He could also get gutter balls for the next three frames, too.TheConfessor wrote:UPDATE
Now they're saying Obama's score was 37 through 7 frames. That's a little more believable. He still had a chance to roll 127 if he learned from his past mistakes.
As I suspected, the first reporter got the story wrong.
I bow to your chutzpah.PlacentiaSoccerMom wrote:I'm sure she could as well.TheConfessor wrote:
Regardless of what one thinks of Hillary, I bet she could bowl higher than a 37.
I won't tell you which of my kids sucks at bowling, but even she could score better than a 37 in 7 frames, without the gutters.
Does Obama have limp wrists or something?
That is a pretty pathetic effort, really. Just start out strike, spare, strike and you have 40 in the 2nd frame. Or strike, strike, strike and you have 60.TheConfessor wrote:I may have to rethink everything that has happened so far in the campaign. I'm watching the NBC Nightly News right now, and they just showed a video of Obama bowling somewhere, maybe in Pennsylvania. They showed him rolling a gutter ball, then the reporter said that he bowled a 37 and acknowledged that bowling isn't his game.
A THIRTY-SEVEN???!!! Wow, that certainly sucks for any able-bodied adult human! I remember when I was about 8 or 9 and my grandmother took me bowling for the first time and my first game was a 50, which seemed pretty mediocre at the time, even for a little kid.
Most people would probably not let a candidate's bowling score affect their vote, but still, I've got to question Obama's judgment in this case. If he knew he was that bad a bowler, he shouldn't be showcasing his deficiencies on national TV. If he didn't know how disastrous his performance would be, he should have hired better bowling advisers who could have given him a more realistic projection of the likely outcome. And if he kept rolling gutter balls, he should have tried a different technique and strategy, not just continue to stay the course.
Regardless of what one thinks of Hillary, I bet she could bowl higher than a 37.
If it turns out the NBC reporter got it wrong, then never mind.
Or maybe he wanted to show that when he's facing a profligate future of continuing losses in an unfamiliar place, he's willing to declare an end to the fiasco after seven frames instead of stubbornly insisting on bowling until he rolls a perfect game. He's already got basketball shoes, so he can save money on the rental footwear.Ritterskoop wrote:Maybe some people like knowing they are better bowlers than the famous guy, and he knows that, and does not mind letting them feel good. Maybe it makes him more accessible to some folks.
But if you feel smart or talented, you're not likely to think the average contestant on Smarter than a Fifth Grader would make a good president.Ritterskoop wrote:Maybe some people like knowing they are better bowlers than the famous guy, and he knows that, and does not mind letting them feel good. Maybe it makes him more accessible to some folks.
The same principle is behind Smarter Than a Fifth Grader, I think. You can get behind a campaign that makes you feel smart or talented.
Of course, under President Obama, bad bowlers are declared to be the next classification in need of governmental protection. Obama will set up a new welfare program to pay these terrible pro bowlers, so that they have no incentive to go out and find real jobs. As for gaining entry into tournaments, a certain percentage of slots will be reserved for terrible bowlers under a new affirmative action plan.silvercamaro wrote:But if you feel smart or talented, you're not likely to think the average contestant on Smarter than a Fifth Grader would make a good president.Ritterskoop wrote:Maybe some people like knowing they are better bowlers than the famous guy, and he knows that, and does not mind letting them feel good. Maybe it makes him more accessible to some folks.
The same principle is behind Smarter Than a Fifth Grader, I think. You can get behind a campaign that makes you feel smart or talented.
What Obama's bowling has done is give the audacity of hope to awful bowlers so they might consider turning pro. (There's nothing to stop them, of course, except they shouldn't expect to earn a livelihood through bowling tournaments, nor so much as gain entry to the contestant rosters.)
Very interesting thought!TheConfessor wrote:Or maybe he wanted to show that when he's facing a profligate future of continuing losses in an unfamiliar place, he's willing to declare an end to the fiasco after seven frames instead of stubbornly insisting on bowling until he rolls a perfect game. He's already got basketball shoes, so he can save money on the rental footwear.Ritterskoop wrote:Maybe some people like knowing they are better bowlers than the famous guy, and he knows that, and does not mind letting them feel good. Maybe it makes him more accessible to some folks.
ne1410s wrote:This political contest has been in the gutter for months.
That's an interesting observation. The superdelegate system was created to give the party leaders a check on primaries. It does look like those who now find themselves superdelegates would rather not accept the responsibility of exercising that power.gsabc wrote: Poor superdelegates. Now that they actually have a role in deciding the nominee, and won't just be showing up at the convention to drink, shmooze and make deals for their own re-election, they're panicking and calling for one of the candidates to throw in the towel. Ghu forbid they alienate one part or another of their constituency through an actual and traceable decision using what brainpower they possess.
MarleysGh0st wrote:That's an interesting observation. The superdelegate system was created to give the party leaders a check on primaries. It does look like those who now find themselves superdelegates would rather not accept the responsibility of exercising that power.gsabc wrote: Poor superdelegates. Now that they actually have a role in deciding the nominee, and won't just be showing up at the convention to drink, shmooze and make deals for their own re-election, they're panicking and calling for one of the candidates to throw in the towel. Ghu forbid they alienate one part or another of their constituency through an actual and traceable decision using what brainpower they possess.
PlacentiaSoccerMom wrote:Instead of a another debate, it might be fun to see Obama, Hillary, McCain and Nader bowl against each other.
That's cool!themanintheseersuckersuit wrote:PlacentiaSoccerMom wrote:Instead of a another debate, it might be fun to see Obama, Hillary, McCain and Nader bowl against each other.
http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/april- ... 04-01.html
