+ Reply to Thread
Page 48 of 48
FirstFirst ... 38 46 47 48
Results 471 to 478 of 478

Thread: Aks Kstat or if he never Comes back Mxy will answer

  1. #471
    A person who tells lies. Tahoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Just fibbing, you guys!
    Posts
    38,773
    I'm not either but I'm going to answer...throw the yellow flag.


    It is flawed logic. But Joe's poll numbers aren't the determining factor on whether Biden gets in. So they are pretty much meaningless as long as he is in the ballpark with polling with support, which he is. I think its a little personal but he could be pushed in by the Dem Party big wigs, imo.


    And if he gets in, he will instantly pull support from both. If he wins Iowa, watch out.


    There will be a small percentage that won't ever leave Bernie and a few dipshits that won't leave Hillary but he will get the entire Dem machine behind him and breeze to the nomination.


    NTAGAS
    Players meeting my ASS!

  2. #472
    Another Q for Mxy, 'cause you seem to keep up with science news: Is there a study somewhere that says that medicine commercials are more effective if they abbreviate the name of the malady in question? Because it seems like every drug ad uses a shortened name for the disease (low-T/OAB/OIC/etc.) and it bugs me a little.

  3. #473
    NOT TO BE FUCKED WITH Uncle Mxy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Zrfff
    Posts
    14,926
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Oobir View Post
    Another Q for Mxy, 'cause you seem to keep up with science news: Is there a study somewhere that says that medicine commercials are more effective if they abbreviate the name of the malady in question? Because it seems like every drug ad uses a shortened name for the disease (low-T/OAB/OIC/etc.) and it bugs me a little.
    The study of money suggests that "low T" led to a whole lot more testosterone than "andropause", which was the name in the 90s before Solvay figured out a way to push more AndroGel (an estrogen blocker, not really a direct testosterone injection -- shh). The real question here -- is "low T" (as distinct from virtually "no T" since birth) even a "disease", any more so than aging as a whole is? Likewise, are most instances of over-active bladder really a "disease" or symptomatic of some other problem (diabetes, diuretics)? Same for "ED". I think the assertion that these fad acronyms are "diseases" deserves reflection. I like your initial word "malady" a lot better, since it gets at the heart of what a lot of drug pushers are going after. Of course, it's hard to get insurance to cover a malady like "my bitchy wife is unattractive to me, so Mr. Happy isn't coming out", so it has to be disease-ified.

    Fuck, I don't even know what OIC is (Google suggest constipation), so whatever they're doing to market it isn't working on me.

    Not sure it's exactly an answer... it's what I have.

  4. #474
    NOT TO BE FUCKED WITH Uncle Mxy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Zrfff
    Posts
    14,926
    Quote Originally Posted by Glantland View Post
    Kstat/Mxy,

    Have a question for you two. Pundits on both sides of the aisle, over the past few days, have pointed to Biden's numbers in recent polls as a sign that he should NOT get in, e.g. "If he's only getting 22% right now and he hasn't even taken any shots yet from opponents, how can he possibly think he can win?"

    My question is, isn't that terribly flawed logic? How can you accurately the assess the support for a candidate using polls that are taken when the candidate hasn't even declared? In other words, how many people in these polls are choosing Hillary or Bernie because they don't (yet?) view Biden as a viable or even ELIGIBLE option?

    I don't hear anyone discussing this, so I'm wondering if I'm just overlooking something here.
    Most of the pundit class falls apart in the face of common sense.

    Clearly, Joe Biden's not running. You don't need two hands and a flashlight to see this, unless you're a moron talking head. He's raised no money. He didn't have the pet projects that a VP angling for Prez does (Bush Sr's "war on drugs", Gore the eco-warrior). He's expressed about as much doubt as a sitting VP can, keeping in mind that Obama could die tomorrow and Biden's next in line. The polls reflect that ambivalence as much as anything. They're mostly to show how weak Hillary is. Apart from disassembling Giuliani, he wasn't a good candidate the first two times he ran for POTUS. So, what's the point?

    Enough words...
    Last edited by Uncle Mxy; 09-14-2015 at 09:58 AM.

  5. #475
    Glenn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    The Buxtons are not thieves.
    Posts
    2,903
    Blog Entries
    2
    All good points, but... I just remember him being interviewed back before Obama selected him and he repeatedly said "I will not accept the VP role if it is offered". He said it straight out, point blank, repeatedly.

    Ultimately he said that when your country calls you to duty, you cannot refuse.
    Find a new slant.

  6. #476
    Glenn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    The Buxtons are not thieves.
    Posts
    2,903
    Blog Entries
    2
    Here's the piece that Heilemann was teasing on Face the Nation yesterday

    http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/ar...new-york-swing
    Find a new slant.

  7. #477
    A Great Name Timone's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Pescara, Italy
    Posts
    66,243
    Blog Entries
    19
    Will I love the way you mock tonight's draft?

  8. #478
    Hasheem Thabeet. Never forget.
    STEW BEEF!

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts