Posts Tagged ‘Statistical Analysis
(1) For anyone working remotely connected to nonprofits, you know what a terrible environment it is for fundraising. Our Buzz brother Sebastian Gray is a nonprofit development consultant here in Chicago, and fundraises for educational and arts organizations. In Chicago, many funding sources are depleted because of Mayor Daley’s Olympics bid push, but others untouched by that have dried up as big money’s fled Chicago for better tax districts in Wisconsin, Michigan, etc. In other cities, Sebastian’s friends report the same thing happening: money that was there less than a year ago, and could be regularly counted on, has just vanished. It is a brutal time to be in development. It’s stunning that Bush raised $100 million so quickly in a normal year, let alone in this economy.
(2) For a President who is supposedly a pariah or persona non grata this number is amazingly high, at a time when Bush has absolutley no political favors to give, has zero clout, is a constant punching bag for the new administration, and remains the butt of Jay Leno’s stale, chin garbled jokes. What’s the incentive to give money to Bush when he can’t do anything for you? There’s an interesting book out by neurologist Jonah Lehrer called ‘How We Decide’ that addresses decision-making as not a rational process the way we fool ourselves to believe: giving money, especially, is emotional in nature. It’s not about what we can get in return generally speaking, but the feelings we have for the receiver of our largesse. This means that $100 million is, to a large degree, coming from people who miss having Dubya in office and who generally like the man on a very personal level. That’s diametrically opposed to what the MSM would have us believe, and adds more credence to our firm belief that Bush will ultimately settle into the middle of the presidential pack, somewhere above his father but somewhere a few notches down from Bill Clinton. All that ridiculous talk of Bush finding himself in the company of Harding, Hoover, Buchanan, and the like is wishful thinking on the part of the MSM, but won’t be the reality for historians. In 20 years, the prosperous, democratic, stable and secure Iraq Bush envisioned will indeed be a reality, and will stand alongside Germany and Japan as stalwart American allies repurposed somewhat in our own image from the enemies of the past. Now, before you get all crazy in comments, we still do not believe there were WMDs in Iraq, and we believe Bush misled the nation by imagining they were there, sending his willing fool Colin Powell to the UN to lie about their existence. We understand why Bush lied though, as he needed some excuse to go ahead with the transformation of Iraq for long-term US interests, and the WMDs ended up being that excuse. IRAN would have been our target back in 2003, as it is the root of about 70% of terrorism in the world, and almost 100% of the threats to Israel. But an American-Iranian War would have been brutal, costing tens of thousands of lives and endangering Israel in the crosshairs. Bush took out the paper tiger of Saddam Hussein and had guts enough to sacrifice his personal popularity for the long-term benefit of Americans. That took a lot of guts, even if most people do not understand it, and do not agree with it. Someday, when you can vacation in Baghdad the way you do Berlin and Tokyo, and the stabilizing influence of the SECOND democracy in the Middle East, after Israel, brings great benefit to oil production, energy policy, and saftey worldwide, a man villainized in his day could very well be Trumanized in posterity. Evidently, there are many who think this, or there would not have been $100 million given so fast to firmly establish his legacy in the form of his library.
(3) All of this money came in without any large push for it that we are aware of. Since joining the McCain/Palin campaign, we started monitoring Republican sites, and have continued to do so more or less since the election. We’re now on both Democrat and Republican fundraising lists. We have never once been invited to any event for former President Bush and have never been asked to contribute anything for him. But we hear from just about everyone else out there. We have never caught so much as a whisper about a fundraiser being held anywhere for the Bush Library. That’s absolutely amazing. All that money was raised without the usual bull horns and cajoling that goes into a project like this. We know for a FACT there was no event for Bush’s library here in Chicago, and there are deep, deep pockets here. So this money came in with minimum effort, which is, once again, remarkable from a development standpoint.
All of this is fascinating to us.
And it further underscores what we have told you many times before about Republicans we know and how they voted in 2008: they just didn’t want a moderate candidate like McCain to win, and preferred to have a Jimmy Carter Part Deux so they could swing back with a new Reagan in 2012. That person will NOT be Mitt Romney, Bobby Jindal, or Charlie Crist. All of them are nice men, exorcists, or orange transvestites, as the case may be, but if so much money is being poured into Bush’s legacy, with such wild enthusiasm, and said enthusiasm was lacking for a GOP candidate who sought to distance himself from Bush the way McCain did, then it sure feels like a winning GOP candidate will be of the He-Man, outdoorsy, plain-spoken, salt-of-the-Earth variety that Bush and Reagan before him patented so well…and a certain Governor of Alaska gives a fresh spin to, you betcha.
If Bush seemingly forced the electorate to swing wildly to the Left with the current president, Dr. Utopia, then these four years in The Golden Age of Hope and Change will themselves force a swing towards the conservative spectrum, and Romney’s just not going to be man enough to be the vanguard that’s needed. That man’s going to actually be someone in a dress…and it sure as heck won’t be Charlie Crist (as much as he would like it to be).
This is one of those things that will win you a game of Trivial Pursuit some day: there have only been 5 US Presidents with brown eyes (and Richard Nixon is one of them…boo!). Hillary’s eyes, according to the article, are gray-blue. My eyes are brown as well, which means the closest I will ever get to the White House is on the visitor’s tour.
The talking heads are doing it again: pounding Hillary like they did before New Hampshire. It is obvious they are pushing a negative agenda against her and have abandoned whatever objectivity they were taught in journalism school. Here’s the thing with becoming obsessed (either obsessed against someone like Hillary, or obsessively enamored with someone like Obama): you lose perspective and buy into your own narrative.
Articles like this one use statistics and facts to examine the demographic voting patterns that have occurred in all contests so far, with an eye to the March 4th primaries. There is no “momentum” for Obama the way the media claims. He was demographically and statistically favored in the post-Super Tuesday contests of February. This was a rough month for Hillary Clinton, no doubt, but the media has made more of it than they should have, and they don’t have a firm handle on the contests that are to come.
The scientific analysis going on here is very interesting.