Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by slcathena

  1. Agreed. Austin rocks, I really hope one of you hired him.
  2. Bob Kerrey isn't running, he said so months ago. I agree the Dems will pick up VA, NH, NM & CO. I think the nice surprise will be Alaska, where Ted Stevens is embroiled in corruption charges. A secondary nice surprise could be Idaho, since Larry Craig hasn't actually stepped down, or said he won't run again.
  3. Doing an aggregate trend line of all the polling data to date is the only thing that could help smooth out some of the gaps you're noting. Bottom line, the reason there are things like significant testing is because at the end of the day no poll 100% reflective of a populous, it's accurate to a certain degree. That doesn't mean they should be thrown out completely, just that that should be noted. Looking at long term trends in a larger sample size is a good way to iron out some of those gaps and make the data more reflective of reality. That said, I think Iowa numbers can be particularly troublesome given that there is no universal method for selecting likely caucus goers (there are quite a few accepted methods for determining likely primary voters), which probably explains some of the variation there. Particularly on the Dem side, given how the Caucus works Iowa numbers offer at best a snapshot of what people are thinking before they go in, not how they will leave the Caucus. A lot of these polls do measure intensity, but you have to go to the actual crosstabs to get at those numbers. You're right that intensity matters, and some of the second tier candidates have rabid support, but is their support strong enough that they are going to abstain from voting at all when they are told that their candidate didn't hit viability on Caucus night (IA) or that they aren't going to switch when their candidate drops out before Super Tuesday? Finally, see my sample note above. Polls may be underestimating some people, but I think it's unlikely that they are SO off that Biden will *really* pull 30% or something even though he's currently polling at 4% in Iowa. I don't think polls are the be all and end all of politics, but just because they have some flaws doesn't mean you throw the baby out with the bathwater. Polls are the best way we have to get a snapshot of the current political system. And when you're throwing millions of dollars into that system for ad buys, etc.* then you want to make sure your data is as accurate as possible. *Not making a normative statement on money in politics, just recognizing reality.
  4. You should see Rob's graph. SC is an entirely different scenario for Obama than McCain. Edwards has been consistently 3rd in SC. An Obama win in IA or NH (both of which are very possible at this point) means that Obama rolls through SC. Edwards pretty much has to win IA and I'm not sure that is enough for him to win anything after that.
  5. The problem with this is that even if McCain won New Hampshire he doesn't have the organization or the cash to play for the rest of the primaries. He will be in a worse position than where he was in 2000, and likely won't recover. All a McCain win in NH will do is damage Romney.
  6. Posted in another thread, but here too for emphasis. We're in. This is an excellent idea.
  7. We're down. I'm sure I can get my kids' stuff up on there by the end of the day.
  8. slcathena


    Yes, that's Ankita and Mario, they are RHSM GF.
  9. slcathena


    Octos: Damien CN d. Bingham MT Notre Dame PB d. Kent Denver ??* Meadow BS d. Holy Names WA RHSM BL d. CPS CC RHSM GF d. West RL CPS KV d. Bingham SS* Notre Dame DM (DA? Can't recall the initials) d. Brophy MM Gulliver Prep MM d. Boise AE Quarters: Damien CN d. Gulliver Prep MM Notre Dame PB over Notre Dame DM/DA Meadows BS d. CPS KV RHSM BL over RHSM GF Semis: RHSM BL d. Damien CN Notre Dame PB d. Meadows BS Elliot already told you the finals results. *I'm sure of all of those except for who ND PB & CPS CC hit... Bingham SS was in one of those rounds, I *think* Kent was in the other, but could be wrong. I can't find my copy of the pairings.
  10. slcathena


    Chris & Mike from Notre Dame & Ankita and Mario from RHSM also received ghost bids.
  11. slcathena


