Not to be outdone by Obama and his "sympathy vote ploy," Sarah Palin has announced that she will be taking 3 days off from the campaign trail to visit the ailing McCain.

"This blatant pandering to the elderly, especially those great pro-American Joe-six pack grandmothers and fathers of the Jew persuasion living in Florida, is really blatant and pandering. And they're not going to fall for this sympathy vote ploy," Governor Palin told reporters before announcing that she would be "suspending" her campaign to visit her "gravely ill friend and very close person" John McCain.

"While I would love to continue visiting the pro-American parts of our this great country, it is necessary for me to take these few days off to see John while he's recuperating in a Jewish home for the aging in Florida," Governor Palin continued before asking if there were any questions, winking, and immediately leaving the press room. Reporters were then given 45 seconds to question the eight doctors who will be attending to John McCain in Florida. Unfortunately it took nearly a minute for the physicians to assemble on the platform, and once they did an aide signaled that time had already elapsed.

The McCain campaign released a statement shortly after:

This stopover simply reaffirms what real Americans already know: John McCain is an expert in health care. John McCain has spent more time within the health care system in the last 20 years than Barack Obama and Joe Biden have throughout there combined lifetimes. John McCain has seen more doctors than the average 10 Americans. John McCain's copious medical records are a testament to his health care know-how. And John McCain is not endorsed by Hamas.

George Will: "Obama gets two votes because he's black for every one he loses because he's black."

McCain gets 3 votes because he's really old and decaying for every one he loses because he's old and decaying.

Palin gets 5.5 votes because she's inexperienced for every one she loses.

Kerry got 2.3 votes for looking French for every one he lost.

Gore got 4.25 votes for being portrayed as a stiff by the mainstream media for every one he lost.

Obama gets 1.5 votes because his middle name is Hussein for every one he loses.

McCain gets 2.7 votes for acting like an asshole at the debates for every one he loses.

Palin gets 6 votes for coming across as an idiot in her two real interviews for every one she losess.

The list goes on, and on...feel free to add your own.

After reading a not particularly interesting New York Times article about the Bradley Effect I decided to take another look at an older FiveThirtyEight article covering the same subject and using democratic primary data to come to the conclusion that the Bradley Effect may now actually be the Yeldarb Effect. The FiveThirtyEight article uses data from "31 states in which at least three separate polls were released within 14 days of that state's primary or caucus" comparing the final Pollster.com trend line to the actual voting data. They conclude (well, the numbers conclude) that Obama outperformed the trend line by an average of 3.3 points.

Since it's a beautiful windy day outside I decided to sit at my computer and further manipulate the data and I found a couple things that probably don't mean much, but I think are interesting nonetheless. PPB = percent of state's population (or average of percentages for that a specific category) that is black from 2006 Census. All variance numbers are the number by which Obama outperformed the Pollster.com trend line.

PPB         Variance

19.9 +              11.2

10 - 19.8           1.19

0 - 9.9                 0.5

Now the confounding issue with the above little table is that out of the 7 states with a PPB of 19.9% or more, 4 have open primaries (i.e., any party affiliation can vote at any primary). And if we look at this little table:

Primary Type     Variance     PPB

open                         8.27             17.8

closed                       2.01             10.6

closed/semi              0.68             10.6

We see that the open primaries (10 states) in general had a much higher favorable Obama variance than the closed (10 states) or closed/semi (semi-open/semi-closed - 30 states) primaries. But at the same time, we have the confounding issue of the states with open primaries, on average, having a much larger PPB.

I like just looking at the number best: numbers are nice and clean and simple. But if you want to try and actually interpret the numbers things can get a bit hairy:

Why is the +Obama variance so high in states with high PPB?

    Pollsters are not reaching enough black voters...

    The open primary effect is skewing the results...

    Black-voters are turning out in unexpectedly high numbers...

    Black voters in these states lie to pollsters about voting for the black candidate...

    White voters in these states lie to pollsters about voting for the white candidate...

Why is the +Obama variance so high in states with open primaries?

    Same reasons as above...

    Republican meddling...

    Unsure republicans having a preference for Obama...

    Unsure republicans having a dislike for Clinton...

What effect did having a female running mate have on the Bradley/Yeldarb Effect?

And finally, what does any of this mean for 11/4? Will we actually see a Bradley Effect in the general once more republicans are thrown into the fray? Or will we simply see a continuation of the democratic primary patterns? What effect will voter intimidation/suppression/confusion have on the effects that may already be effecting things? So many questions. So many permutations. And really, who the hell knows.

Misc notes: I used 19.9 to start the highest PPB category because Virginia was at the cusp with 19.9 as of 2006 and I decided to drawing the line at 19.9 is about as meaningful as drawing it at 20. I did not use Iowa in any "Primary Type" data because I'm not really sure were it belongs. I did use the other 30 states that FiveThirtyEight had data for.

In a telling sign that the McCain campaign's recent attacks on the character of Barack Obama and the overall 'terrorization' of the democratic nominee is working to plan, McCain himself was attacked for admitting that he had consorted with the presidential hopeful.

