Comments on FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: The Debates: Somebody's Wrong

酒店經紀人, 菲梵酒店經紀, 酒店經紀, 禮服酒店上班, 酒店小姐兼職, 便服酒店經紀, ...

2009-10-08T03:32:38.855-04:00

酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,

艾葳酒店經紀公司提供專業的酒店經紀, 酒店上班小姐,八大行業,酒店兼職,傳播妹,或者想要打工兼差、打...

2009-09-23T01:57:08.918-04:00

艾葳酒店經紀公司提供專業的酒店經紀, 酒店上班小姐,八大行業,酒店兼職,傳播妹,或者想要打工兼差、打工,兼差,八大行業,酒店兼職,想去酒店上班, 日式酒店,便服店,制服酒店,ktv酒店,禮服店,整天穿得水水漂漂的,還是想去制服店當日領上班小姐,水水們如果想要擁有打工工作、晚上兼差工作、兼差打工、假日兼職、兼職工作、酒店兼差、兼差、打工兼差、日領工作、晚上兼差工作、酒店工作、酒店上班、酒店打工、兼職、兼差、兼差工作、酒店上班等,想了解酒店相關工作和特種行業內容,想兼職工作日領、假日兼職、兼差打工、或晚班兼職想擁有鋼琴酒吧又有保障的工作嗎???又可以現領請找專業又有保障的艾葳酒店經紀公司!

艾葳酒店經紀是合法的公司工作環境高雅時尚，無業績壓力，無脫秀無喝酒壓力，高層次會員制客源，工作輕鬆，可日領、現領。
一般的酒店經紀只會在水水們第一次上班和領薪水時出現而已，對水水們的上班安全一點保障都沒有！艾葳酒店經紀公司的水水們上班時全程媽咪作陪，不需擔心！只提供最優質的酒店上班,酒店上班,酒店打工環境、上班條件給水水們。心動嗎!? 趕快來填寫你的酒店上班履歷表

水水們妳有缺現領、想要兼職、有缺錢的煩腦嗎?想到日本留學缺錢嗎?妳是傳播妹??想要擁有高時薪又輕鬆的賺錢,酒店和,假日打工,假日兼職賺錢的機會嗎??想實現夢想卻又缺錢沒錢嗎!??
艾葳酒店台北酒店經紀招兵買馬!!徵專業的酒店打工,想要去酒店的水水,想要短期日領,酒店日領,禮服酒店,制服店,酒店經紀,ktv酒店,便服店,酒店工作,禮服店,酒店小姐,酒店經紀人,
等相關服務幫您快速的實現您的夢想~!!

徵信社, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 捉姦, 徵信公司, ...

2009-02-09T21:27:00.000-05:00

情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,...

2009-01-19T08:21:00.000-05:00

A capitol post. For your amusement, Rickey presen...

2008-09-25T09:46:00.000-04:00

A capitol post. For your amusement, Rickey presents: Sarah Palin's NYC Itinerary

The observation that this race is pro-Obama in its...

2008-09-25T01:41:00.000-04:00

The observation that this race is pro-Obama in its equilibrium state with McCain's only hope being to create a disturbance event in that equilibrium at the right time appears to be quite accurate. According to the Gallup daily tracking poll, there have been only 4 such events in the hundred-something days since Obama clinched the Democratic nomination, totaling 9 days with ties and 11 with McCain leads. Since June 5th, Obama has led 91 days. Although Rasmussen's numbers are slightly less clean cut and more favorable to McCain, they tell a strikingly similar story: since June 8th, McCain has led 11 days, the race has been tied for 12, and Obama has led 88. What's more, for McCain to get a lead in either poll has required an extremely favorable political environment for the Republican. 7 of McCain's 11 leading days in Rasmussen occurred during or immediately following the RNC and the same is true for 10 of McCain's 11 lead days in Gallup's poll. Hard to say, but it seems highly unlikely an event will take place between now and November creating such a GOP-friendly environment.

I think a saying I hear during football games appl...

2008-09-24T10:05:00.000-04:00

I think a saying I hear during football games applies here.

Often times towards the end of the game one team is down by two scores with a few minutes to go. They need a field goal and a touchdown to win/tie. The smart decision is almost always to take the fieldgoal on 4th. Reason being, you keep the other team playing where as if you go for the touchdown and fail, game over.

I think that The McCain campaign is simply trying to keep the Obama team on the field. If McCain goes for the domestic policy debate on friday and gets crushed then he may never recover, going with the Foreign Policy, at least he keeps close to Obama and can hope for a late development.

Love the work you do around here.

What about Early Votes? Isn't it the case that for...

2008-09-23T16:04:00.000-04:00

What about Early Votes? Isn't it the case that for some people this may be the only Debate they watch before they pull the lever?

I'd like to see your analysis of that.

I think it is definitely possible that both campai...

2008-09-23T15:19:00.000-04:00

I think it is definitely possible that both campaigns could benefit from making the first debate about foreign policy. This is because they are not playing a zero-sum game, although it does seem like it at times. I don't think that's why both sides agreed, but the point is worth making.