    That's the coolest name I've ever seen.
  12. I personally think he should have said something 6 months ago when it didn't look so reactionary...that said I think he's in a bit of a double bind. The GOP won't want to hear that he believes in a strong separation of church and state. That cuts into their social agenda. Unfortunately, I believe that's his strongest argument. If he professes that his faith will influence the way he governs, I don't know how much headway he'll make even if he has the best speech ever prepared saying that his beliefs are similar to mainstream Christians. I don't say that because I believe that's an unwinnable argument, but because I think the people he's losing on this issue are going to believe their ministers who have repeatedly condemned the LDS Church before they are going to believe what looks like a very polotically opportunistic speech.
  13. Sonic-Jihad: I can't do a line-by-line thing at the moment, am working on something and a bit pressed for time, but I did want to reply to one thing. You mention the way Obama supporters feel about Clinton who they "were never going to vote for anyway." You're correct that I fall in that category. Mainly because despite what she says, she hasn't done anything to make me believe she'll follow through on any of the things she says that sound good. She's done multiple things that convince me she'll triangulate us back to the center, so I'd rather back someone who's brave enough to announce he's for merit pay at a speech to a teacher's union. You say she had more info on Iraq, I say she didn't use the intel she had access to. She didn't even read the full NIE. That's ridiculous. Additionally, her comments on the floor of the senate before that vote read like she's trying to protect a future unitary executive. I'm not voting for that, period. That doesn't mean I'll vote for Guiliani or anyone from the GOP, but it does mean that I won't vote for president if she's on the ballot. Considering that she's struggles to crack 50% in the favorables category nationally, and that the Democratic party has more people like me in it than HRC supporters care to admit, I'd say that's a pretty good reason we should look elsewhere if we want to win.
  14. What it is is a move towards transparency, which this country desperately needs after 7 years of BushCo. Heaven forbid the people have an actual say in what their government does. Your position is that a vote that reflects the will of the populous is a bad thing?
  15. Two additions (I agree with all of the above): The Internet: Obama want's to keep it free and transparent. He's proposing plans to increase broadband access to the entire country and use blogs for all active legislation to insure citizen input. That is amazingly progressive. Nuclear Weapons: Obama has called for global disarm and has specific plans to regulate former soviet sites. What exactly isn't he being specific about?
  16. And now we can add the Des Moines Register to that: Poll---------------------- ---Clinton ------------ Obama Des Moines Register 11/25-28--- 25 ----------------28 And with that, Obama moves to +1.4% ahead of Hillary on the RCP Average. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/ia/iowa_democratic_caucus-208.html
  17. Gallup isn't much better than Zogby. Neither uses a very tight screen. Rob, I saw the SV poll as well. Amazing. That's (I believe) the 5th poll in a row showing a statistical tie in Iowa. While I may disagree that Zogby is a great pollster, I think Rob's point was 100% accurate. Obama pulls in all Dems, Independents and some GOPs. Clinton doesn't pull the latter two categories period. Plus, she loses some Dems (like myself, who would rather not vote for president than vote for her). That's a dangerous position to be in.
  18. Awww, come on. Wes Clark doesn't deserve an insult like that! At least he knew the Soviet Union no longer existed!
  19. I agree with you that the evidence has been updated, there is probably new tech, but the basic proposals still haven't really been adopted. The fact that it was the college topic three years ago means there really isn't that much of a research gap, either. It's neither here nor there, it's still the better topic of the remaining two, but I really would have preferred the community taking advantage of less explored case areas like Central Asia or ag subsidies.
  20. slcathena

    Sad news

    I only met Michael once, and am terribly shocked and saddened by this news. My heart goes out to everyone who has been affected by this, particularly the debate community at NFA. You're all in my prayers, and thoughts.
  21. Yeah, but SCOTUS can't actively increase assitance. Any case that did that would be extremely vulnerable to FX.
  22. Click here for a link to the ad I'm not really a Huckabee fan, but this made me smile. That dude would actually be tough in the general.
  23. First off, congratulations and good luck!! The only piece of advice I have is that in this situation specialization is probably your friend. You may be able to get 4 or 5 kids involved, and you can probably get a nascent LD/Policy gig going on...but with that few kids you need to focus on one, and on getting them ready fast. Take advantage of things like the Ev collection the NDCA put up, supplement it as best you can. With any luck you can get your kids involved enough to go to camp this summer, and get the ball rolling.
  • Create New...