But one thing is certain. We have a bet on the Wisconsin gubernatorial race, and that's a bet we put in writing the day we made it. Want to see the writing?
Oktubre 31, 2014
Now, Meade is telling me that we're just playing and we didn't even have a snow bet this year, that I'm remembering a bet we made last year...
... as we argue about what the standard for "snow" really was, and he hews to the theory that it was about whether the sidewalks needed at least a sweeping if not a shoveling, and I say it had to do with noticeable sticking on the ground, at least a dusting. Dusting, sweeping... all that is broomed away by the realization that perhaps we did not even have a snow bet this year.
But one thing is certain. We have a bet on the Wisconsin gubernatorial race, and that's a bet we put in writing the day we made it. Want to see the writing?
But one thing is certain. We have a bet on the Wisconsin gubernatorial race, and that's a bet we put in writing the day we made it. Want to see the writing?
Mga Post
73 komento:
What is the under in this case?
Does it mean that Walker will get higher and Burke will get lower?
They both will do worse and a third party will do better?
Walker will do worse and Burke will do better?
I'm guessing it's Walker under. But not sure.
This is ambiguous- under what?
You've built some wiggle room and it's all a bit unsavory.
I was told earlier today that it's snowing in Racine. Alas, another winter is arriving. (But I won't be there!!!!)
Whatever. The one bet I really REALLY care about is my bet that the corn market has set a firm bottom.
Only a law professor could cover all bets this effectively. I see endless litigation in the courts over this no matter what.
Hope the prediction itself is right on, which it seems might be a possibility.
If the ground is white, you had snow. If the ground is not white, you did not.
Bets with friends can be handshake deals. Bets with members of the same household must be put in writing. (And by "must" I mean "really really should.")
The "under" had to do with under the margin of 7%.
What are the rounding rules? Would 52.7% = 53%?
"The "under" had to do with under the margin of 7%."
What if Burke wins by 7.5%?
"What if Burke wins by 7.5%? "
Then all bets are off and Wisconsin is headed to hell in a hand basket.
"Whatever. The one bet I really REALLY care about is my bet that the corn market has set a firm bottom."
I would've thought you'd be more of a hog report guy.
Meade said...
"Whatever. The one bet I really REALLY care about is my bet that the corn market has set a firm bottom."
10/31/14, 11:49 AM
Did you take a position in the market?
@Meade, you're right that corn and soybeans can be had for a song. Too bad the family farm is selling.
What if Burke wins by 7.5%?
Then it won't matter, because Civil War.
My understanding of the bet is that if Walker gets at least 53%, Meade wins. He chose 53%, and I had the opportunity to pick over or under. I picked under.
I now see that since it says Burke 46, it's possible that the bet is about the spread, and what Meade was picking was a 7-point spread, and there are other ways that could be met, such as by Walker getting 52% and Burke 45%. So maybe Meade wins as long as the spread is at least 7 points.
I'll participate in arguing about that distinction if and when it makes a difference.
For now, the writing is what it is, and our memories of what we meant are as hazy as they are.
Oh well. I'll bet in the end you'll submit.
Because that's what a good wife does.
Meade-----+1
Tank's prediction:
Wisconsin beats Rutgers by more than four touchdowns.
Woe is me and my alma mater (law school).
Herb, my brother!
What fascinates me is that Meade hit the spread in the final Marquette poll. But that only has Walker at 50%, with Burke at 43%:
"A new Marquette Law School Poll finds Republican Gov. Scott Walker leading Democratic challenger Mary Burke 50 percent to 43 percent among likely voters in the Wisconsin governor’s race. Another 3 percent say that they are undecided or that they do not know whom they will support, while 1 percent say that they will vote for someone else. Likely voters are those who say that they are certain to vote in the November election."
Isn't it weird that there are people who say they are certain to vote, but at this late date still don't know who they are voting for? And this accounts for 3% of the likely voters? What's up with these people? I think there's a chunk of the populace that just can't admit they might not vote.
My record at predicting political races isn't much better than Dick Morris'.
Yes, that bad.
The lady wins both bets
It is not wise to make bets with your wife and win.
Maybe I missed it. Has Althouse indicated which candidate she intends to vote for? I'm sensing a lot of sympathy for Burke.
I don't think Meade accounted for the voter ID law getting suspended. You are going to get some surprisingly high turnouts in Madison.
"Then all bets are off and Wisconsin is headed to hell in a hand basket."
Wait. Please let me amend that: If Burke wins next Tuesday, I suggest that Wisconsinites look at it not so much as a "firing" of Scott Walker but that, after working very hard to turn the state around, producing extremely impressive numbers (that we can't really show you the documents of), he will have completed Phase 1, so Wisconsin will have decided to reorganize its overseas operations, eliminating his position, at a time when he was ready to leave anyway, he is taking a snowboarding sabbatical, and will return for Phase 2.
