So long as we all get our own personal Six, I’m fine with that. In fact, I really don’t care what my Cylon overlords to to me, then.

Well, I don’t really want to be massacred in cold blood by robots with machine gun hands, so I’m all for electing Admiral Saul Tigh as President. I for one greet our cybernetic overlords with open arms and a request to be made into one of them with spring-loaded legs and multispectrum eyes.

http://messagesfromearth.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/cylons-for-mccain1.jpg

Method here.

So, thee polls of two politicians, those old war-horses ‘A’ and ‘B’:

Poll1: A, 60%; B, 40%.
Poll 2: A, 60%; B, 40%.
Poll 3: A 15%; B, 85%.

What’s the median? Is it A, who won 2 out of 3 polls, or B, who got 55% of the total people polled (assuming all polls are equal size; once this question is settled we can worry about polls with unequal samples )?

It depresses me that an astronomer’s blog would attract people who do not think carefully as a matter of habit – apparently preferring to revert to casual media when away from work. &c, &c, &c …

*Gasp* The common folk here, at a popular astronomy blog? Sorry I missed the rest of your statement, I had to call Jeeves over to clean up the shards of glass from my broken monocle. It’s sooo hard to find good help these days, you know…

It’s funny to see you come in here and bash people for their lack or careful thinking, because you’re making a number of unjustified assertions yourself:
- That you know another person’s thought processes, and that their post here is representative of them, in their entirety,
- That they ‘revert’ to ‘casual media’, (hey I’m all for promiscuous media)
- That they don’t research voting records,
- That they’re constitutional illiterates,
- That they believe everything they read, especially polls and statistics.
I hope you feel at least a twinge hypocritical — or is sloppy thinking fine as long as it’s about other people’s thinking and motives?

I was enjoying the political discussion (oh my, what a vulgar topic – a person of good breeding never discusses politics) when you barged in, waving your e-peen around, and repeatedly smacked it against the wall right in front of us. All of this with your avatar in plain sight – have you no shame?

Since this is the BA’s site and I fear I may have already pushed the limits of his “don’t be a jerk” rule, I’ll forgo the suggestion I had for you and the horse you rode in on, and simply suggest that you try a little harder to not be so antisocial next time.

“The mainstream RIGHT WING parties in countries all over Europe are way to the left of where John McCain is today on a whole host of issues.”

John McCain’s platform is not centrist. He isn’t a neo-con but that does not automatically make him a moderate unless you’re willing to accept the neo-con definition of the word. The mainstream parties in countries all over Europe are way to the left of where John McCain is today on a whole host of issues.

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with that, of course. He has the right to run on whatever platform he wants to, but I find it amazing that so many people believe that because he’s some sort of congenial maverick on a few things, that he’s really a moderate. He only looks moderate when reflected in the mirror of the last eight years. It’s not a true image. If McCain wins, there is no doubt he will run a full-throated conservative presidency, from the economy, through foreign policy, to the judiciary.

If that’s what you want, vote for McCain. But change he ain’t.

Eh… but he’s so old. When poorly lit, he looks like he’s melting. And this is from a 42 year old white guy. He’s just… meh…

And Obama… meh… too Messianic for me. He just another of the “let government solve your problems for you!” type. I just want to be left alone. I have a good career, I invest in real estate, I can retire early if the various governments don’t rape me too hard. Just leave me alone.

He *does* support nuke power, though. That alone could win me if he follows though on it. There’s so many nifty new ideas to try in that arena, and we’re still sitting around with fraking COAL plants.

This goes to show you something: polls can be meaningless.

There’s was a classic case here in California from years ago. They did two polls on a state ballot proposition, and the error bars of the two results did not even overlap. I wish I could recall which one because it might google-able.

The cited analysis had its caveats, which were promptly ignored. Any scientific body should recognize that uncertainty exists in any measurement. This group should not have to be reminded that polls are a measure of the penetration of an idea into the surveyed demographic, and nothing more. Perhaps it has not occurred to you that life itself is a continuing process which we observe at its current level of completion; that the paths to get here and those to leave are non-denumerable. So we presume to say what is likely. I’m OK with that, so long as the observation method is explained. That was done.

Please feel free to be offended if I have impugned the perfect logic and pure source information with which you have constructed your current position on any issue. I am not speaking of you, of course, and I really wish there were more like you.

- Benjamin Disraeli – British prime minister XIX -

by the way Dr.Tyson if a superb scientific and a better human being.

I’m glad I wasn’t drinking anything when I read this:

“If you mean “the right” as in Coulter, Hannity, Limbaugh, Delay, Free Republic, Kristol, et al. then I agree with you. To the “far right” (which is what they are) McCain being squishy on a few right-wing issues is tantamount to him being a socialist.”

If you want to see the Far Right, look into the John Burch Society.

Also, don’t mistake right-wing support for Hillary as her suddenly becoming a darling of the right. It’s more of a function of the right disliking Hillary less than disliking McCain. It’s like a guy taking his date to the multiplex and finding the only movies are “Sex and the City,” “Baby Mama,” and a special showing of “Steel Magnolias.” She asks him to pick one. He must make a choice from these three when what he really was wanting to see was “Iron Man.”

>> Health care and judicial nominees.

