive thoughts.
8:24 pm EST: Rush Limbaugh really sucks for the GOP on this contraception controversy.
8:23 pm EST: Romney's lead made possible by more votes from Cleveland metro, Cincinnati metro, and Franklin County (Columbus).
8:22 pm EST: Palin is doing an interview on CNN...she is not the sharpest tool in the shed. "Obama's Orwellian message", "We have to fight with history, facts, and logic", "The leftist radicals continue to say discriminatory things about the disabled, women, and defenseless"
8:21 pm EST: Romney now has a 4,000 vote lead in Ohio.
8:15 pm EST: Romney's strength in Ohio seems to be in Hamilton County (Cincinnati) and the counties around the Cleveland metro area. Santorum's strength is in the rural areas outside of Cincinnati, Columbus, and Cleveland.
8:11 pm EST: In Ohio, Mitt Romney has about a 800 vote margin with 2% of precincts in. The precincts coming in are from a smattering around the state.
8:07 pm EST: A really smart talking head just stated how to connect with voters. Not by talking about himself/herself, but by talking about what voters themselves can do and what role voters can play themselves in helping our country.
8:02 pm EST: Very little has changed for Mitt Romney. He continues to run an exclusively negative campaign with decreased turnout models. Romney is having his easiest time in blue states and in blue areas of each state. He is struggling in traditionally red parts of the country.
8:00 pm EST: Mitt Romney will win Massachusetts...Surprise!!!!! Curious Capitalist is 4 for 4!
7:59 pm EST: Exit poll data now in for TN and OK, 72% of voters in both states identify as white, evangelical, born-again voters. This ought to be good news for Santorum.
7:58 pm EST: Romney is slightly ahead of Santorum in Ohio according to the exit polls there.
7:53 pm EST: Polls are about to close in Tennessee, Oklahoma, and Massachusetts.
9:00 pm EST: Santorum is staying above the "I'm going to get delegates" line in Georgia.
8:51 pm EST: Oklahoma has just been called by the only true news station around, FoxNews, for Santorum. Curious Capitalist is now 6 for 6 in predictions!!!!!!
8:49 pm EST: Newt's taking shots at everybody tonight...Santorum, Romney, Obama, Wall Street. Newt is really going after Wall Street...yikes...
8:46 pm EST: Newt's quote of the day "Wall Street money can't beat Main Street work." Question #1: what about casino money from Newt's main donor, casino magnate Sheldon Adelson? Question #2: Didn't Wall Street money beat down Newt twice, once before Iowa, second after South Carolina? Question #3: Newt is Main Street work? I thought he was just fat and married an attractive blonde, 23 years his junior...the American Dream for guys right?
8:41 pm EST: About 60 percent of the votes tabulated so far are from Cuyahoga, Franklin and Hamilton counties, home to Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati, respectively. But only about 20 percent of the votes in the Republican primary in 2008 was cast in one of those counties, meaning it the current vote count is disproportionately weighted toward these areas. Look for Romney's current margin in Ohio as the night wears on.
8:39 pm EST: This evening will likely not be decisive for the GOP primary. Tennessee is Santorum's first primary win that counts!!!
8:38 pm EST: Curious Capitalist-endorsed candidate, Rick Santorum, has just won Tennessee!!!! WHOOOOO!!!!!! I'm 5 for 5!
8:35 pm EST: Right now, Santorum is leading in all of the counties where the vote has come in. Counties from West, Central, and East Tennessee.
8:32 pm EST: Santorum is still leading in Oklahoma and Tennessee. The liberal mainstream media just won't call it for my boy.
8:29 pm EST: This just in...Palin says that her door is open if there is a brokered convention. If my boy, Rick Santorum won't be the nominee, I'll be throwing my hat behind Sarah Palin.
8:26 pm EST: Palin speaks in such a folksy style. She has got to be super stupid...I think she has no original, substantive thoughts.
8:24 pm EST: Rush Limbaugh really sucks for the GOP on this contraception controversy.
8:23 pm EST: Romney's lead made possible by more votes from Cleveland metro, Cincinnati metro, and Franklin County (Columbus).
