Sunday, October 31, 2004

Redskins Lose Predicting Kerry Victory

With the polls being so close, we need to look at other indicators of which way the election is going. We are encouraged by the victory in the Nicelodeon Poll, which historically has been predictive (most likley as the kids know how their parents will vote, even if the parents arent't talking to pollsters).

A number of historical trends favor Kerry, such as the fact that no President elected after losing the popular vote has been reelected, and no President named George Bush has ever won a second term. Now we have something else on our side as Green Bay beat Washington. Since 1932 this game has been predictive, with the incumbent winning if Washington won their last home game, and the challenger winning if Washington lost.

There was another good omen for us on the football field this weekend. Michigan trailed by 17 points to Michigan State and has only come back to win when down by 17 twice. Michigan tied it up and went on win in triple overtime. The MVP's name was Edwards.

Between the Red Sox victory and the Redskin loss, Kerry would certainly win if only the election was held in a sports arena. Hopefully our ground game will also be enough to clinch a victory on Tuesday.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

But this is the year that the "Curse is reversed" isn't it??

6:46 PM  
Blogger Ron Chusid said...

Football and baseball are two different things. Breaking the baseball curse does not change the meaning of the Redskin prediction.

On the other hand, while baseball and football are distinct, apparently both predict politics. As I noted previously, breaking the baseball curse means breaking the "curses" against a northeastern liberal winning, and the curse against a Senator winning.

As most things come in threes, the victories by New Enland last year, along with the Red Sox this year, also suggest a victory for the candidate from Boston.

Of course, like the polls this year, these sports analogies could most likely be used to predict a victory for which ever candidate one prefers.

10:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

As a young women just started working like to have the opportunity to control some of my Social Security Savings by investing in other than in the Government securities. I believe Bush's idea of my own SS account is very good. I have seen people with 401,IRA and other plans are well prepared to face their retired life.
thanks Annie K

5:22 AM  
Blogger Ron Chusid said...

The problem is that Social Security is not an investment plan. The money from people now paying in is what pays the benefits for current retirees. If currently employed people put the money into a retirement account rather than Social Security, there would not be money to pay the current retirees. Bush's plan is something which sounds good but which can never really come about.

What is needed is a combination of traditional Social Security along with tax breaks for retirement programs. Social Security is to provide a bare minimum, not be someone's sole source of retirement income.

Another problem with substituting investiment accounts is that htere is no way to predict what will be in the investment account. What do we do if people retire but don't have enough money for subsistance. At least with the present program we know everyone will have a bare minimum.

6:11 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home