The Ghost of Freddie Mac

Remember in 2008 after the financial crisis hit and it was considered raaaaaaycist to criticize Freddie Mac’s part in it? You may recall this from Dakinat’s coverage of it at The Confluence in the fall of 2008. Remember how fast the prog factions supporting Obama tried to smack her down, saying that The Confluence was stoking racism?

Well, now that Freddie Mac can be used against white, conservative politicians (Gingrich, and increasingly Romney), it’s no longer racist. It went through the Democratic laundry machine and came out sparkling clean. Not a hint of racist smell at all! Let’s take a walk down Memory Lane and recall the details, so the about-face is all that much more dramatic, shall we?

Read the rest at The Crawdad Hole: The Ghost of Freddie Mac.

They’re All Ron Paul* Now

If you’re on Facebook and plan on talking about the election this year, beware. Here is their plan for the 2012 election:

Facebook announced yesterday that “every post and comment — both public and private — by a U.S. user that mentions a presidential candidate’s name will be fed through a sentiment analysis tool that spits out anonymized measures of the general U.S. Facebook population.” This analysis, along with reader polls and other information, will in turn be shared with politico.com.

This of course isn’t the first time Facebook has played fast and loose with your private information, and it won’t be the last. And it does pose some interesting question/problems:

This raises at least three concerns. The first is that many users may not want to be part of any “sentiment analysis” or poll. For example, they may be a firm supporter of Mitt Romney but find Ron Paul’s ideas interesting. Are they now going to feel hesitant to talk about Paul’s ideas out of awareness that it might be registered as support or boost a candidate they don’t like? Second, we don’t see any mention of user consent anywhere in Facebook’s announcement. How has Facebook decided that users agreed that their personal communications can and should be used in this way?

Finally, what other uses might this information be put to in the future? Will it be used to serve users ads from politicians or manipulate voting preferences in some way? We can see the marketing materials from Facebook now: “Candidates, serve ads to secret supporters! No one knows about their preferences except their closest friends and us.”

I’m also concerned about the prospect of Politico, known for their obvious support of Democrats and attacks on Republicans of every stripe, using the information to help/hurt candidates in some way. I don’t support Politico and as long as they play the partisan games they do (see Herman Cain), I won’t. BUT! There is a way around this. We’re discussing it on the P&L Facebook fan page, and having some fun doing it. I suggested we come up with nicknames, but another user had a better idea. Per the commenter:

I’m just going to respond by calling every candidate RON PAUL.

And that’s just what we’ve been doing, to hilarious effect. Per another commenter:

I can’t wait for the State of the Union to see how Michelle matches the girls colors with hers and RON PAUL’S tie.

Per another:

I gotta go get me some RON PAUL at the grocery store and while I am at it, I should get some RON PAUL when I am at the hardware store. All I want for Christmas is RON PAUL.

We even got creative with Sarah Palin:

I’ll help. SARAH RON PAUL PALIN SARAH RON PAUL PALIN LOL

If enough people do this, or something similar, it will throw a monkey wrench in Facebook’s and Politico’s plans. They’ll have to sift endlessly through misleading data, if they are even able to. I encourage you to adopt a similar strategy while on FB this year, and by all means, drop by our page to keep informed and to laugh!

*For Tribal Dufuses: This is not an endorsement of Ron Paul.

Hillary Clinton Took 10% of the NH Vote Yesterday (Updated)

D'oh!

You won’t see this reported in the mainstream media, but Hillary Clinton likely took an astounding 10% of the vote in New Hampshire’s 2012 Democratic Primary last night. Here are the election results from AP (via CSPAN). We know the “Write In” candidate was Hillary Clinton because there was a concerted effort to write her in, and because New Hampshire has never produced a write in candidate with a double digit percentage for either party’s primary with the exception of LBJ in ’68. This suggests New Hampshire Democrats, and Hillary Clinton supporters specifically a) aren’t over 2008, and b) wanted to send a powerful message to President Obama. Personally, I would love to see the exit polling on this one.

For your gloating pleasure, here are the results from the five New Hampshire Dem primaries prior to 2012:

1992

1996

2000 (Scroll down to New Hampshire on this one)

2004

2008

Wiki on Write-in Campaigns in presidential primaries.

Nowhere will you find write in numbers of this percentage or even close. Ralph Nader’s 2002 campaign comes closest with 1.82% of the vote. In fact, you have to go all the way back to 1968 and the write in votes that Lyndon B. Johnson received after he declared he would not run for the presidency to beat Hillary Clinton’s numbers here–he received 50% of the vote. I think everyone with an awareness of history can understand how odd that election was. Could 2012 be shaping up to deliver an equally odd election this year?

As I said on P&L’s Facebook Fan Page:

This does not bode well for Obama.