During an evening rally last night McCain began touting his bi-partisanship and recalled a time when he "reached across the aisle" to collaborate with his rival Barack Obama. But before McCain could finish his tale of Washington done right, his stage was rushed by a large group of overweight blond women and white men shouting such epitaphs as terrorist-sympathizer, traitor, Muslim, Arab, and ni**** lover. Even Cindy McCain was seen kicking her husband in the gut with a $5,000 stiletto.

Once McCain's secret service finally wrestled away the bulk of the assailants and after a few harrowing minutes between McCain and his personal defibrillator, the republican nominee was able to compose himself enough to thank the crowd for putting country first, while at the same time rebuke them for woefully misplacing their hate. "My friends, I am just like you," McCain insisted while bending down, rolling up his sleeve and holding his forearm in parallel to the unconscious blond mulletted man cluttering the stage. "I am of the same skin -um...I am fundamentally the same as you. The enemy is the other one," he continued, "I am just a Joe-the-six-pack like you," he insisted while pointing behind him at the life-sized card-board cutout of a smiling, winking McCain holding a six-pack in one hand and making the thumbs up sign with the other. The crowd grumbled somewhat reassuredly, most likely not completely convinced because in the cut-out McCain was holding a six-back of Tsingtao.

After the rally, during a brief news conference, McCain derided his rival: "If Barack Obama would have simply agreed to the 536 town-hall meetings I suggested, all of this uglyness could have been avoided."

As kos glowingly points out, Prop 8 is finally catching on. It had been looking like a no-go for some time thanks to those fags in San Francisco and their Nazi propaganda. But it's starting to look like the more level-headed Californians are finally seeing things for what they are and have accepted that marriage needs to be between a man and a woman only.

Now with Prop 8 picking up ground, I say we stick in an add-on amendment (they can do that, right?). We can call it Prop 8.5 and it will just further strengthen the institution of marriage. Prop 8.5 will change the California constitution to show that marriage should be not only between a man and a woman, but between a man and a women of the same race.

If you read the bible as I do, and you read the same version as I do, it's plain to see that God intended marriage to be between a man and woman of the same race only. It is especially important to further sanctify the bond of marriage thusly in light of the upcoming elections and the problems that could arise if Barack Hussein Ayers Obama (God-forbid - though at least he's straight (or is he?)) becomes president.

And if for some reason the homo-loving P.C. wags in the California congress don't add Prop. 8.5 to the ballot, I plan to pencil it in myself and so should you. If we all make our will - God's will - known, they'll have no choice but to cave to the righteous. Individually we may be weak, but together, in numbers, and with anger we're strong. Kind of like a mob.

Ok, so he's not really a friend, more like an acquaintance (and I'm white if that matters to anyone). But anyway we were talking about something and he mentions a show he was watching so I segue to the last debate (which he missed) and mention what a bastard McCain is.

"You think so," he tells me in a surprised way, which is when I find out he's still undecided. I suppose it's naive of me, but I can't help but assume that the intelligent, cool people I know (or are acquainted with) are democrats, or at least, as tired of the Bush and Friends bullshit we've had to deal with over the last 8 years as I am. And I suppose the fact that he was black may have had something to do with the degree of my assumption (though I do assume this of my white acquaintances as well).

He starts in with the spoon-fed crap about experience and Obama's flip-flopping (when the fuck did reevaluation and mind-changing become such a bad thing?), but the point that I thought was really interesting came out a little later in our conversation.

He said he was worried how bad tings are with the economy and with the country in general being so deeply buried in the steaming shit Bush has been shoveling on us for 8 years (not his exact words ;). He's worried that if Obama wins and subsequently is unable to dig us out sufficiently, and things just continue to get worse, as they may regardless of who's in office at this point, that Obama may be seen as a failure and people will say (or think): well there you go, that's what happens when you let a black guy run things.

Of course, that's a pathetically bad reason not to vote for Obama, but I thought it was an interesting point nonetheless.

I've got a pretty intense distaste for those potential voters who have yet to make up their minds. Unless you're completely isolated from all forms of media and information dispersal in general, you should have made a decision by now. But that's a side-rant, here's the main rant:

Compare the CBS snap poll of 'undecided' voters from the first debate to the CBS poll from tonight's debate.

Who won:   Obama   McCain  M.O.V.  Draw

debate 1       39            25         +14       36

debate 2       39            27         +12       34

It's essentially the same. But it sure looked to me that Obama did much better and McCain did much worse in this debate, and this sentiment is backed-up by the CNN poll of all watchers (Obama debate 1: +13; Obama debate 2: +24).

This leads me to conclude that about 65% of these 'undecided' voters that CBS is polling are, in fact, decided, while the other 35% or so are the kind of fucking idiots who buy whatever the last ad they saw told them to and believe whatever the last pundit they heard tells them is true. These 35% will likely just pick whichever name comes first on their ballots.