HorsesAss.Org

  • Home
  • About HA
  • Advertise
  • Archives
  • Donate

Search Results for: 10,000

Up to 1000 dead in Baghdad stampede

by Goldy — Wednesday, 8/31/05, 8:41 am

As many as 1,000 Shia pilgrims were crushed, asphyxiated or drowned today, in a stampede on a bridge in Baghdad that started over rumors of suicide bombers. This is the single largest loss of life in Iraq since the US invasion, and yet another tragedy to add to the numerous others.

While it may sound unfair to blame the US for this calamity, many Moslems will, just as they blame the Saudi government when similar disasters occur during the pilgrimages in Mecca and Medina. As the occupying force in Iraq it is our responsibility to maintain order and ensure public safety, a responsibility we continually fail to live up to.

Had a similar tragedy occurred in the US, there would be inquiries and commissions and possibly, prosecutions. But I’m wondering if Americans can feel outrage over a tragic loss of life that occurs in a far off land, even when it occurs under our watch?

56 Stoopid Comments

Dirty tricks: 1000 signatures stolen from anti-smoking initiative

by Goldy — Tuesday, 6/28/05, 1:38 pm

Here’s an interesting tidbit from today’s Seattle P-I:

Organizers of an anti-smoking initiative said yesterday that about 1,000 signatures were stolen from the campaign’s Green Lake office over the weekend.

Someone apparently climbed onto an adjacent roof and smashed out a second-story window to get into the YES! On Initiative 901 offices, said campaign director Megan Sather.

Nothing else in the office, which had computers and a small amount of cash, was disturbed.

“I’m surprised that any break-in of our office would focus on signatures, and just plain disappointed that anything like this would happen to stop us from getting on the ballot,” Sather said.

While I share Megan’s disappointment, I don’t share her surprise. I-901’s main opponent is the Recreational Gaming Association, the same lying bastards whose members bankrolled last year’s I-892, Tim Eyman’s stupidly cynical slot machine initiative. In an effort to confuse voters, they filed their own “anti-smoking” initiative, I-911. The initiative’s sponsor is Gary Murrey, an RGA board member, and a Vice President at Great American Casinos, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Canadian corporation that was I-892’s largest financial backer. So once again we have the incredibly crooked and corrupt Great Canadian Gaming Corporation meddling in Washington’s initiative process.

Now I’m not saying that it was Great Canadian or any other RGA member who broke into I-901 HQ to steal signatures… but it wouldn’t surprise me. When you have an industry whose profits are based on loansharking, prostitution and addiction, a little Watergate-style break-in seems almost innocent. I’m just saying.

In any case, it’s all moot because I-901 has already collected more than enough signatures to qualify for the ballot, and the campaign wasn’t stupid enough to leave the petitions lying around where Great Canadian could send one if its pals in the Chinese mob to come steal it. Not that this was the work of Great Canadian, the RGA or the Chinese mob.

I’m just saying….

67 Stoopid Comments

Rossi lawyers find over 1000 felons voted… for Rossi

by Goldy — Thursday, 2/24/05, 1:28 am

A tip of the hat to Paul for pointing me towards this Letter to the Editor in The Olympian:

Republicans are party of choice for prisoners

I write regarding the Republican hot-button issue du jour — felons voting.

The federal prison camp where I was ensconced recently for 16 months housed a large number of white-collar criminals — CPAs, investment bankers and stockbrokers, corporate lawyers, CFOs and CEOs, who were Republicans almost to a man, and had their Wall Street Journals mailed to them daily.

Indeed, almost the only progressive-minded souls there were in the sparse ranks of us pot growers, together of course with many of the political prisoners.

During my taxpayer-subsidized sabbatical, I initiated countless discussions with fellow inmates designed to assess their political preferences.

What I found was that the huge plurality of inmates where I was, of all ethnicities and backgrounds (most of them, like Big Pharma, common drug peddlers), were fundamentally apolitical — most of them having never voted, ever, or even registered to vote, and could not have cared less about being denied their right to vote.

Yet, when asked whether they preferred a liberal Democratic or Republican candidate or philosophy, they, like the white-collar guys, consistently chose Republican, by margins of 65 percent to 80 percent.

Why?

Because in their view, Republicans were the virile, tough, action-taking, man’s-man party, while liberals and Democrats were reviled as soft, weak, passive, femme — minority and gay-hugging pushovers and saps.

So why, I wonder, should Republicans have their undies in a knot about felons voting when from my direct experience Republicans clearly are the red-blooded all-American felon’s party of choice?

Brydon Stewart, Olympia

Republicans are “the virile, tough, action-taking, man’s-man party?” Gee, I don’t know… looking at soft-spoken Dino, I’m guessing that if he had gone to prison like his mentor, he probably would have ended up becoming somebody’s bitch. But I guess that would have made him a “man’s man,” wouldn’t it?