If we can extrapolate even half that to the general public across the nation, he losses the margin he had in 2008 and has to turn out his entire base and a significant portion of Independents to win. That’s not likely with the political climate as it is. Of course a third party candidate could throw a wrench in it (Looking at you AmericansElect Chairman, Wall-Street-junk-bond baron, and “former” Obama supporter Peter Ackerman).

What do you think? Bellwether for 2012, or just a meaningless outlier?

UPDATE:

Worth repeating:

It gets worse for Obama. According to the Secretary of State in NH, they were saying they thought there would be 75,000 votes cast in the Dem primary, compared to 250,000 in the GOP. But less than 60,000 (59,644 with 99% reporting) turned out for Dems.

http://www.sos.nh.gov/

The GOP got quite a bit closer to their anticipated total with 248,220, a difference of less than 2,000 votes.

So there is your enthusiasm gap quantified, at least in NH.

That’s a 15,000 vote gap for Dems!

31 Days to Reset

I’ll be the first to admit that I’ve been stuck in a rut. The reasons are varied and myriad, and I won’t go into them in this post as I already have a habit of over-sharing. That said, I have been looking for ways to drag myself out of it. Getting the new job in my field after a long-term unemployed stint will definitely help, but I want to do more than just get over all the pain & heartache that I’ve endured the last few years. I’m 40 and facing down an empty nest very shortly. I’m happy to have dedicated the time I did to my daughter and certain family obligations, but I’m ready now to break out and become the professional, economic, and social success I know I can be. My goal this year it to break into print media, which I hope to do here in my new town of Indianapolis. Beyond that I hope to work, work, work to build that financial success, and to let go of some long-held negativity in my life and perspective.

Recently I stumbled upon an interesting blog called Happy Black Woman, run by Rosetta Thurman. She has a (free!) program called 31 Days to Reset. Her goal is to help unsatisfied women realize the happiness they say they want. I’m hoping it will help me develop some much-needed discipline, and some emotional relief. Also, if I find it successful, it will be another tool in the box to offer to my female students who may need help with direction as well as with their language skills. The program calls for spending a little bit of time each day for 31 days doing reflective assignments that she e-mails to you. The steps are also on her blog.

Day 1 the assignment is to choose a notebook, mantra, and a song to start each day. My notebook is a little floral thing that will fit in my purse. I was going to use it to track jobs I’d applied for, but now I have a job and won’t need it for that. I think it’s the perfect re-purposing! My mantra is my favorite Susan B. Anthony quote:

Failure is impossible.

The song I chose is P!nk’s Fucking Perfect.

I’ll be tracking some of these assignments here at P&L, per Ms. Thurman’s recommendation. I’m not doing this in isolation because I want it to have a better impact, and maybe, just maybe being reflective of and honest with myself will inspire someone else. One can hope.

Taylor Marsh Goes PUMA!

I really couldn’t believe it when I started reading. I’d seen her tweet out the new post, Party’s Over, at her blog just 16 minutes ago as I type this, and decided to check it out. It’s a real heavy hitter for the first day of the year, and sure to provoke lots of ire in blogger boyzland. I can’t wait to see the fall out. Basically, she vindicates so many points that PUMA made, and then declares her vote is up for grabs. Now, I will believe that when I see it of course, but I do feel vindicated about much of what I was writing in 2008, especially with regard to abortion and the Democrats dismal record of failure in that department. Here’s a taste of what she has to say, but I do recommend going to read the whole, sprawling piece:

For over 30 years, modern feminists like myself have been hearing that we must support Democrats, because if we don’t our freedoms will be on the line yet again. After supporting Democrats since my one vote for Ronald Reagan in 1980, what has finally happened through Pres. Obama is exactly what I was told this political party would guard against. So now, as the 2012 elections approach, Barack Obama and the Democratic Party are once again relying on the theory that because Republicans are worse women like me can be suckered into falling in line one more time.

But it gets better. She even expresses sympathy for conservatives, especially women, and flirts with the idea that it’s okay for women to be more concerned with their finances than with whether they can have an abortion, should they ever need one:

It’s now even considered an extreme position to think women’s individual freedoms are important. On Obama’s conservative Plan B decision, you get replies like “it’s smart politically” or his fans argue from the right using parental rights over individual female freedoms.

Then there’s the reality that most women have more dire issues on their mind, because reproductive health choices are considered by most to be a given. For sexually active young females, poor women and those in rural areas, however, these issues are attached to one another. However, their stories don’t equal the same coverage as the majority of reports about women today.

Women often share the breadwinner role, so their focus is on who is protecting their bottom line.

Recently on MSNBC when they asked voters in Iowa about their choices, a woman said, “I need to take care of my paycheck, that’s why I’m supporting Romney.”

Why should women automatically bet that Pres. Obama will help their bottom line more than Mitt Romney?

Is it enough that the 111th Congress passed the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which Pres. Obama signed?

Then she straight up calls the Democrats liars and, for the love of goodness I cannot make this stuff up, flirts with the Ron Paul train: Continue reading