For now, the writing is what it is, and our memories of what we meant are as hazy as they are.
Maybe you could explain that to these guys.
PPP has it 48%-47% Walker. Huge sample of 1800 likely voters. 4 out of the last 5 polls has either Burke up by 1% or Walker up by 1%, or tied. Possibly explains the recent desperate attack on Burke using a dude who thinks Obama is a homo-Nazi. That's our Guv!
"Maybe I missed it. Has Althouse indicated which candidate she intends to vote for? I'm sensing a lot of sympathy for Burke."
I'm voting for Walker, for the third time in 4 years.
My original vote in 2010 was based almost entirely upon my belief that high-speed train money was a boondoggle.
My vote in the 2012 recall was based on opposition to using a recall to change the outcome of an election. I thought it was horribly disruptive and an inappropriate use of the procedure, which I would prefer to abolish.
My vote this time is based on my belief that Walker deserves the vote of confidence that he's been doing a good enough job and that a reversal of direction is not called for. I consider him competent and stable, and I don't think we've gotten a clear picture of who Mary Burke is and whether she's reliable and independent enough under pressure from the various entrenched interests who exercise power through the Democratic Party
Plus it lets you polish your not reflexively voting for women cred, so you can then scratch that itch that you are itching to scratch with Hillary.
*ducks*
garage, the final polling for the 2012 recall election had PPP giving Walker +3, Marquette giving Walker +7, and the RCP Average giving Walker +6.7. Final result was Walker +6.8.
If that pattern holds for Walker's reelection, I figure next Tuesday's results should be close to Walker +6.9.
Darn! I'll be losing my bet with Althouse. Shoot, shucks, and phooey!
Note:
That previous *ducks* was because my comment was intended as a humorous reference to both the itching to vote for Hillary meme, and the NYT trying to recover their credibility regarding the race card idea.
I should probably duck again for my badly mixed metaphors in that comment as well, so:
*ducks*
*ducks* like a duck...
Looking at the new PPP poll, my first question is: What's with 95% of people saying that they are "certain" to vote?
Then there's this:
Q7 In the last presidential election, did you vote for
Barack Obama or Mitt Romney?
Barack Obama................................................50%
Mitt Romney.................................................... 44%
Someone else / Don't remember .................... 6%
The actual spread in Wisconsin in 2012 was: Obama 52.83%, Romney 45.89%.
And:
Q8 If you are a woman, press 1. If a man, press 2.
Woman ........................................................... 53% Man................................................................. 47%
What's up with the gender imbalance?
If that pattern holds for Walker's reelection, I figure next Tuesday's results should be close to Walker +6.9.
No way Walker wins by anywhere near that, although I think he is probably up by 1% or 2%. BTW, PPP had Obama +3, Baldwin +3 in final 2012 poll. Obama won by 7, Baldwin by 5. GAB only predicts a 57% turnout, which, if true, more than anything would be Burke's downfall.
Meade said...
"Whatever. The one bet I really REALLY care about is my bet that the corn market has set a firm bottom."
I'm with you on the firm bottom. I don't much care what or who it's on.
@Achilles: I took a long position on Dec. corn when it touched 352. You?
What's up with the gender imbalance?
Part of the polling was sub-contracted to guys hanging out on the street:
So who ya gonna vote for, mami...
Hey, a guy's trying to poll you, it's rude not to answer...
LOL!
*ducks*
I remember driving back to law school from a weekend away with a number of fellow law students. At one point someone said it had snowed back at school, someone disagreed, and we spent about a half hour arguing about how to determine who had won the snow bet.
What if one of us could see one snow flake when we returned? What if the grass was white but the roads were black? What if there were no snow on the ground but someone who was there said there had been? Etc.
It taught me something important about law school.
Althouse: "... and I don't think we've gotten a clear picture of who Mary Burke is and whether she's reliable and independent enough under pressure from the various entrenched interests who exercise power through the Democratic Party."
Really?
I mean, really?
I think we have developed quite a clear picture of who Burke is and whether or not she's a reliable lackey for the various dem party entrenched interests.
The one bet I really REALLY care about is my bet that the corn market has set a firm bottom.
Judging by this years harvest That's pretty damn low.
Unless, of course, "corn market" and "firm bottom" are code for something else.
So garage is already conceding defeat, but won't concede a blowout. Good times.
I think we have developed quite a clear picture of who Burke is and whether or not she's a reliable lackey for the various dem party entrenched interests.
Not as clear as Walker's entrenched interests. "Take Koch's money"
I hope Meade means popcorn. The popcorn price should go up soon as the Democrats flee the sinking ship.
As a long time resident of the last surviving Soviet Republic, New York, I envy you the opportunity to vote for a politician with the qualities which Governor Walker has displayed in the face of political assaults funded by taxes levied on the public in the form of inflated salaries to public union employees. He has retained a composure and dignity throughout..
