Open Thread

This is one of those days that I really like--just sitting my ass down and blogging for nine hours straight. But, I am calling it a day of blogging now. Time for some food and some beer. Maybe I'll even force myself to watch the Eagles on Monday Night Football.

This is an open thread. Tell the world what is on your mind.

Tags: Open Threads (all tags)

Comments

32 Comments

Don't pick on the Eagles

You guys have a good team over there in Philly.  The NFL is just a tough business.

by jcjcjc 2006-10-02 04:47PM | 0 recs
Ravens 4-0

yeah

by aiko 2006-10-02 05:20PM | 0 recs
Any team with Steve McNair

Has a chance to win any given week.

As a Steelers fan, I long recall McNair as the ultimate Steeler slayer.

I tell ya, McNair was the best offseason pickup by any team.  The guy just plain busts his ass every game to win.

by jcjcjc 2006-10-02 06:56PM | 0 recs
Iowa Electronic Markets Are Moving

These small markets are NOT predictive....the last few days proves that they are reactive.

The contracts of Republicans Lose House have moved from 34 cents to 53 cents in just three days (one contract pays one dollar) and even the Republicans Lose Senate has moved from 17 cents to 22 cents.

These markets are reacting to what is going on in the world, not predicting what will happen November 7.  They are just another small sample of voter sentiment, but all the trends are in the same direction.

by Arthurkc 2006-10-02 04:49PM | 0 recs
Time for the information theory

You know, the one that says that the market reflects the information known at the time...  Always a personal favorite bamboozle offered by economists.

"We're always smart, we just need better info."  Yup.  Worked for HP I hear.

I liked the predictive markets discussion.  Thought it was one of the more interesting ones had on here in a while.

by jcjcjc 2006-10-02 05:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Time for the information theory

I found the open market thread interesting, too, with lots of food for thought.  I was thinking of doing some research and writing up a diary based on the thread in the next couple of days.

On an unrelated note, it sure is nice not to be despairing about the state of the world, with Republicans finally reaping what they've sown.  Makes it much easier to get up in the morning and get to work on the "harvest".

by aip 2006-10-02 06:37PM | 0 recs
No sigh of relief

Not even a snowball's chance in hell of a sigh of relief from me until Nov. 8.

I'm still betting that Diebold delivers at least the Senate for the GOP.

Who is the mfr on the machine in TN?  I should check, because I'm willing to bet if the GOP can rescue Corker through malfeasance, he's their best bet.

Him and maybe DeWine, since they have the infrastructure in OH to do it.

by jcjcjc 2006-10-02 06:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Time for the information theory

Like I posted in teh other thread, but no one seemed to care, there's already good academic research on political markets. Peoiple should read it before making sweeping statements about their predictive value, especially when citing exceptional annecdotes as evidence of market failure.

by dantheman 2006-10-02 10:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Time for the information theory

Hey Dan, I read the links you posted, and even commented on them at the time.  The research I want to do is find more already-published research, and summarize them, a day-long research project I'll do just as soon as I have a free day...

by aip 2006-10-02 10:52PM | 0 recs
Who said they were a bunch of Kreskins?

Of course they are reactive. I don't see why that's such a revelation around here, or anywhere. It's just like the sports odds I've dealt with here in Las Vegas dating to the '80s.

Newsflash: the oddsmakers changed the numbers on the Eagles last year when McNabb was out and the team was crumbling. Should they be condemned as reactive? Or should they have known that before the season started, and put up 7 as an over/under on the Eagles season wins and drawn millions on the over 7, laughing all the way?

Let's say a number goes up, USC -7 vs Texas, to use the Rose Bowl example from last year. Some people will have a definite opinion on the game, the way the teams match up against each other, and will be intent to wager on Texas, just to pick one or the other, no matter what the number is. In the long run that's the type who will inevitably lose, but in a one game situation they can be pure genius. It's the same as the people who are sure one way or the other regarding the House result this year.

The other strategy, employed by professional speculators, is to look at every game or number in terms of the correct odds and only pounce if they are confident they have value, an advantage if the situation were played out dozens or hundreds of times. That type is more than content to lose an individual wager since he's confident his strategy was correct and eventually will pay off.

I moved from type A to type B and have never regretted it.

If the markets didn't exist, what do you think the conventional wisdom would be in regard to House or Senate takeover? I guarantee much different than it is now. You have have assertions Democrats were massive favorites in the House and probably 50/50 in the senate. IMO that would be clearly wrong but minus the high number of speculators that's what we would be hearing, especially on progressive sites.

And that's not guesswork. I mentioned in the thread last week I was wagering on politics before the markets were around or prominent. The conventional wisdom at that time was markedly inferior to what it is now. I was in a 16-man betting pool and you literally would often have a dozen or more picking the candidate who was the rightful underdog, and sometimes by bizarre percentage. That was based on what the media was reporting and poor knowledge of the dynamics of the race. It changed dramatically between '96 and '00, and especially between '96 and '04.

Please eliminate the markets and maybe I can wager under 20 or 25 in terms of how many net House seats change hands.

And another thing on the markets, something that may not have been properly emphasized last week. A 70 is nothing, slightly more than a 2/1 favorite. That's literally the equivalent of a 4 or 4.5 point sports favorite losing. It you had tons of 90s losing, that's one thing, but to point out a 52 or a 70 going down is meaningless. If people thought they were cinches you wouldn't have 30% willing to purchase the other side.

by jagakid 2006-10-02 06:05PM | 0 recs
Sorry, but that's no proof that markets are wrong

The Foley scandal isn't the kind of thing that markets are supposed to be good at predicing. With the exception of a few people at ABC, no one knew the Foley scandal was going to break at the time that it broke. Everyone who knew about Foleys transgressions thought they had it covered up pretty well, and reasonably expected that it would not come out until after the election, if at all.

We can see that the knowledge that the Foley scandal was going to break when it did spent no time as private information is the reaction of the House Republicans. If they'd had time to take advantage of this information on the markets, they would have also had time to formulate a better response. The fact that they didn't have a better response indicates that they didn't expect it to be a factor in the election.

Again, the important piece of information here is not the fact that Foley was a pervert, but the fact that the Foley scandal would break before the election. That information went from "nobody knows it" to totaly public way to fast for the market to have any advantage over pundits in general.

Saying the markets are wrong for reacting to the Foley scandal instead of predicting it is like saying the Dow was wrong for reacting to the Sep 11th attacks instead of predicting them. In both cases game changing information became massivley public very quickly, and teh markets reacted accordingly.

by dantheman 2006-10-02 10:08PM | 0 recs
Re: July 10 meeting

Interesting that the nytimes has confirmed that the CIA DID INDEED talk to Rice on July 10th and the 9/11 commission DID INDEED know about it.  Why it wasn't in the report I suspect was for political reasons.

Ben Veniste said on CNN that there were "things" that were not in the 9/11 commission because they were out voted.  I wonder if this was one of those things.

by puma 2006-10-02 04:52PM | 0 recs
by Tennessean 2006-10-02 05:00PM | 0 recs
The TERRORSTORM...

No wonder Rice did nothing...

http://www.infowars.com/terrorstorm/goog le_high_quality.htm

by lakezoarian 2006-10-02 05:14PM | 0 recs
Re: The TERRORSTORM...

well u democrats are amazing u will lose again. as a independent i see the republicans caring for our security and im sad to say i see alot of democrats doing things to hurt it,ill tell you when you stop all the crying and finger pointing and come up with good ideas to run the country maybe you will win again.americans are getting more conservative, why? 9/11 thats why,i see good in both parties but really the constant badgering of the president will hurt your party come election day.

by XxSnakexX 2006-10-02 06:28PM | 0 recs
Re: The TERRORSTORM...

Wow, those trolls are hard to spot, aren't they?

by aip 2006-10-02 06:40PM | 0 recs
Re: The TERRORSTORM...

The RNC apparently sent Snake the 2004 script by mistake. Back then a lot of timid Democrats believed it, but no more -- or at least a lot fewer do now.

by Sitkah 2006-10-02 08:27PM | 0 recs
Debates coverage

We are continuing to update coverage of Dewine/Brown at DebateScoop, and I'll be writing a little on tonight's Iowa Governor debate between Nussle and Culver.

