<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Who Will Win</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/03/17/who-will-win/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/03/17/who-will-win/</link>
	<description>Random samplings from a universe of ideas.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 22:18:33 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Robert O'Brien</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/03/17/who-will-win/comment-page-1/#comment-26271</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert O'Brien</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2007 02:25:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/03/17/who-will-win/#comment-26271</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Fred and Newt bring significant personal baggage.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

What baggage does Fred Thompson bring? The recent slip in &lt;i&gt;Law &amp; Order&lt;/i&gt; ratings?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Fred and Newt bring significant personal baggage.</p></blockquote>
<p>What baggage does Fred Thompson bring? The recent slip in <i>Law &amp; Order</i> ratings?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: damselfly</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/03/17/who-will-win/comment-page-1/#comment-26269</link>
		<dc:creator>damselfly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Mar 2007 03:34:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/03/17/who-will-win/#comment-26269</guid>
		<description>I wouldn&#039;t rule out the R&#039;s running Fred Thompson. At least it would get him off Law &amp; Order.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wouldn&#8217;t rule out the R&#8217;s running Fred Thompson. At least it would get him off Law &amp; Order.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dinsdale</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/03/17/who-will-win/comment-page-1/#comment-26246</link>
		<dc:creator>Dinsdale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 00:44:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/03/17/who-will-win/#comment-26246</guid>
		<description>Thanks John Casey.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks John Casey.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Casey</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/03/17/who-will-win/comment-page-1/#comment-26289</link>
		<dc:creator>John Casey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 00:10:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/03/17/who-will-win/#comment-26289</guid>
		<description>Dimesdale,

Obama got 70% of the votes cast; 3.5 million voted for him.

That represents 54% of the 6.44 million registered voters, and 36.8% of the approx. 9.5 million eligible to vote.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dimesdale,</p>
<p>Obama got 70% of the votes cast; 3.5 million voted for him.</p>
<p>That represents 54% of the 6.44 million registered voters, and 36.8% of the approx. 9.5 million eligible to vote.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: beezle</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/03/17/who-will-win/comment-page-1/#comment-26270</link>
		<dc:creator>beezle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2007 23:08:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/03/17/who-will-win/#comment-26270</guid>
		<description>sorry late to read the post.. as to Rudy...the thing with that firefighters union has many undertones. Pre Nov 01 Rudy had very good relations with both police and firefighters.  As to NY hating Rudy, consider he was twice elected as a Republican in a city that is &lt;i&gt;overwhelmingly&lt;/i&gt; democratic and he is widely credited for the turnaround and resurgence of the city.  Having worked in NYC during the 80s and 90s, I can first hand say you can&#039;t begin to compare pre to post Rudy.  As to the press club dinners in drag, well.. I don&#039;t think he&#039;ll be getting to many dates!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>sorry late to read the post.. as to Rudy&#8230;the thing with that firefighters union has many undertones. Pre Nov 01 Rudy had very good relations with both police and firefighters.  As to NY hating Rudy, consider he was twice elected as a Republican in a city that is <i>overwhelmingly</i> democratic and he is widely credited for the turnaround and resurgence of the city.  Having worked in NYC during the 80s and 90s, I can first hand say you can&#8217;t begin to compare pre to post Rudy.  As to the press club dinners in drag, well.. I don&#8217;t think he&#8217;ll be getting to many dates!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Elliot</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/03/17/who-will-win/comment-page-1/#comment-26244</link>
		<dc:creator>Elliot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2007 16:43:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/03/17/who-will-win/#comment-26244</guid>
		<description>Unfortunately you probably need to update the percentatages as it appears that Edwards will be focusing on his wife&#039;s health at this point.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Unfortunately you probably need to update the percentatages as it appears that Edwards will be focusing on his wife&#8217;s health at this point.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Count Iblis</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/03/17/who-will-win/comment-page-1/#comment-26292</link>
		<dc:creator>Count Iblis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2007 21:53:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/03/17/who-will-win/#comment-26292</guid>
		<description>McCain is in favor of attacking Iran, if diplomatic pressure and sanctions fail to persuade Iran to suspend their uranium enrichment program. I think that this issue will become very important at election time, because it doesn&#039;t look like Iran will suspend their enrichment program anytime soon.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>McCain is in favor of attacking Iran, if diplomatic pressure and sanctions fail to persuade Iran to suspend their uranium enrichment program. I think that this issue will become very important at election time, because it doesn&#8217;t look like Iran will suspend their enrichment program anytime soon.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Maynard Handley</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/03/17/who-will-win/comment-page-1/#comment-26288</link>
		<dc:creator>Maynard Handley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2007 21:36:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/03/17/who-will-win/#comment-26288</guid>
		<description>The Political Science answer to this is fairly unambiguously Hillary Clinton as Dem nominee, as far as I can tell.

To the extent that Political Science (ie try to tease something useful out of very small data sets with a constantly varying background) means anything, the evidence of the past has been that the current (ie post1972) nomination process is something of a sham, that the real work happens in the &quot;Invisible Primary&quot; which consists of obtainining the endorsement/support of ward leaders and higher in the party. This seems to be a significantly more important factor than national popularity, popularity amongst party members, money raised, etc.
Everything I see leads me to believe that HC is far ahead on this score.