The popcorn price should go up soon as the Democrats flee the sinking ship.
Cult members' tears are delicious as well
garage is very upset that the 69th largest political donor donates to Walker.
Can you imagine garages rage against the Koch's if they moved all the way up to 64th on the political giving list?!
My God! What a calamity that would be.
Our middle school (all white no doubt) football Heeee-ro would probably have a heart attack.
LOL
BTW garage, Mary Burke herself could have been an "entrenched interest" if she had found success in the private sector.
But she couldn't.
Which is why her own family dumped her.
LOL
I'm voting for Walker, for the third time in 4 years.
My original vote in 2010 was based almost entirely upon my belief that high-speed train money was a boondoggle.
My vote in the 2012 recall was based on opposition to using a recall to change the outcome of an election.
If I vote for Walker, it will break the tie. I voted against him (I thought his ludicrous 250K jobs claim was baloney, and a vast underestimate (!) of what happens during a good recovery; plus my brother-in-law plays cards with Barrett, or has), then for him (because I thought the Recall a waste of time, and I don't buy the notion that Teacher Unions are a good idea).
If I vote for Burke, it's because I enjoy split party power in the State. If I vote for Walker, it's because I appreciate his devotion to the direction the state is going, even if I might not agree with all of it.
You never get a politician you wholeheartedly agree with, unless you don't think.
@MadisonMan misses the bullseye by a wide margin here!
we spent about a half hour arguing about how to determine who had won the snow bet.
Seasoned punters bet on ice out.
I was going to vote for Walker until I seen one of his buddies, and Jefferson County Republican Chair, post several swastikas memes on Facebook. As we know all too well, that is worse than pretty much anything on earth. I know Althouse and commenters here are very sensitive to swastikas being attached to politicians, so it's surprising there isn't more of an uproar?
Written bets? Why so formal?
garage, was the buddy you "seen" proudly marching around the Capitol with his swastika Facebook memes along with 100,000 of his other buddies chanting "THIS is what democracy looks like"? (Mob rule).
I know how sensitive you are to other people's lack of common sense.
garage, was the buddy you "seen" proudly marching around the Capitol with his swastika Facebook memes along with 100,000 of his other buddies chanting "THIS is what democracy looks like"? (Mob rule).
I didn't personally see the swastika guy at the Capitol. But, Mary Burke isn't pals with that person either. Also, swastika guy at the Capitol isn't the Chair of the Jefferson County Democratic Party.
Don't you agree with the MJS that Walker should disavow Ellerman and his hurtful and hateful memes against the First Lady and POTUS? Don't you agree Ellerman should be removed from his position by Walker?
Or are you okay with Walker's buddy publicly calling POTUS a homo-nazi?
Assuming arguendo, garage: yes, yes, and no.
But, Mary Burke isn't pals with that person either.
How do you know?
How do you know?
To be fair, there aren't pictures on the internet of them posing with each other.
To be fair, did you see for yourself the Facebook posts of what you call Walker's swastika-meme-ing buddy?
"We would have gotten away with it if it weren't for those meddling Koch brothers!"
To be fair, did you see for yourself the Facebook posts of what you call Walker's swastika-meme-ing buddy?
I saw screen shots. Ellerman took them all down after they were discovered.
Hmm. Would you mind emailing me the screenshots? Thanks.
I can grab them off Twitter if you like.
Yes please.
Here is the ad - the image comes on at:30
Mary Burke Ad
Looks pretty benign, but I assume things are pretty quiet today because so many WI Dems are covering their internet tracks. In the case of Graeme Zielinski (former WI Dem Spokesman, "Walker is like Jeffery Dahmer"), extra help has been called in and will be adding a 3rd shift.
Re the ad - image actually is at :08
Here is the image:
Swastika
Oops - wrong one - this is the one:
Hope and Change/Swastika
Technically, Zielinski compared Walker's legal team to Dahmer. One of Walker's attorneys defending a dude that killed his father with an axe.
Technically, Zielinski compared Walker's legal team to Dahmer
Technically, I think he was comparing Walker's legal team to Dahmer's legal team.
zielinski-twitter-screenshot
I have pictures of liberals using swastikas against Walker.
It's bad, but there's a huge difference between using a swastika to make an image that conveys the message that somebody else is a fascist and using a swastika to express your own approval of Nazis.
"But one thing is certain. We have a bet on the Wisconsin gubernatorial race, and that's a bet we put in writing the day we made it. Want to see the writing?"
Congratulations on winning our bet.
I predicted Walker would win by 7 or more but he only won by 6. I failed to factor in just how much Chisholm and the Dem's John Doe "investigation" would chill the free speech rights of Eric O'Keefe and others. In other words: voter suppression.
Mag-post ng isang Komento
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 4 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.