Tuesday, October 04, 2011

Oscar "Mitt" Wilde births another pithy one.

Man dislocates jaw yawning so goddamned hard.
Posted by at
Labels:

11 comments:

Tecumseh said...

Yawn, indeed.

10/04/2011 8:00 PM
Tecumseh said...

Counterpoint (at intrade):
* Romney 55%
* Perry 18.9%

Just sayin'.

10/04/2011 8:02 PM
Mr roT said...

Intrade:

Obama: 100%
McCain: 0%.

How's that workin out for ya?

10/04/2011 10:22 PM
Mr roT said...

Shit sells.

10/05/2011 1:17 AM
Tecumseh said...

You're making less and less sense, Mr Rot. Euroland has a bad influence on your cognitive abilities. You gotta get back and feel the pulse of things in the real world.

10/05/2011 1:25 AM
Mr roT said...

I thought I was making a rather obvious point that the most popular politician is not necessarily the best statesman.

Romney blathers, flirts with the welfare state, and flip-flops and yet hits 55% among the members of the not silly party.

I am not sure how to make this horrifying situation clear enough so that it makes more sense to you.

Should I photoshop a picture of Paris Hilton at a presidential lectern? Would that clarify things? She's very popular too, you see.

10/05/2011 1:31 AM
Tecumseh said...

What you say still makes absolutely no sense to me.

Obama 100%, McCain 0%?? What's this about?

Romney .. hits 55% among the members of the not silly party. What?? Romney is stuck at between 17% (as you yourself point out here) and 23% among GOPers, in polls on who people prefer as candidate for the nomination. This has very little to do with the intrade quote -- 55% refers to the perceived probability of Romney actually winning the nomination. And that's based on random people from all other the US (and perhaps all over the world) betting on the outcome -- not a semi-scientific poll of likely GOP voters.

Jeepers, the kind of stuff I need to explain on this board. What's next? What's the difference between mean and median? Ask AA.

10/05/2011 1:43 AM
Mr roT said...

Obama 100%, McCain 0%?? What's this about?

Intrade. Last pres. election. I am saying that Intrade does not measure whether a candidate is a cunt or not.

How clear can it be made?

Intrade does not provide a counterpoint to the fact that Romney is worthless, as you suggest above, in English.

Clear now or should we go on to discuss the moments of a pdf?

10/05/2011 1:54 AM
Tecumseh said...

Obama 100%, McCain 0%?? What's this about?

Intrade. Last pres. election.

Duh. That's a tautology: once it became clear Obama was winning the election (on Election night, in November 2008), his intrade quote jumped to 100%, and McCain's quote dropped to 0%. Like, duh. Anybody should be able to grasp this concept, and not assign any cosmic significance to it, beyond the fact that

P(sample space)=1, and
P(empty set)=0.

The first statement is one of Kolmogorov's axioms of probability, the second is a trivial consequence of the axioms.

10/05/2011 2:11 AM
Mr roT said...

Well, you elevated the discourse without leaving it.

Good.

10/05/2011 2:14 AM
Tecumseh said...

You don't like my explanations as to what Kolmogorov's axioms say? At least, my discourse is precise, and when I say something, it's crystal clear to everyone what I'm saying (at least, I hope so--I try my best).

Sometimes, I wonder whether even you understand what you're trying to say...

10/05/2011 8:49 AM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)