8:22 pm EST: Palin is doing an interview on CNN...she is not the sharpest tool in the shed. "Obama's Orwellian message", "We have to fight with history, facts, and logic", "The leftist radicals continue to say discriminatory things about the disabled, women, and defenseless"
8:21 pm EST: Romney now has a 4,000 vote lead in Ohio.
8:15 pm EST: Romney's strength in Ohio seems to be in Hamilton County (Cincinnati) and the counties around the Cleveland metro area. Santorum's strength is in the rural areas outside of Cincinnati, Columbus, and Cleveland.
8:11 pm EST: In Ohio, Mitt Romney has about a 800 vote margin with 2% of precincts in. The precincts coming in are from a smattering around the state.
8:07 pm EST: A really smart talking head just stated how to connect with voters. Not by talking about himself/herself, but by talking about what voters themselves can do and what role voters can play themselves in helping our country.
8:02 pm EST: Very little has changed for Mitt Romney. He continues to run an exclusively negative campaign with decreased turnout models. Romney is having his easiest time in blue states and in blue areas of each state. He is struggling in traditionally red parts of the country.
8:00 pm EST: Mitt Romney will win Massachusetts...Surprise!!!!! Curious Capitalist is 4 for 4!
7:59 pm EST: Exit poll data now in for TN and OK, 72% of voters in both states identify as white, evangelical, born-again voters. This ought to be good news for Santorum.
7:58 pm EST: Romney is slightly ahead of Santorum in Ohio according to the exit polls there.
7:53 pm EST: Polls are about to close in Tennessee, Oklahoma, and Massachusetts.
It is ironic that “libertarian scholars [fail] to enthusiastically embrace a couple billionaires’ putative property rights” over the Cato Institute
Cato Scholar Julian Sanchez argues that there is nothing ironic or hypocritical about members of the Cato Institute manning the barricades against Charles and David Kochs' lawsuit to obtain a controlling stake in the institution (Kochs' complaint here). He is wrong; it is highly hypocritical.
On the standard libertarian view, property rights are created through productive effort and exchanged through voluntary transactions. They are pre-legal, moral rights and not violating them is a big part of the libertarian prime directive (so big that they cannot even be violated to provide the destitute with “food, shelter, health care, employment”).
The Kochs, Cato President Ed Crane, and a few others got together in the 1970s, created the Cato Institute, divided property rights in it equally among the different founders, and provided that "[n]o stockholder of the Corporation shall have the right or power to pledge, hypothecate, sell or otherwise dispose of, directly or indirectly, all or any part of his shares of stock without first offering to sell such shares as he desires to dispose of to the Corporation for a price equivalent to the price paid by such shareholder for such shares." Cato Chairman Bob Levy effectively concedes that, regardless of its current legal effect under Kansas corporate law, this agreement was intended and understood to prohibit the disposition of shares by devise (including William Niskanen's shares that are presently at issue):
Levy explains to National Review Online that “the way forward is to abandon this shareholder structure, substitute a structure where the institute is controlled by members, the way just about every non-profit in the world is, and those members would be the board of directors themselves, so that we have a self-perpetuating board.”
Abandoning the shareholder structure is the way forward for Levy because the current structure doesn’t enable a self-perpetuating board (including a board that self-perpetuates by decedent members’ willing their shares away).
But despite the fact that the Niskanen shares are not to be devised – should have been tendered to the Corporation for repurchase (a collateral consequence of which would have been the Kochs’ obtaining a controlling stake in Cato) – Crane, with the apparent approval of his scholars, has vowed to use Kansas law to try to destroy the scheme of property rights upon which Cato’s founders agreed. Maybe he has a sufficiently plausible legal argument (we can punt that one to the “experts in Kansas corporate law” to whom Sanchez glibly adverts), but so what? The law has been known to disrespect property rights in the past. And given that property rights have lexical priority over act-consequentialist considerations in libertarian morality, it is hypocritical for libertarians to focus all of their energies on lamenting, and fighting in the press, the Kochs’ “takeover attempt” without a word about what, by libertarian lights, is a violation of the Kochs’ moral rights.
Where’s the rousing defense of the right to make an unwise decision? Where’s the reminder that the ends don’t justify the means? That rights are to be taken seriously? That legality does not excuse wrongdoing? When the exercise of those rights hits too close to where libertarians earn their daily bread, nowhere.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)