Check it out, comment on threads, diary on a debate if you are watching one --

10 pm EST on CSPAN tonight is Michigan governor debate, a close race.

by demondeac 2006-10-02 05:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Open Thread
I've been bashing pork all day.
by Bobby McGee 2006-10-02 05:43PM | 0 recs
Reynolds tried to block Foley IMs

America Blog has it:  Reynolds tried to broker a deal with ABC to not go public with Foley IMs.   Reynolds needs to go.

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/10/ breaking-cong-tom-reynolds-r-ny-chief.ht ml

by dpANDREWS 2006-10-02 06:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Reynolds tried to block Foley IMs

Just to be clear, it was his chief of staff, not Reynolds himself.

by aip 2006-10-02 06:43PM | 0 recs
Response to Stoller's latest Breaking Blue

Mark Kennedy: Great Candidate OR Greatest Candidate?

by jlove1982 2006-10-02 06:15PM | 0 recs
McNabb Worm Kill Count: 38,928.

E-A-G-L-E-S, CRAPFEST!

So yeah, how many fake IM conversations do you think Karl Rove concocted over the past 48 hours?

by RisingSign 2006-10-02 06:42PM | 0 recs
Re: McNabb Worm Kill Count: 38,928.

Donovan has been a fantasy stud for me.  He is close to 300 yards passing, 2 TDs, 2 rushing TDs and 47 yards on the ground.  Yeah baby.  The Philly D has been putting up a good effort w/3 take-aways.

P.S. Debra Bowen rocks.

by juls 2006-10-02 07:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Open Thread

I can't belive that the Minnesota Twins have not been mentioned in this thread.

Priorities, people....

by global yokel 2006-10-02 07:17PM | 0 recs
DCCC expenditures in red districts

As a curiosity, I went and checked my own database for DCCC expenditure figures on the six blue districts, between September 21st and October 1st (+/- $1000)

CO-7: $216,000 almost triples total
FL-22: $45,000
IA-1: $163,000 almost 50%+
NM-1: $208,000 almost doubles total
PA-6: $34,000
WA-8: $54,000 almost triples total

A concern:, in the same period (9/21 - 10/1), the disparity between NRCC spending and DCCC spending has shot up to 14.2 million to 6.6 million.

(my database is publicly accessible at expendtrak.ballotvox.org)

by loyalson 2006-10-02 07:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Open Thread

Thanks for taking up the Yom Kippur slack! Man what a news day! And I imagine that being in Philadelphia the local stations have been all over the tragic shooting near Lancaster, which must have only added to the "excitement".

Rest up, do that beer & football thing, and hope to be hearing from you real soon.

Now I need to get some food into me as fasting is NOT good for the system!

(Although, there are a whole lot of Repubs who are going to need to do a lot of atonement soon--as in the local federal penal colony.)

by kovie 2006-10-02 07:35PM | 0 recs
WASH TIMES CALLS ON HASTERT TO RESIGN

The House is on fire.

Read tomorrow's lead editorial here.

by Califlander 2006-10-02 07:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Open Thread

funny and immature: here's some images of what the fark.com folks came up with about the Foley scandal.

h/t to Baron Von Super...., SpectroBoy, and judasdiomedes, respectively.

oh... and here's duppy with one more

by aip 2006-10-02 08:52PM | 0 recs
Re: One thing going for Ford in TN

If Ford can keep his lead until election day in the TN Senate race, one thing going for him is we have a strong Democratic Governor in Brandesen & his field people to watch the vote.

Unlike the past diebold "anomalies" in states with Republican Governors like Ohio & Florida.

Having an established Governor in place with his state organization helps Ford protect the votes especially in a tight race.

That's why winning the statewide election in Ohio is so important for the 2008 Presidential.

As for Florida, unfortunately, unless something drastic happens. Republican Crist is leading big right now in the Governorship race.

by labanman 2006-10-02 09:30PM | 0 recs
Thankful

Man, these last days, I've loved being a Democrat.  Sorry, I just had to vent my smugness.  :-P

by ira13ping 2006-10-02 10:59PM | 0 recs
by estebban 2006-12-22 04:05AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads