P
Priceless
Guest
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
Considering it was below 700 when Obama took office...
Considering it was below 700 when Obama took office...
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
- Status
walrus
Wind up workin' in a gas station
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
So that makes ok for Clinton to screw a subordinate, nice
P
Priceless
Guest
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
The correct analogy would have been "so that makes it ok for the Dems to preach about economic opportunity but then whore themselves out to the same corporate ruling class."
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
That argument doesn't work for many Republicans though
According to them, there is no corporate ruling class. 
That argument doesn't work for many Republicans though
According to them, there is no corporate ruling class.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
"America is a classless society." Repeat this to the epsilons in their hypnomedia 10 times per minute, and add alcohol to their blood surrogate.That argument doesn't work for many Republicans though
leswp1
Well-known member
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
), he won't recover.
Craig - apparently 5min doesn't believe in the significance of corrections or bear markets.
Priceless - yes, people believe it, but that doesn't make it right. I'll keep fighting the good fight (and losing).
I saw a poll (linked via drudge I think) last night that showed Cain's support dropping (especially among women). So he might not have problems with male Republican voters, but he definitely has a growing problem with the female ones. If he doesn't fix that (by offering them jobs
), he won't recover.As not-Mitts drop out of the race, their supporters will go to the other not-Mitts. If that occurs quickly enough, not-Mitt will win the nomination (if not, we'll have a protracted battle similar to Obama-Clinton).
Craig - apparently 5min doesn't believe in the significance of corrections or bear markets.
Priceless - yes, people believe it, but that doesn't make it right. I'll keep fighting the good fight (and losing).
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
Not-Mitts have no incentive to drop out. Every hunk of red meat they throw out at a debate nets them another hundred thousand book sales and gets them that much closer to a FNC gig. This isn't a primary, it's a trainee program.
Not-Mitts have no incentive to drop out. Every hunk of red meat they throw out at a debate nets them another hundred thousand book sales and gets them that much closer to a FNC gig. This isn't a primary, it's a trainee program.
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
At some point, their campaigns will run out of money. I also believe the stronger not-Mitts will find a way to buy them out of the race.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
I don't think they're actually spending any money. Interesting point about buying out, though. Basically they are following the later Roman Emperor model. Which makes sense for them.
busterman62
I got a pocket full of kryptonite
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
I've got a novel idea. Let's argue over who was the greatest scourge to humanity, Stalin or Hitler. You choose and I'll argue for the other side. What? This is a political thread. OK. Same rules apply.
I've got a novel idea. Let's argue over who was the greatest scourge to humanity, Stalin or Hitler. You choose and I'll argue for the other side. What? This is a political thread. OK. Same rules apply.
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
No the S&P is not far from its all time high. Afterall its is up 15% in the last month and a half. The S&P going up 16% to an all time high seems quite feasable in the next year in my eyes
Craig - apparently 5min doesn't believe in the significance of corrections or bear markets.
No the S&P is not far from its all time high. Afterall its is up 15% in the last month and a half. The S&P going up 16% to an all time high seems quite feasable in the next year in my eyes
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
Math fail again. If something initially costs a dollar, drops 50%, then rises 50%, it would not cost $1 at the end of that. It would cost $0.75. For the same reason, the S&P dropping 16% and rising 16% won't equal its all time high. Plus this completely ignores the looming uncertainties (which markets generally hate because they can't easily price them in) for next year. We still don't know what will happen with the super committee, nor do we know how the bond market and rating agencies will respond, nor do we know how Congress itself will respond. Then there's the election next fall which will ultimately determine US policies over the following two years. To expect the market to climb significantly in that environment is overly optimistic.
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
This is very simple...which somehow you're managing to mess up. The S&P is less than 20% from its all time high. It doesn't matter if it goes up or down or sideways. Its all time high was about 20% higher than it is today. Also the S&P was at 1100 a month and a half ago...now its 1265. That is a simple increase of 15% in less than two months. Now how is a 20% increase in the markets in a year not possible...when we just had a 15% increase in the last month in a half?
And no, talking about 'looming uncertainty' as your airtight proof doesn't fly as this same month and a half increase happened in the face of all that same uncertainty. Based on current volatility, equities are not far from all time highs no matter what kind of math you use. If there's such a failure in math, please prove in math terms how this is not true.
This is very simple...which somehow you're managing to mess up. The S&P is less than 20% from its all time high. It doesn't matter if it goes up or down or sideways. Its all time high was about 20% higher than it is today. Also the S&P was at 1100 a month and a half ago...now its 1265. That is a simple increase of 15% in less than two months. Now how is a 20% increase in the markets in a year not possible...when we just had a 15% increase in the last month in a half?
And no, talking about 'looming uncertainty' as your airtight proof doesn't fly as this same month and a half increase happened in the face of all that same uncertainty. Based on current volatility, equities are not far from all time highs no matter what kind of math you use. If there's such a failure in math, please prove in math terms how this is not true.
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
You said "going up 16% to an all-time high" - which is mathematically wrong. An increase in value of 16% would not equal its all-time high. When you are dealing with numbers and percentages, you need to be very specific in your word choice.