On the Republican side, amusing as it is to see the party imploding, I cannot see any of the three stooges as being especially popular to ward leaders, so god knows what will happen.

One could argue that the internet changes everything, that whereas in 1996 or whatever the rank and file voted as the ward leaders told them to/suggested they do, now they have enough info to behave differently. Perhaps, although my guess would be that, while this may be true in  the future, we aren&#039;t there yet.

As for the election, the most significant driver (from what I can remember)) is the state of the economy at the time of the election (not what is was like average over the last 4 years, or what it looks like it&#039;s headed to). War&#039;s being lost don&#039;t help, though there are few data points. Desire for change (ie switch parties just for the sake of switching) is not insignificant. My guess would be that the perfect storm we&#039;re headed to as housing collapses, trade imbalance is out of control, money is wasted on the military rather than anything more useful, health-care continues to rise, etc, will break before the election, and not early enough before that it could somehow be hidden in time. So my guess (based on the best the limited science of this field has to say, rather than my hopes and dreams) would be that the dem nominee becomes president, and that that nominee will be Ms Clinton.

(VP? I know of no research that tracks that, which means no more than that my knowledge of this subject is very limited. Presumably it will be whoever of Obama and Edwards is perceived as being more likely to pull in the marginal Republican voter. On those grounds, my guess would be that, sorry Obama, it&#039;ll be Edwards not you.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Political Science answer to this is fairly unambiguously Hillary Clinton as Dem nominee, as far as I can tell.</p>
<p>To the extent that Political Science (ie try to tease something useful out of very small data sets with a constantly varying background) means anything, the evidence of the past has been that the current (ie post1972) nomination process is something of a sham, that the real work happens in the &#8220;Invisible Primary&#8221; which consists of obtainining the endorsement/support of ward leaders and higher in the party. This seems to be a significantly more important factor than national popularity, popularity amongst party members, money raised, etc.<br />
Everything I see leads me to believe that HC is far ahead on this score.</p>
<p>On the Republican side, amusing as it is to see the party imploding, I cannot see any of the three stooges as being especially popular to ward leaders, so god knows what will happen.</p>
<p>One could argue that the internet changes everything, that whereas in 1996 or whatever the rank and file voted as the ward leaders told them to/suggested they do, now they have enough info to behave differently. Perhaps, although my guess would be that, while this may be true in  the future, we aren&#8217;t there yet.</p>
<p>As for the election, the most significant driver (from what I can remember)) is the state of the economy at the time of the election (not what is was like average over the last 4 years, or what it looks like it&#8217;s headed to). War&#8217;s being lost don&#8217;t help, though there are few data points. Desire for change (ie switch parties just for the sake of switching) is not insignificant. My guess would be that the perfect storm we&#8217;re headed to as housing collapses, trade imbalance is out of control, money is wasted on the military rather than anything more useful, health-care continues to rise, etc, will break before the election, and not early enough before that it could somehow be hidden in time. So my guess (based on the best the limited science of this field has to say, rather than my hopes and dreams) would be that the dem nominee becomes president, and that that nominee will be Ms Clinton.</p>
<p>(VP? I know of no research that tracks that, which means no more than that my knowledge of this subject is very limited. Presumably it will be whoever of Obama and Edwards is perceived as being more likely to pull in the marginal Republican voter. On those grounds, my guess would be that, sorry Obama, it&#8217;ll be Edwards not you.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kapakapa</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/03/17/who-will-win/comment-page-1/#comment-26287</link>
		<dc:creator>kapakapa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2007 09:47:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/03/17/who-will-win/#comment-26287</guid>
		<description>The Inconvenient Truth left me a very favorable impression of Al Gore.

Does anyone know why he is not running?
Does he think he has little chance?
Does he fear something if he runs?
Or is he just lurking for the right moment?  Or he has had enough?

My preference would be a duo of Gore as president and Obama as VP.

Whoever becomes the next president, I&#039;m afraid he/she will inherit a financial and deplomatic mess.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Inconvenient Truth left me a very favorable impression of Al Gore.</p>
<p>Does anyone know why he is not running?<br />
Does he think he has little chance?<br />
Does he fear something if he runs?<br />
Or is he just lurking for the right moment?  Or he has had enough?</p>
<p>My preference would be a duo of Gore as president and Obama as VP.</p>
<p>Whoever becomes the next president, I&#8217;m afraid he/she will inherit a financial and deplomatic mess.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Binh</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/03/17/who-will-win/comment-page-1/#comment-26260</link>
		<dc:creator>Binh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 2007 17:19:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/03/17/who-will-win/#comment-26260</guid>
		<description>If you want to know why Giuliani won&#039;t become President, watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IrE6FMpai8</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you want to know why Giuliani won&#8217;t become President, watch this:<br />
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IrE6FMpai8" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IrE6FMpai8</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
