Statistics Anyone?

OK, as everyone knows the BIG Iowa results came through. And yes, many people became new fans in Obama and Huckabee. But it is only Iowa some may feel. Iowa currently is responsible for 7 electoral votes. Yep a huge SEVEN votes out of the 538 votes. For the mathy people out there, yes Iowas is equal to 1.3% out of the entire process, and would aid a candidate with 2.59% of the electoral votes they would need to become president. So yes, the question definitely needs to be, how can such a small percentage of Americans, have such a huge influence? Especially as Mr. Silton pointed out, one primarily composed of whites. They should not in my opinion. I do not care who wins the Iowa caucus, but the people who fund campaigns do! And unlike the 60 or so of us who study government, many Americans vote based on not wanting to choose the losing presidential candidate. So that is how Iowa gains its power.

Do you think it is fair, I sure don't. PS, New Hampshire will bring 4 electoral votes to which ever president the state decides to vote for. Yep a staggering .7% of the electoral college and they are almost as influential as Iowa.

Recess is in Session?

Not my best play on words, but it is alright. This being an election year, investors are counting their fingers waiting to see who gets elected and how they will effect the overall economy. According to CNBC, today their were not to many fears of an upcoming recession. However, in my opinion would a market channel publicly announce that "A recession is coming" blatantly, just as the colonists yelled the "British are coming" to prepare? If any report gave news that they were confident of an upcoming recession, a reliable report of course, not only would billions of dollars be lost through investors taking out their money, but come on, even the news site would lose viewers/readers as Americans would not want to spend their money! (A little drastic)

If anyone wants to hear what the Trillion Dollar Survey reported on CNBC, check out this link. It is a collection of the nation's top money managers, investment strategists and professional economists.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/22486170

With College on our mind, will we get to save a Dime?

Our friendly congress the other day apparently went to far according to our governors on a new higher-education bill that tells states how much money they must spend on their public colleges. Kind of sounds alright to me. Next year would it be great if the schools were nicer and there was money in our pockets? But, for all those out there the money has to come from somewhere now doesn't it? According to the NGA letter, "the new mandate 'would have a chilling, negative impact on future state higher-education investments.'"

Should our opinion count even if we are 17, I mean the ordeal effects us quite a bit. What do you think?

P.S. I came across this and I wanted to know if people thought things like this were funny, or are the absurd and should not be allowed?

http://www.overstock.com/Home-Garden/Hillary-Clinton-Nutcracker
/2568425/product.html

The Dreaded Speeding Tickets

Yahoo had an "interesting" print today. They had an article that showed which states the heaviest speeding tickets occur in. I am not traveling this break, but is it okay for there to be such outrageous speeding fines? Especially if there are discrepancies between state's fines? I for one think it might be a little absurd once the State breaks the $400 dollar mark, but these states have fines above these. Seems like the states are taking advantage of their own residents and tourists!


http://finance.yahoo.com/family-home/article/104065/The-Most-Expensive-States-for-Speeding-Tickets-2007;_ylt=Aut66psLKBCoIG.rErFoxzW7YWsA

Which G.O.P Candidate?!

There is no clear leading G.O.P. candidate so far in the 2008 presidential election. A new poll has shown that Republican voters are unsure of who to vote for. Not one of the Republican candidates has secured half of the Republican electorate.

Now, Republicans seem to be divided equally between former Gov. Mike Huckabee, Rudolph W. Guiliani, and Mitt Romney.

On the other hand, the polls show that Democrat voters are much more settled with Hillary Clinton than contesters Obama and Edwards.
Reasons for this include:
-many voters see Clinton as more likely to be able to unite the country
-more experienced and prepared for the presidency
-she has former President Clinton behind her

New polls also show that public satisfaction with Washington in general is at an all time low. The Democrat-led congress mustered a pathetic 21 % approval rate, while President Bush's is at 28%.

When I looked at this information, although the American people seem unhappy with the political status quo, I believe that they will not be as apathetic. Although they may not be happy with the choices they have, because their perception is so negative at the moment, it is likely that they will try to vote to change things because indeed, many things are wrong with the country at the time. Pressing issues: immigration, the war in Iraq, foreign policy, security, and the economy all need to be changed. Thus even though the public may seem to have an aversion to the political environment currently, I do not believe this will deflect the public's involvement in the 2008 election.

What do you think?
Why is the Republican electorate so undecided?
Will the election bring back a better perception of Washington?

Full Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/11/us/politics/11poll.html?ref=washington