The first is supposedly the one issue nearest and dearest to Hillary Clinton’s heart, and the second is probably the issue that most affects women’s rights for the forseeable future. If they really believed in what Clinton was fighting for (instead of just being overawed by her cult of personality) then voting for McCain should not even be an option.

Disappointment and resentment are powerful emotions, but I doubt they will last all the way through November if Clinton enthusiastically makes her case for Obama.

Once McCain had a lock on the GOP nomination, the Right looked at Hillary, Obama, and McCain and concluded *there wasn’t much political difference.* And I heard some say that they would rather vote for Hillary than McCain. Their reasoning was that at least Hillary had experience and was a known factor, and they still had a distaste for McCain.

If you mean “the right” as in Coulter, Hannity, Limbaugh, Delay, Free Republic, Kristol, et al. then I agree with you. To the “far right” (which is what they are) McCain being squishy on a few right-wing issues is tantamount to him being a socialist.

But by any reasonable scale, McCain is a solid Republican conservative on just about all the issues. Sure he’s not a neo-con, but that does not make him a moderate. His campaign platform is solid conservatism — even when it comes to environmental issues — the market rules supreme. And don’t forget, he voted with Bush 95% of the time last year. Not exactly a maverick record.

I simply don’t buy that Clinton suddenly became the darling of the right. Sure she might have won some converts from the moderate right of the Republican party with her populist message, but any change in attitude towards Clinton from those on the hard right during the primary season was merely an appreciation of how disruptive a Democratic Convention floor fight over the nomination would be to the Democrats’ chances.

As for those Clinton supporters who prefer McCain, then either they are blue-dog/Reagan Democrats anyway or they’re still being irrational over Clinton’s loss (I understand, I was gutted when Bush won in 2004, even though I can’t vote in the USA and wasn’t a huge fan of Kerry either!). If Clinton holds to her promise of being Obama’s number one surrogate between now and the election, I expect many of her supporters to come around.

I disagree with this analysis because McCain isn’t exactly the darling of the Right. Before McCain had a lock on the GOP nomination, Romney and Huckabee were essentially the “none of the above” candidates. Huckabee for those who felt that Romney was too much of a flip-flopper, and Romney for those who saw Huckabee as Nehemiah Scudder. Aside from a handful of loyalists (particularly in the Ron Paul camp), no one on the GOP side grabbed the Right’s attention. Frank Thompson came the closest. And the Right was *not* a fan of the Feingold-McCain campaign “reform” bill, interpreting it as infringing on the 1st Amendment.

Once McCain had a lock on the GOP nomination, the Right looked at Hillary, Obama, and McCain and concluded *there wasn’t much political difference.* And I heard some say that they would rather vote for Hillary than McCain. Their reasoning was that at least Hillary had experience and was a known factor, and they still had a distaste for McCain.

Something that’s surprised me is that some staunch Democrats, who assumed Obama would get the nomination, had already said they intended to vote for McCain. Apparently they didn’t see much political difference, either. Whether this same sentiment is nation-wide is another issue.

The issues that concern me the most are Climate Change, Universal Health Care, Iraq Policy, the Deficit Economy, maintaining separation of church/state.

It’s not even close. The policies espoused by Obama and Clinton are pretty much the same when you compare them with McCain. McCain pays lip service to Global Warming, but his policies are pretty much in line with Bush. Universal Health Care? McCain’s a non-starter on that one, and I’m betting that Obama will concede ground to Hillary Clinton on their differences. Iraq? Same again. The deficit economy may be slightly closer, but McCain’s flip-flopped on the Bush tax cuts and now wants to extend them — how is that supposed to help reduce the deficit? As for church/state and other judicial issues, well, McCain has vowed on numerous occasions to nominate “strict constructionist” (code words for “very conservative”) judges to the Supreme Court. The next two judges to die/retire will likely be Stephens and Ginsberg. So voting for McCain is a vote to complete the hard-right swing of the supreme court and it will remain that way for at least a decade or two.

If that’s what you want, vote for McCain, but don’t pretend that voting for him is to vote for a centrist moderate. His promise about the Supreme Court alone should be enough dissuade you of that notion.

I saw what you did there.

Jeffersonian:…There are states with near-entire populace who will not vote for Obama, regardless of the press fervor or issues. The opposite is true of Clinton – the press has ridiculed her every step since day 1,…

Wow — how the heck did you come to that conclusion? First, until February this year, Clinton’s primary campaign was more coronation than a battle, and the press was entirely in the tank for a Clinton cakewalk. Second, even in deepest Appalachia, Obama will get the majority of Democratic votes (and Kerry only got around 67% in those areas last time around). He won’t win there, but your assertion is just silly.

The outcome of the election is not a foregone conclusion, nor would it have been if Clinton — who’s negatives are far higher than Obamas –had been the nominee. How quickly you forget the rabid hatred the right has for the Clintons. They would crawl 100 miles over broken glass to vote against her. They eased up on her in the past few months because they wanted her as the Democratic nominee because they’re worried about the lukewarm reception the rabid right has given McCain.

Obama has just as much chance of beating McCain as Clinton would have. The simple fact that Obama won the nomination against probably the biggest upset in the past 40 years should be enough to keep McCain awake at night, and given McCain’s daily flubs over the past week perhaps it has.

I never base my voting decisions on them, what kind of person would?

I have also already decided whom I will vote for in this presidential election anyway.