Also, at no point have I stated that it's impossible for the S&P to gain that much value in the coming year; I simply believe it is unlikely that it will do that. Europe is slipping back into recession, and that will impact export sales and put a dent in profits. Beyond that, there's a question of whether the Greek bailout plan will actually work (I don't believe it will and that the country will in fact default one way or another - at which point many banks will take significant losses and may require a bailout themselves to stay afloat, similar to what happened here with TARP a couple years ago). And then we have the supercommittee and whatever it is Congress does or does not do with regard to the deficit (which may or may not severely anger the bond market and impact our interest rates) plus the looming 2012 election.
A lot of bullets must be dodged for the market to capture its high-water mark. If you wish to believe it'll do that, that's your right; I however don't believe that it will, and that a severe correction and/or bear market is likely.
You said "going up 16% to an all-time high" - which is mathematically wrong. An increase in value of 16% would not equal its all-time high. When you are dealing with numbers and percentages, you need to be very specific in your word choice.
Also, at no point have I stated that it's impossible for the S&P to gain that much value in the coming year; I simply believe it is unlikely that it will do that. Europe is slipping back into recession, and that will impact export sales and put a dent in profits. Beyond that, there's a question of whether the Greek bailout plan will actually work (I don't believe it will and that the country will in fact default one way or another - at which point many banks will take significant losses and may require a bailout themselves to stay afloat, similar to what happened here with TARP a couple years ago). And then we have the supercommittee and whatever it is Congress does or does not do with regard to the deficit (which may or may not severely anger the bond market and impact our interest rates) plus the looming 2012 election.
A lot of bullets must be dodged for the market to capture its high-water mark. If you wish to believe it'll do that, that's your right; I however don't believe that it will, and that a severe correction and/or bear market is likely.
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
Umm...16% was Craigs number not mine...I was using it to address his point.
The actual numbers were that the S&P was at 1098 in early October and at 1277 last week when we started this discussion. That is a 16.3% increase in one and a half months. The all time high close in 2007 was 1530. 1530 is 19% higher than 1277.
So after all your posts...my point still stands that in relative terms we're not far away from our all time high, just 19% higher, when the markets went up 16.3% in the last month and a half.
The only reason I'm pursuing any of this is your bizarro statement:
"Math fail again. If something initially costs a dollar, drops 50%, then rises 50%, it would not cost $1 at the end of that. It would cost $0.75. For the same reason, the S&P dropping 16% and rising 16% won't equal its all time high."
Umm...16% was Craigs number not mine...I was using it to address his point.
The actual numbers were that the S&P was at 1098 in early October and at 1277 last week when we started this discussion. That is a 16.3% increase in one and a half months. The all time high close in 2007 was 1530. 1530 is 19% higher than 1277.
So after all your posts...my point still stands that in relative terms we're not far away from our all time high, just 19% higher, when the markets went up 16.3% in the last month and a half.
The only reason I'm pursuing any of this is your bizarro statement:
"Math fail again. If something initially costs a dollar, drops 50%, then rises 50%, it would not cost $1 at the end of that. It would cost $0.75. For the same reason, the S&P dropping 16% and rising 16% won't equal its all time high."
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
I'm as amused by the Gingrich surge as the next guy, but he's going to be disaster as a general election candidate. How can the family values party nominate a guy who's on his 3rd marriage? Yes, that shouldn't matter but it does. Gingrich has the same problem that Sarah Palin or Al Gore had. They were fundamentally unlikeable people that every negative rumor stuck to, whether it was true or not. Aside from Nixon I can't think of anybody else who overcame that to win the WH.
Right now Romney's biggest mission is that he has to get rid of Cain. Cain is running strong down South, and the last thing the GOP needs is the preferred candidate of the base of the party losing to someone who cleaned up delegates in states that have no chance of going Republican in November. That's what happened when McCain won even though Huckleberry won the South and McCain went on to lose three states from the Old Confederacy. Romney won't have any easier time than McCain did, and its not like he can take Cain as a running mate. IF he can start laying the groundwork in the primaries by winning the Floridas and South Carolinas that has to help for the general election.
I'm as amused by the Gingrich surge as the next guy, but he's going to be disaster as a general election candidate. How can the family values party nominate a guy who's on his 3rd marriage? Yes, that shouldn't matter but it does. Gingrich has the same problem that Sarah Palin or Al Gore had. They were fundamentally unlikeable people that every negative rumor stuck to, whether it was true or not. Aside from Nixon I can't think of anybody else who overcame that to win the WH.
Right now Romney's biggest mission is that he has to get rid of Cain. Cain is running strong down South, and the last thing the GOP needs is the preferred candidate of the base of the party losing to someone who cleaned up delegates in states that have no chance of going Republican in November. That's what happened when McCain won even though Huckleberry won the South and McCain went on to lose three states from the Old Confederacy. Romney won't have any easier time than McCain did, and its not like he can take Cain as a running mate. IF he can start laying the groundwork in the primaries by winning the Floridas and South Carolinas that has to help for the general election.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!
If the GOP had an ounce of sanity Romney would be leading by double digits. If they had an ounce of dignity Huntsman would be.
Foreign policy grades.
John Stewart captured Newt perfectly: "the Pillsbury Dough Boy's dickish know-it-all brother." Gingrich also has twenty years of soundbites playing the "say something outrageous to get on the news cycle" game to kill him. I can't believe anybody actually falls for his falsely erudite witlessness. He is Cornel West with less charm, which is saying something.
If the GOP had an ounce of sanity Romney would be leading by double digits. If they had an ounce of dignity Huntsman would be.
Foreign policy grades.
Last edited:
- Status