Sunday, November 18, 2012
Nov 3, 2011 -- 6:13AM, catboxer wrote:
I don't like Obama either, but he's going to win next year because his opponent will be a robot who "does not compute."
The Republicans might have a fighting chance if they were a democratic organization. After 2012 I expect you'll wake up to the fact that Karl Rove is the turd in your punchbowl.
Think about it.
I posted that at BeliefNet in 2011. By late 2010, I already knew that Romney would be the Republican nominee (I called it "Mittens Fever"), and Obama's chances of beating him were about 90-10.
I bring this up not to brag about how smart I am, but to make the point that you don't need a crystal ball to know within a range of probabilities what's going to happen. All you need to do is pay attention, and keep your own desires out of it. Anybody can do it, but few ever will, for reasons I don't understand.
You look at the polls. You follow the money. You add up numbers and divide by the number of numbers you added together. And you don't worry about loving or hating the answer -- you love it 'cause it's real.
This is how young Nate Silver with his NY Times statistics blog was able to harpoon the blimps of nearly all the political pundits in the universe this year, by correctly calling 50 out of 50 states while the "experts" sat there blathering away on TV with crap running out their ears.
And now most of them look like the ignorant and clueless fools they always were.
I hear people, say "I hate to say I told you so," but they're lying. Pointing out to people that you were right and they were wrong is one of life's greatest pleasures, second only to crushing your enemies and driving them in front of your chariot, while listening to their lamentations and sincere expressions of regret.