The candidates care not just about winning, but about governing, future/lower ticket elections, about their families, their reputations, etc., and so there may be times when they may eschew an action that would increase their chances of winning this election if they believe the cost is too great. This is the logic behind Gore's decision not to challenge Bush v. Gore in 2000.

You might say, "Duh! Everyone knows that sometimes candidates believe the fabric of democracy or their children's privacy trumps winner-at-all-costs politics," and I would agree, but I think we could all benefit by reminding campaigns more often, even if it's posed strictly in terms of self-interest. Is there any doubt that government was more effective and the public happier when people revered their leaders?

Read: Do Debates Affect Presidential Contests? htt...

2008-09-23T14:39:00.000-04:00

Read: Do Debates Affect Presidential Contests? http://www.gallup.com/poll/13651/Debates-Affect-Presidential-Contests.aspx ; Average debate winning margin: 1984-Reagan (-8%), 1988-Bush (-9%), 1992-Clinton (19%), 1996-Clinton (25%), 2000-Gore (-1%), 2004-Kerry (10%).

Your the one equating dealings with Russia to ches...

2008-09-23T14:12:00.000-04:00

Your the one equating dealings with Russia to chess and checkers and I'm the one that doesn't think?

That's the problem with you convicts. You don't understand metaphor because the Royal Marines didn't give you any books.

Chess and checkers aside, Russia acts in their interests, not ours. Undoubtedly, war with Russia would be bad. But you seem to forget that there are two parties making a judgment as to the soundness of war. Remarkably, you seem to place greater trust in Putin, who demonstrated wanton aggression when invading Georgia.

Wanton agression? There was a three year buildup to that where he set the trap with Kosovo, giving citizenship to the SO's, and putting in peace keepers. Putin knew Georgia would attack. Georgia tripped the wire. Putin didn't just wake up and say, "Yep! Gonna invade Georgia today."

As for their part: They understand MAD. That's why Russia or the USSR have never attacked a NATO country. That's why they turned around in the Atlantic. They're smart enough to know when not to push their luck, and if you can stay ahead of them, they won't be much of a threat.

You can push that line if you wish. And I hope Obama does as well because it's an electoral loser.

Yeah... Working with other world powers to ensure global security is an electoral loser. If that's true, maybe we deserve global nuclear holocaust.

The prevalence of early voting may help the party ...

2008-09-23T13:57:00.000-04:00

The prevalence of early voting may help the party that "wins" whatever game is being played in the earlier debates, as perceived by whoever is keeping score, IM(not-so)HO.

Essentially, for everyone but political junkies an...

2008-09-23T13:47:00.000-04:00

Essentially, for everyone but political junkies and wonks, the debates will boil down to the following:

Foreign policy = I'm not a wimp
Town Hall = I'm not insane
Domestic policy = "I feel your pain"

Obama can do both all of these reasonably well. McCain does great at not being a wimp, okay at convincing us he's sane, and fails abysmally at connecting on domestic issues. Advantage Obama.

For comparative, I would recommend watching Obama on O'Reilly. I am anything but a fan of O'Reilly's, but I think the approach Obama took there was a foreshadowing of his approach to debating McCain. And he definitely "won" the foreign policy segment, as Papa Bear himself seems willing to admit, with his repeated assertions that Obama is "not a wimp," is "steely," etc. "Not being a wimp" is how a Democrat "wins" foreign policy, and Obama can do that believably while still speaking to the issues in an intelligent, rational, non-war-mongering way.

There are two huge reasons why Obama wanted to swa...

2008-09-23T13:35:00.001-04:00

There are two huge reasons why Obama wanted to swap the debate topics.

First, he wants the economy to come last because he wants to see how the chips fall with the bailout. He has a lead on the economy and doesn't want to risk it by ending up on the wrong side of the equation. That this benefits McCain for the same reason doesn't really matter.

Second, if you recall, Obama called out McCain for a foreign policy debate during his nomination acceptance speech. Does he have an ace up his sleeve? Who knows, but it clearly shows that he thinks he can win this debate.

The potential for this to be a win-win for Obama is definitely there.

I disagree comepletely. McCain needs foreign polic...

2008-09-23T12:53:00.000-04:00

I disagree comepletely. McCain needs foreign policy first to prop himself up for the domestic issues debate and gain credibility over all. A decisive win in the first debate followed next thursday with a decisive win in the Vice Presidential debate (bring up coal Palin please) can be a lasting momentum. It can be the Bush Gore debates, where Bush came out first debate stronger than expected, and Gore had to change his tactics to look less attacking for the second and third.

In debate even multi-session debate you should always lead with your best argument. Foreign Policy is McCain's best argument.

McCain is now the underdog. He LOVES being the und...

2008-09-23T11:09:00.000-04:00

McCain is now the underdog. He LOVES being the underdog. He does very well coming from behind at the last minute. I think he actually prefers it. I think it fires him up and plays into his "mavrick", "leadership" self-image. These are the exact types of polling numbers that are perfect for John McCain going into a debate. Hopefully it's true that debates rarely make or break a candidate and Obama's trend will continue regardless.

ermibr said... "In both cases, the victor was det...

