Daily Graphs and Charts

[Monsterzuma]

[Leoreth]

Originally Posted by Winner

If you don't know what to read next:

No Scott Lynch? He would've deserved a bump. Especially considering that Terry "blatant political agenda" Goodkind is in

Also funny that they sold The Name Of The Wind as Harry Potter knock off, because it's often criticized for that. Oh, and it reminded me that I always wanted to read The Once And Future King.

[Winner]

Originally Posted by Monsterzuma

Christ, get it over with already. Why can't you have the primaries all at once, have a second round with only the two strongest candidates running, and then focus on selling the winner as a good candidate against the president?

This farce is such a waste of money and effort, and it makes the US democracy look like a bad reality show meant to entertain stupid masses.

[luiz]

I figured Obama would have gained an edge with the US economy improving and unemployment (slowly) decreasing. But that's quite more than I expected.

It's patently obvious that if Republicans want a chance at the White House they can't nominate Newt. He is a joke. But hey, sometimes people want to be stupid.

[Leoreth]

@Winner: You answered your own question in the second paragraph

Interesting is only that this currently only servers the purpose of the self-destruction of the Republican party. Obama > Romney surprised me.

[Winner]

Originally Posted by luiz

It's patently obvious that if Republicans want a chance at the White House they can't nominate Newt. He is a joke. But hey, sometimes people want to be stupid.

It's patently obvious that for a candidate to have any chance of winning these days, he must look good. Romney has the right "American" looks which is an advantage.

Just wait for the first woman in the White House. If Palin is an indication of what she will be like, then the US is screwed.

[Joecoolyo]

Originally Posted by Winner

Christ, get it over with already. Why can't you have the primaries all at once, have a second round with only the two strongest candidates running, and then focus on selling the winner as a good candidate against the president?

This farce is such a waste of money and effort, and it makes the US democracy look like a bad reality show meant to entertain stupid masses.

That's kinda defeats the point. The point of primary season is it's supposed a long, grisly haul. That way, all the weak-sauce and joke candidates are slowly weeded out and the only ones left standing are the ones who can actually handle the slog that is the White House.

If we did it all in one day, everyone from Bachmann to T-Paw would still be on the ballot, when obviously they weren't executive material.

[Cutlass]

Originally Posted by luiz

I figured Obama would have gained an edge with the US economy improving and unemployment (slowly) decreasing. But that's quite more than I expected.

It's patently obvious that if Republicans want a chance at the White House they can't nominate Newt. He is a joke. But hey, sometimes people want to be stupid.

Republicans don't necessarily see it that way. They think that Obama remains vulnerable because the improvement in the economy has been small at best. And they have a lot of other issues to hit him on. They may even be right about that.

So that poll kind of surprises me as well, and I would tend to think that it reflects the fact that the other Republicans have been successful at chipping away at Mitten's armor.

So they still think they have the candidate they want, and not the one they need to have. And that hurts Romney because a sizable part of them just don't want him.

[Leoreth]

Originally Posted by Winner

It's patently obvious that for a candidate to have any chance of winning these days, he must look good. Romney has the right "American" looks which is an advantage.

Unfortunately, the office also requires him to open his mouth from time to time. Seriously, seeing how Romney stutters his way through some questions makes me doubt he's actually been politically active for some time.

Just wait for the first woman in the White House. If Palin is an indication of what she will be like, then the US is screwed.

Hilary is likelier than that.

[Winner]

Originally Posted by Leoreth

Unfortunately, the office also requires him to open his mouth from time to time. Seriously, seeing how Romney stutters his way through some questions makes me doubt he's actually been politically active for some time.

Americans obviously have low standards. Though sometimes when I hear Czech politicians speak, I feel a strong urge to change my name and move to Scandinavia...

Hilary is likelier than that.

I doubt she'll ever become the president. She'll be too old by then. The first woman president will be a MILF.

[Tycho Brahe]

Originally Posted by Winner

Americans obviously have low standards. Though sometimes when I hear Czech politicians speak, I feel a strong urge to change my name and move to Scandinavia...



...

Stay away. We don't like foreigners.

[Mechanicalsalvation]

Originally Posted by Leoreth

Hilary is likelier than that.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...tory?track=rss

[Mechanicalsalvation]

Originally Posted by Winner

Americans obviously have low standards. Though sometimes when I hear Czech politicians speak, I feel a strong urge to change my name and move to Scandinavia...

Wozniacka is the best Danish woman tennis player so perhaps you want need to change the name but otherwise I feel the same...

Originally Posted by Winner

I doubt she'll ever become the president. She'll be too old by then. The first woman president will be a MILF.

Moro Islamic Liberation Front, a militant Islamist group located in the southern Philippines.


Yeah, sure...

[Winner]

Originally Posted by Gorakshanat

Moro Islamic Liberation Front, a militant Islamist group located in the southern Philippines.

Or, as Bill Maher says, a Moron I'd Like to Forget (when used to describe Sarah Palin)

[Godwynn]

You came close in 1995, Europe.

Sauce

[Monsterzuma]

Europe blows the US out of the water in terms of productivity/energy use and productivity/land use (Europe is half the size of the US at similar GDP). for some reason those things don't get mentioned a lot. why do americans have to burn and litter so much to be productive?

[GoodSarmatian]

We just couldn't keep up with your innovative financial sector.

[kronic]

Originally Posted by Godwynn

You came close in 1995, Europe.

Sauce

So, labour productivity fell back as soon as the Euro was put in place. As the article demonstrates, mostly because it declined in the South.

[Cutlass]

Originally Posted by Monsterzuma

Europe blows the US out of the water in terms of productivity/energy use and productivity/land use (Europe is half the size of the US at similar GDP). for some reason those things don't get mentioned a lot. why do americans have to burn and litter so much to be productive?

That's a little misleading. But not entirely wrong. Americans do use land inefficiently, but then we can, because we have a third of a sizable continent to work with. The US has ~4 times the population and 27 times the land. Distances alone require more energy use. Of course we don't attempt to use energy as efficiently, and we spread out much further than we really need to. So there is quite a bit of justice to the accusations of using land and energy inefficiently. But it does require qualifiers.

[Godwynn]

Originally Posted by GoodSarmatian

We just couldn't keep up with your innovative financial sector.

That explains why this country is not even a quarter of a millennium old and it has a higher GDP per capita than 90% of Europe.

Amerika, du hast es besser—als unser Kontinent, der alte. - Goethe

Hell, von Goethe knew it when we were 60 years old. The same holds true today.

Peace playa!