Social Commentary

Dopey and Dazed

Dopey

Does anyone find it dissonant that Iowan Democrats gave a victory to an admitted marijuana user to become President and the Senate is letting him keep his seat, while denying money to college students convicted of possessing illegal drugs?

The question that is begged is, “Does prior marijuana use help the chances of a Presidential candidate?”

Dazed

Obama’s last speech had a fog index of 8.17 (higher is more academic). McCain, 8.14 (most recent 4 weeks old on hydrogen?!); Clinton, 9.5; Giuliani, 11.6; No speeches I could find on the Huckabee site, just responses to opponents jabs, his foreign affairs article got 13.05.

My prior beliefs were that veterans like Giuliani would speak at the lowest level of diction and Obama and Clinton would use their race and sex as license to be less “regular guys” and more intellectual. That the leaders for New Hampshire are the candidates with the lowest Fog index tells me that the other campaigns need to use the K.I.S.S. formula: “Keep it simple, stupid!”

Political Commentary

Amidst All The McCain Worship

John Hood makes an excellent point:

There is also a longer, truly heart-felt affection by center-left journalists for McCain, who mirrors their sentiments on the issue they (wrongly) believe is central to American politics: campaign-finance reform.

…in this matter Iowa is inconvenient for the McCain/Left argument. Huckabee had little money and won. Romney spent lots of money and came in second.

This is one of the biggest reasons that I do not want to see John McCain as president. Of course, it’s also one of my many unhappinesses with George W. Bush, who signed a law that he stated himself he believed to be unconstitutional, thus betraying his oath of office.

Media Criticism

Scientific Fraud

At The Lancet. This isn’t really new news–anyone with half a brain who looked at the study carefully at the time (i.e., not all-too-credulous journalists) could see that it was a nonsensical statistical mess. But the case against it is looking even stronger now.

Of course, it fulfilled its political purpose–to damage the Republicans and the Bush administration in the 2006 elections. And when it comes to righteous moral crusades like that, accuracy and scientific integrity be damned.

Political Commentary

Realignment of Presidential Punters

As of 7:20 EST Friday, on Intrade, Obama has moved up to $0.48 on the dollar vs. $0.50 on the dollar for Clinton. Clinton is showing as a close third to Edwards in Iowa dropped her from a high of $0.70 last week.

On the Republican side, McCain is trading at about $0.31 on the dollar for Republican nomination now ahead of Giuliani at about $0.27 with Huckabee at $0.17 and Romney at $0.14. Giuliani was trading at $0.45 at the beginning of December.

A political stock market, a class of info markets, is the best known device for aggregating poll data and all other available data, public and private about the chances of the candidates.

Obama-NH last trade at $0.65 out of $1.00 vs. $0.44 for Clinton. For SC, it’s Obama $0.62 with Clinton’s last trade at $0.42. Some arbitrage opportunities here to lock in more than $1 by selling short each candidate. McCain is trading at $0.75 for NH and in SC, The Rest of the Field (There’s no Huckabee security here for some odd reason) is trading at $0.40 vs. McCain’s $0.30.

Political Commentary

Asking The Wrong Question

Everyone (well, not everyone, but the conventional wisdom) is writing off Fred Thompson.

But this prognostication raises a question that (as far as I know) has never been asked. Everyone assumes that if Fred drops out, he throws his support to his old bud McCain. But what if Thompson does much better than expected, and after South Carolina, McCain drops out? Where does his support go? Will he explicitly endorse Thompson? And even if not, will his voters go there anyway?

It’s hard to see them going to Huckabee, Romney or Giuliani. What do they have to offer the conservatives and hawks who were with McCain (assuming that’s why they were with him). Neither Huck or Mitt has been very strong on the war (that’s a vast understatement with respect to Huckabee, who seems to be a Republican version of Jimmy Carter). And Rudy seems too socially liberal to attract McCain voters (many of whom are presumably attracted by his pro-life position).

If Fred comes in third (and two positions above McCain) in Iowa, as predicted above, he will probably have enough momentum to ignore New Hampshire and raise money for South Carolina. Particularly since he will have shown that he didn’t “enter too late” (the other candidates entered too early, as he continually points out) and that he can do well when he focuses on a needed state.

The key point is that with all of these polls, no one has a majority. The real question is: where will people go when their favorite flames out? People should be asking that about every candidate, not just Fred. This is still anyone’s (well, OK, not Ron Paul’s, or the other minor candidates’) race, in that if one can pick off the votes of the others, they can rapidly raise their percentage to a majority. This seems like good news for Fred to me, if he can do well tonight. This is a result of the fact that there’s no Republican incumbent.

And if no one can, then things will be very interesting at the convention. It seems to me that if it ends up brokered, that ends up being good for the most genuine heir to Ronald Reagan as well.

Biting Commentary about Infinity…and Beyond!