2008-09-23T10:59:00.000-04:00

ermibr said...
"In both cases, the victor was determined by scowling, sighing, makeup, etc."

Maybe this time it will be: CREEPY SMILE

Having a debate on foreign policy first will work ...

2008-09-23T10:56:00.000-04:00

Having a debate on foreign policy first will work to Senator Obama's advantage. The best analogy is the first Kennedy/Nixon debate when Senator Kennedy appearing along side VP Nixon mitigated the experience issue and stature gap. McCain will be expected to out perfom Obama is McCain's perceived field of expertise. The bar will be higher for McCain and lower for Obama. If Obama holds his own against McCain the advantage will go to Obama. In light of the numerous mistatements McCain has made recently (Sunni/Shia, Iraq/Pakistan border, Spain in Latin America) it would not be surprising if McCain makes another fumble and Obama plays an error free game with no turnovers.

The issues with Nate's analysis is that candidates...

2008-09-23T10:36:00.000-04:00

The issues with Nate's analysis is that candidates do not always win the topic of their strong suits. Kerry "won" the foreign policy debate in 2004 and Bush "won" the first domestic debate in 2000. In both cases, the victor was determined by scowling, sighing, makeup, etc. which had nothing to do with the topic discussed. So Obama may have a chance on Friday to have what will perceived to be a road win (or tie) on a topic that people falsely believe gives some advantage to McCain, helping him beat expectations. Of course, just because substance did not dominate the last two debates does not mean either candidate could not say something deleterious (e.g. Ford: Poland not under Soviet occupation) to make the topic of discussion matter this time around.

McCain desperately needs to change the subject off...

2008-09-23T09:28:00.000-04:00

McCain desperately needs to change the subject off the economy, so this gives him an opportunity.

If Obama can get across the point that foreign policy and the economy are inter-related, by saying something like "this bailout package costs roughly the same amount of money as we've spent in Iraq" then Obama can trump anything McCain says.

It is unclear to me why you say Obama is more like...

2008-09-23T09:21:00.000-04:00

It is unclear to me why you say Obama is more likely to stumble in the foreign policy debate. Is this "common wisdom" of something unsubstantiated creeping in?

Every year it seems, the person who looses on logic is declared the winner by the press. This will almost certainly happen again this year.

Obama edge. I thought it would have been much bett...

2008-09-23T09:16:00.000-04:00

Obama edge. I thought it would have been much better for people to have the commander-in-chief question h sa the last thing in their head. Having foreign policy lasts leaves people with "Are you better off than you were eight years ago?" stuck in their head. If Obama pulls this off right, anyway. He's not a very good debater compared to McCain.

Doesn't matter that it is supposed to be about for...

2008-09-23T08:52:00.000-04:00

Doesn't matter that it is supposed to be about foreign policy. No matter what the chosen topic, the candidates will use the forum to say whatever they want to say. They will each have a message they want to convey. They will give the question asked a brief acknowledgment and then go to their message.

I think it would take a colossal gaffe for the debates to change the election outcome.

My question for this debate is: How many times will McCain point out he was a POW? Will it hurt him more than help him?

Well clearly McCain is going to hit for the fences...

2008-09-23T08:50:00.000-04:00

Well clearly McCain is going to hit for the fences right now. He's had an awful cycle and needs a(nother) game changer. But I think Obama is wise pitching to him here - and the McCain team may have walked into a trap - for several reasons:

- Obama might be pitching for McCain's wheelhouse but he's going to be gunning for the big K. If he's able to land a big line, pin something bad on McCain, or successfully tie in domestic kitchen table issues to the foreign policy debate, the narrative that Obama's a smarter, more well-equipped candidate will begin to solidify. That will spell doom for McCain's campaign.

- As has been noted elsewhere, if Obama falters a bit, he's still got the next rounds to pick up.

- With the bailout in negotiation, the markets still volatile, and potential other shoes left to drop Obama is buying himself some time. Were the economic debate to take place Friday, he would be on the hook to come up with statements, ideas, solutions to a crisis that is very much still in development. That could come back to bite him if he steps wrong. Here he has taken an opportunity to punt (while appearing aggressive in moving to foreign policy, McCain's turf). That to me is quite a shrewd play.

"Oh yeah, I forget about him because he's more of ...

2008-09-23T08:44:00.000-04:00

"Oh yeah, I forget about him because he's more of a moderate."

No, I don't think so. He just seems like a moderate because he doesn't deny reality. He said yesterday that, short of an act of treason, there is no way that he wouldn't support McCain in November. He has never expressed a moderate position, to the best of my knowledge. It's just that he is realistic. Like he believes (rightly) that the race in VA will be close. And that McCain has little chance in MN or WI. He's a realist, not a moderate, in my view.

Also, Glenn_in_CO is very fact-based and knowledgeable. FL GOP is also reasonable and grounded in actual facts. They're out there. Oz only looks good when compared to jack black or dariencrow and those types.