Friday, September 19, 2008

First thing we do, let's kill all the canaries and roosters!

Comes word from on high that market regulators are considering banning or otherwise restricting short selling, to "help stabilize the markets." Genius. Thank God our men and women of vision are on the job, saving us from the evil speculators.

It brings to mind how in the old days, miners would take various birds, most famously canaries, down into the mines, presumably because they enjoyed the plumage--the mines being otherwise such a dark and dreary place. Trouble is, the birds would die occasionally, and there was very often a buildup of toxic gas in the mine at the very same time! Clearly the canaries were a serious hazard, the gas buildup often sickening or even killing miners. Thankfully, the practice is now a thing of the past, the birds are rarely taken into the mines, and the number of gas-related miner deaths has declined apace!

On a related note, it has come to my attention that nearly all recent stock market declines have taken place during daylight hours (market local time, that is). Given the seriousness of this problem, I call for a large scale rooster-slaughtering program. Eliminate the sunrise, and I can nearly guarantee that the stock market will stop dropping (if not immediately, then at least after one final round of selling). Yes, this does raise the problem of how we will get more chickens in the future, but I am simultaneously calling for our genetic scientists to get to work on cloning hens, which should resolve the matter in short order.

You can thank me later.

Labels: , , , , ,

Monday, September 08, 2008

Biden v. Palin Update

Let me make the VP debate my own little theme here, for a while. (Why not? I am thinking of retooling the whole blog idea away from politics and toward philosophy, physics, metaphysics, that sort of thing, but for the time being, this is sort of fun...)

Dahlia Lithwick offers sound advice to Biden & co. over at Slate. I think this is perfectly fine, as far as it goes. It is perfectly consistent with my own take, where I simply suggest, "be confident, relaxed and charming." Lithwick offers other substantive notes on the gender/culture dynamics at work in the debate. While, again, I think she has sound advice, it is merely a list of helpful suggestions about maximizing Biden's debate performance, and minimizing some of Palin's natural advantages, and it is not, alas, a real prescription for winning.

It does not affect the fundamental dynamic, as I have called it: Palin wins the pre-debate expectations game, and therefore wins the debate...

But go, go, counter-meme! It is just barely possible that the "Palin should win" counter meme could win out, and an expectations inversion saves the day! As an Obama partisan, I'd be happy to see that happen, but I'm still doubting it.

Labels: , ,

Friday, September 05, 2008

More On Palin's "Surprising" Debate Victory

Tim Cavanaugh at Reason is calling it for Palin, also. He predicts

[T]he hyper-informed Biden will demonstrate his mastery of the facts, leave no doubt about his flair for complex policy questions, get his ass handed to him in the debate, and never understand what went wrong.

An "ass-handing" no less! If this kind of talk can gain MSM credence (and I believe it is highly unlikely) then it could cause an inversion of expectations. Again, this is nothing the Obama/Biden camp has any control over, it is all about the media narrative, the dominant expectations meme in the media environment at the moment of the debate.

The most likely outcome is a "functional" ("actual") tie, meaning competence on both sides and no major gaffes. The "win" will go to whomever is the consensus "underdog" going in, which is almost certain to be Palin.

The only way Palin can lose (barring improbable meltdown) is if she is somehow expected (by media consensus) to win.

Labels: , ,

And the Winner of the Vice-Presidential Debate...

Palin! Natch. Mickey Kaus is already calling this one, and I pretty much agree.

Here's how it breaks down: The expectations game will easily break in her favor. Biden's much greater relative experience level will raise his performance expectations and keep hers dampened. She will study hard. (Seems to be capable enough, and will master her flash cards easily enough--this is not snark, Biden will study as well, but he has less of that sort of prep work, because of said experience.) She will easily rattle off whatever foreign policy talking points are required. She will be focused (as will Biden) on attacking the top of the opposing ticket. She will easily meet all the basic requirements. Merely even "holding her own" against Biden will be declared a victory for Palin in the media meta-story, and not a damn thing Joe Biden or anyone else can do about it.

Caveat: As of today, I see only one narrative line that leads to a potential Palin weakness in the debate. It is possible that she will stay in full-bore attack dog mode so much of the time that it could come to taint her aura. (Some have already dubbed her a "pit bull in lipstick".) She was apparently quite scathing in her convention speech, which certainly played well to the base, but there is a possibility of taking it too far for the swing voters in play. Doesn't seem likely. First, apparently there is something of a gender/appearance card in play, whereby (non-Hillary) women get away with saying nasty things that would backfire on a man (see: Ann Coulter, Sarah Silverman). Second, even if this stigma does begin to attach to her, she would just need to dial it back a bit for the debate, and presto! Perfect lady again!

The odds breakdown (as of September 4):

1) Media calls "Palin Win" - 90% (Note sub-breakdown below.)

1a) Palin "wins" by keeping it close and "beating expectations" - 85%

1b) Palin truly beats Biden by any reasonable measure - 5% - This means even partisan Dems agree she wins. She masters all questions, gives better answers, gets in all the zingers, and/or Biden chokes with major gaffe or loss of composure.

2) Media Calls "Draw" - 5% - This means Biden really does look better, but no so-called "knockout blow" is landed. By still "beating expectations," she is given the draw.

3) Media Calls "Biden Win" - 5% - Palin really stumbles. Gets lost or stumped, loses composure, or commits serious gaffe.

Biden's best hope? Look charming and confident, cross fingers. Perhaps another hurricane or other act of God intervenes, scrapping the debate...

Labels: , ,

Wednesday, September 03, 2008

Palin on deck, and...

.... KNOCKS IT OUT OF THE PARK!!!!!!!!

... or so the press is absolutely going to say. Absolutely no need to watch the speech, as Timothy Noah writing at Slate is calling beforehand.

This post is not exactly important--i.e. probably even less important than my average post. But I am linking above and joining Noah's bandwagon so that, in my own small way, I will be on the record before she speaks tonight. It is 100% likely that it will be billed as a great success, exactly as Tim Noah predicts.

This is not to say anything one way or the other about what Palin's qualifications are (or are not). Just that the speech will yield absolutely no additional information on that question, or any other question that really matters. It is being billed as "critical", "important", blah, blah, blah, and that is all bullshit. She is perfectly competent at reading from a teleprompter, looks good on camera, is not stupid, is comfortable in the spotlight, and will perform without incident. Hooray! Cue the flags...

This crap is exactly why I (pretty much) stopped watching conventions. Nothing of any actual significance will transpire (just as nothing really happened in Denver last week), but the media, having drunk the Kool-Aid (made and ladled up by the two major parties... grape or cherry? blue or red?) are compelled to pretend that important things actually do happen at the conventions, otherwise they are wasting our time and a whole lot of money.

And the debates? Don't get me started....