• Except...he's already been kicked out of the CFL party, hasn't he?

  •  Just out of curiousity, how many on the other side are on record as supporting the nuclear option? Any guesses as how they'd spin THAT flip-flop if WE tried to use it?

  • "There is some validity to that thought.  My biggest point is that even if you don't think the markets are spot on I don't see how you can't think they are in the ball park."

    Were the much larger, more diverse - and hence theoretically more accurate - stock markets "in the ballpark" on the proper valuation of telecom companies in 1998?  Were they right - no, scratch that - were they "in the ballpark" on Enron in 2000?

    Just hypothetically speaking, if it were revealed tomorrow that 90% of the traders on Tradesports were Republican officials or donors would that change your view as to whether we should acknowledge that they are in "in the ballpark"?

    I've had this argument with a Republican friend who thinks that the exit polls were FUBAR in 2004 and yet loves Tradesports as a predictor.  He maintains that asking hundred of thousands of people what they did 5 minutes in the PAST can't be trusted because of selection problems that may make the selection non-representative.  Yet he insists that a *self-selected, GUARANTEED non-representative*  set of traders making guesses  as to an event four weeks in the future have some sort of magic predictive power.

    I think he's batshit nuts.


Advertise Blogads