WWTBAM Bored

the nomination, and you shouldn't bet against that now, here are my top two choices for a running mate:

1. Colin Powell

2. Chuck Hagel

When I ran these by the boys in Prediction Services, they said that if he were to run with either one, you should put all in, and borrow whatever you can and put that down, too.

Full disclosure about the boys in Prediction services, though: I know that they're pretty good predicters, but I've never said that they're not dumb. Here's an exchange that took place during our meeting:


Me: How do these guys stack up against the models y'all have been fooling with?

Peterson: Sir, we've only been doing that during the lucnh hour.

Me: What?

Peterson: Well, Sir, it says right there in the Employee Manual of Skippy's International, Inc., that nooners are fine. Also, Sir, I'll remind you of the memo that you sent re: increasing productivity, where you specifically recommended that.



See what I mean?

Anyway, they think that there's no other choice that would be stronger.

I bet you anything that they're gonna end up trying to take credit for having thunk this up.

Posted this about a month ago.

Saw Hagel yesterday. He's got a new book. He's saying he would have a hard time coming out in support of his friend and fellow-Republican McCain because of McCain's foreign-policy positions.

A strong Vietnam Vet who achieved great success in the business world.

I'll be real surprised if Colin Powell ever endorses McCain.

I still think that if Obama would go with either of these two, they'd sqush McCain like a bug.

And be practicing the bipartisan approach that he preaches.

wbtravis007 wrote:the nomination, and you shouldn't bet against that now, here are my top two choices for a running mate:

1. Colin Powell

2. Chuck Hagel

When I ran these by the boys in Prediction Services, they said that if he were to run with either one, you should put all in, and borrow whatever you can and put that down, too.

Full disclosure about the boys in Prediction services, though: I know that they're pretty good predicters, but I've never said that they're not dumb. Here's an exchange that took place during our meeting:


Me: How do these guys stack up against the models y'all have been fooling with?

Peterson: Sir, we've only been doing that during the lucnh hour.

Me: What?

Peterson: Well, Sir, it says right there in the Employee Manual of Skippy's International, Inc., that nooners are fine. Also, Sir, I'll remind you of the memo that you sent re: increasing productivity, where you specifically recommended that.



See what I mean?

Anyway, they think that there's no other choice that would be stronger.

I bet you anything that they're gonna end up trying to take credit for having thunk this up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBGIQ7ZuuiU

themanintheseersuckersuit wrote:

wbtravis007 wrote:the nomination, and you shouldn't bet against that now, here are my top two choices for a running mate:

1. Colin Powell

2. Chuck Hagel

When I ran these by the boys in Prediction Services, they said that if he were to run with either one, you should put all in, and borrow whatever you can and put that down, too.

Full disclosure about the boys in Prediction services, though: I know that they're pretty good predicters, but I've never said that they're not dumb. Here's an exchange that took place during our meeting:


Me: How do these guys stack up against the models y'all have been fooling with?

Peterson: Sir, we've only been doing that during the lucnh hour.

Me: What?

Peterson: Well, Sir, it says right there in the Employee Manual of Skippy's International, Inc., that nooners are fine. Also, Sir, I'll remind you of the memo that you sent re: increasing productivity, where you specifically recommended that.



See what I mean?

Anyway, they think that there's no other choice that would be stronger.

I bet you anything that they're gonna end up trying to take credit for having thunk this up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBGIQ7ZuuiU

I can't get this here. Can you describe what it is for me?

I'm 99% sure it will be John Edwards.

Bob Juch wrote:I'm 99% sure it will be John Edwards.

How 'bout if I put a dollar down against 99 of yours?

wbtravis007 wrote:the nomination, and you shouldn't bet against that now, here are my top two choices for a running mate:

1. Colin Powell

2. Chuck Hagel

When I ran these by the boys in Prediction Services, they said that if he were to run with either one, you should put all in, and borrow whatever you can and put that down, too.

Powell is an unlikely candidate - first, he's African-American and there's no point further inflaming people by having two on the ticket. Second, Powell was the one who carried the administration's water when it came to the doctored intelligence on Iraq. Given Obama's assertions that he has "always been against the war" I can't see him taking someone like Powell on as veep.

wbtravis007 wrote:

themanintheseersuckersuit wrote:

wbtravis007 wrote:the nomination, and you shouldn't bet against that now, here are my top two choices for a running mate:

1. Colin Powell

2. Chuck Hagel

When I ran these by the boys in Prediction Services, they said that if he were to run with either one, you should put all in, and borrow whatever you can and put that down, too.

Full disclosure about the boys in Prediction services, though: I know that they're pretty good predicters, but I've never said that they're not dumb. Here's an exchange that took place during our meeting:


Me: How do these guys stack up against the models y'all have been fooling with?

Peterson: Sir, we've only been doing that during the lucnh hour.

Me: What?

Peterson: Well, Sir, it says right there in the Employee Manual of Skippy's International, Inc., that nooners are fine. Also, Sir, I'll remind you of the memo that you sent re: increasing productivity, where you specifically recommended that.



See what I mean?

Anyway, they think that there's no other choice that would be stronger.

I bet you anything that they're gonna end up trying to take credit for having thunk this up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBGIQ7ZuuiU

I can't get this here. Can you describe what it is for me?

I was in a rickrolling mood.

earendel wrote:

wbtravis007 wrote:the nomination, and you shouldn't bet against that now, here are my top two choices for a running mate:

1. Colin Powell

2. Chuck Hagel

When I ran these by the boys in Prediction Services, they said that if he were to run with either one, you should put all in, and borrow whatever you can and put that down, too.

Powell is an unlikely candidate - first, he's African-American and there's no point further inflaming people by having two on the ticket. Second, Powell was the one who carried the administration's water when it came to the doctored intelligence on Iraq. Given Obama's assertions that he has "always been against the war" I can't see him taking someone like Powell on as veep.

I think that Powell would be able to acquit himself on the war stuff quite well.

Besides, name me one person who has "always been against the war" who would add alot to the ticket.

I think Powell being black in a strange way increases the appeal of the ticket, although I'll concede that it wouldn't be considered to be a choice made according to the conventional wisdom.

Hard to explain. I'd love to see that hypothesis put to the test, though.

Trust me on this: Obama and Powell would crush McCain.

I wouldn't be surprised if Richardson wound up on the ticket. Nice reward for his endorsement and really strengthens the appeal to the Hispanic vote.

lilclyde54 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Richardson wound up on the ticket. Nice reward for his endorsement and really strengthens the appeal to the Hispanic vote.

I like Richardson a lot, too.

I think Obama and Richardson would win.

I think that the other two guys would make the outcome a certainty, though. They'd smash McCain on the war. That's why I'd go for one of them.

I think either would welcome the opportunity to run with Obama.

lilclyde54 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Richardson wound up on the ticket. Nice reward for his endorsement and really strengthens the appeal to the Hispanic vote.

I think this is a likely outcome, but it doesn't change my overall pessimistic assessment of the Democrats' chances in November.

lilclyde54 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Richardson wound up on the ticket. Nice reward for his endorsement and really strengthens the appeal to the Hispanic vote.

Richardson was a complete dud on the campaign trail and flubbed badly in several debates. His endorsement of Obama wasn't well received in the Hispanic community either, who largely viewed it as a sellout.

As a practical matter, the last state in which Richardson's endorsement might have had a significant effect was Texas.

wbtravis007 wrote:

lilclyde54 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Richardson wound up on the ticket. Nice reward for his endorsement and really strengthens the appeal to the Hispanic vote.

I like Richardson a lot, too.

I think Obama and Richardson would win.

I think that the other two guys would make the outcome a certainty, though. They'd smash McCain on the war. That's why I'd go for one of them.

I think either would welcome the opportunity to run with Obama.

Richardson would be Obama's best bet and I certainly think his lips grew by several sizes over the weekend.

As to their defeating McCain, I think that this would strongly depend on who McCain selects as his running mate. If he selects someone that is closely aligned with him on the important issues, then I think he may have some problems with the staunch conservative vote. If he picks a strong economic conservative like Romney or our own Mark Sanford, then he has a chance of winning back many of the conservatives (like me) waiting to see who he will select as running mate.

As it stands right now, polls (for what they're worth) indicate McCain beats both Obama or Clinton by at least 5 percentage points. But, there is a long way to go until November and much can and probably will happen before then. I do not believe the gloves have come off yet.

Sir_Galahad wrote:

wbtravis007 wrote:

lilclyde54 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Richardson wound up on the ticket. Nice reward for his endorsement and really strengthens the appeal to the Hispanic vote.

I like Richardson a lot, too.

I think Obama and Richardson would win.

I think that the other two guys would make the outcome a certainty, though. They'd smash McCain on the war. That's why I'd go for one of them.

I think either would welcome the opportunity to run with Obama.

Richardson would be Obama's best bet and I certainly think his lips grew by several sizes over the weekend.

As to their defeating McCain, I think that this would strongly depend on who McCain selects as his running mate. If he selects someone that is closely aligned with him on the important issues, then I think he may have some problems with the staunch conservative vote. If he picks a strong economic conservative like Romney or our own Mark Sanford, then he has a chance of winning back many of the conservatives (like me) waiting to see who he will select as running mate.

As it stands right now, polls (for what they're worth) indicate McCain beats both Obama or Clinton by at least 5 percentage points. But, there is a long way to go until November and much can and probably will happen before then. I do not believe the gloves have come off yet.

McCain picking Romney would be the one way we would lose my vote. And, I believe, the votes of lots others like me.

"Richardson would be Obama's best bet and I certainly think his lips grew by several sizes over the weekend.

As to their defeating McCain, I think that this would strongly depend on who McCain selects as his running mate. "

What does the "lips grew" thing mean? Collagen?

Richardson has some corporate background that needs explaining and might prove interesting.[/quote]

TheCalvinator24 wrote:McCain picking Romney would be the one way we would lose my vote. And, I believe, the votes of lots others like me.

So I don't make a possibly unwarranted assumption, what about Romney don't you like?

Beebs52 wrote:"What does the "lips grew" thing mean? Collagen?

I'd like to know what this meant, too.

Does it have something to do with butt-kissing?

I'm confused.

Jeemie wrote:

Beebs52 wrote:"What does the "lips grew" thing mean? Collagen?

I'd like to know what this meant, too.

Does it have something to do with butt-kissing?

I'm confused.

Yes. Sounded like an awful lot of kissing up to me. Yes, I know they all do it but everyone knows that Richardson is absolutely dying to get the VP spot. I believe he was a huge Clinton supporter up until the time it looked like it was going to be Obama getting the nod.

TheCalvinator24 wrote:
McCain picking Romney would be the one way we would lose my vote. And, I believe, the votes of lots others like me.

I am curious about this, too, Cal. What about Romney don't you like?

And, on the other side of the coin, I will not vote for McCain unless he picks a strong conservative running mate that I like.

Sir_Galahad wrote:

Jeemie wrote:

Beebs52 wrote:"What does the "lips grew" thing mean? Collagen?

I'd like to know what this meant, too.

Does it have something to do with butt-kissing?

I'm confused.

Yes. Sounded like an awful lot of kissing up to me. Yes, I know they all do it but everyone knows that Richardson is absolutely dying to get the VP spot. I believe he was a huge Clinton supporter up until the time it looked like it was going to be Obama getting the nod.

Duh. Of course. I've lost my ability to detect metaphors. Sorry bout that.

Or, maybe because there's so much butt-kissing all over the place I didn't find his out of place.

Sir_Galahad wrote:

TheCalvinator24 wrote:
McCain picking Romney would be the one way we would lose my vote. And, I believe, the votes of lots others like me.

I am curious about this, too, Cal. What about Romney don't you like?

And, on the other side of the coin, I will not vote for McCain unless he picks a strong conservative running mate that I like.

I believe that Romney is a complete phony. His "Conservative Credentials" were conveniently created after he decided to run for President. I don't trust him.

I agree that McCain needs a strong conservative running mate. That's just not Romney.

I don't have a solid suggestion for whom it should be, but I am serous when I say that I will not vote for McCain if he picks Romney.

TheCalvinator24 wrote: I believe that Romney is a complete phony. His "Conservative Credentials" were conveniently created after he decided to run for President. I don't trust him.

I agree that McCain needs a strong conservative running mate. That's just not Romney.

I don't have a solid suggestion for whom it should be, but I am serous when I say that I will not vote for McCain if he picks Romney.

Are you referring to his economic or social "credentials" that were created? Looking at his background, I don't think there is any dispute that his economic position is solidly conservative. I would grant you that his social positions are a bit in the gray area but that is not so important to me.

I just don't trust McCain at all. That phony smile and little wink just don't give me a warm fuzzy.

Sir_Galahad wrote:As to their defeating McCain, I think that this would strongly depend on who McCain selects as his running mate.

I think people put too much stock in the selection of a running mate. People vote for the President, not for the Vice President. Look at it this way, George Bush won the election after selecting Dan Quayle as his running mate, and his weakness as a candidate and a campaigner was pretty well exposed in the vice presidential debate (i.e. Bentson's remark that he was no Jack Kennedy)...

danielh41 wrote:

Sir_Galahad wrote:As to their defeating McCain, I think that this would strongly depend on who McCain selects as his running mate.

I think people put too much stock in the selection of a running mate. People vote for the President, not for the Vice President. Look at it this way, George Bush won the election after selecting Dan Quayle as his running mate, and his weakness as a candidate and a campaigner was pretty well exposed in the vice presidential debate (i.e. Bentson's remark that he was no Jack Kennedy)...

That may have been true in the past but I think this year's election is a completely different story. McCain does not have the total support of the Republican Party base (yet) for obvious reasons. And, I feel that his selection of a running mate is crucial to his being elected despite the downward spiralling of the two Democrat candidates. JMO.