103 Stoopid Comments

Monkey business, or 1000 monkeys?

by Goldy — Monday, 1/3/05, 1:21 am

As the thousand monkeys on the right-wing blogs tirelessly type away in hope of accidentally writing Hamlet — or better yet, the final chapter of Christine Gregoire’s political career — we have been treated to snippet after snippet of half-coherent conspiracy theories regarding alleged misdeeds at King County Elections.

The 10,000 ballot underestimate during the first count, the provisional ballot affidavits, “changing the rules” to count 735 misfiled ballots, disenfranchised military voters, partisan canvassing decisions, lax security, enhanced and duplicated ballots, improper voter registrations… it is all intended to crush the integrity of the electoral system under the combined weight of the various allegations.

Now perhaps the unSound sycophants find it convincing, but as legal evidence in an election contest… it’s all load of monkey poop. Not a single one of these so-called-scandals provides legal grounds for overturning this election. And no court is going to set aside the results simply because the election was chaotic, or imperfect, or close.

But the monkeys keep on typing, and the latest “smoking turd” to roll off their Smith-Coronas is the supposedly shocking discrepancy between the number of people who voted, and the number of ballots counted in King County. County officials and the Secretary of State have all said that these returns are preliminary and unofficial. But how could King County possibly certify the results, the monkey’s angrily demand, based on unofficial returns?

Hmmm. How about RCW 29A.60.190, which is plainly titled “Certification of election results — Unofficial returns”…?

So how long do the counties have before submitting the final returns? Well, I’m not exactly sure, but according to RCW 29A.60.230 it seems a final report on absentee ballots is not due until March 31st. So personally, I’m just going to remain patient and wait for the final numbers before I start worrying about the typing monkeys.

Oh… and one other thought. It’s not at all clear to me, that even if King County fails to reconcile all the discrepancies in its returns, that this would provide grounds for an election contest either:

RCW 29A.60.130
Certificate not withheld for informality in returns.

No certificate shall be withheld on account of any defect or informality in the returns of any election, if it can with reasonable certainty be ascertained from such return what office is intended, and who is entitled to such certificate, nor shall any commission be withheld by the governor on account of any defect or informality of any return made to the office of the secretary of state.

I think the key words here are “reasonable certainty”, a phrase repeated in RCW 29A.60.200. But, the usual caveat: much to my mother’s chagrin, I am not an attorney. I’m not entirely sure what to make of this statute… but hell if I’m going to trust a bunch of typing monkeys.

68 Stoopid Comments

Poll Analysis: Hillary hits 100%

by Darryl — Tuesday, 8/16/16, 5:00 pm

Clinton
Trump
100.0% probability of winning
0.0% probability of winning
Mean of 337 electoral votes
Mean of 201 electoral votes


Electoral College Map

Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Lousiana Maine Maryland Massachusettes Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Electoral College Map

Georgia Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Delaware Connecticut Florida Mississippi Alabama Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

The Monte Carlo analysis of state head-to-head polls last week showed Democratic Sen. Hillary Clinton leading Republican Donald Trump in electoral votes by an average of 325 to 213, and with Clinton having a 99.7% probability of winning an election held then.

Since then, 24 new polls have been released in 13 states. Some states have multiple polls, for example, Florida with five and New Hampshire with three.

Now, after 100,000 simulated elections, Clinton wins 99,999 times and Trump wins the single Electoral College outcome that was a tie. Clinton received (on average) 337 to Trump’s 201 electoral votes. The results suggest that, in an election held now, Clinton would have a near 100.0% probability of winning.

Here is how the race has evolved in some key states.

Florida gains five new polls that solidly favor Clinton (+3%, +6%, +1%, +5%, and +9%). The new polls move Florida from a 67.1% probability of a Clinton victory last week to a 98.2% probability now.

ClintonTrump16Jul16-16Aug16Florida

Georgia flips from light blue to light red. Of the seven current polls, Clinton leads in only two of polls. Last week Clinton only had a 68.6% probability of taking the state. That has now shrunk to a 24.2% probability.

ClintonTrump16Jul16-16Aug16Georgia

Maine gets one new poll that shows Clinton up by +10% and with 100% probability of taking the state. Unfortunately, the new poll does not provide congressional district results. The last poll that did that was from June, and showed Trump with a slight lead in one district. It would be great to get some polling in ME CDs.

New Hampshire gets three new polls (and one aging out). The oldest poll shows Trump with a +9% margin, but Clinton has the lead in the last four polls by +15%, +13%, +10%, and +9%. Clinton goes from a 38% probability of taking the state last week to a 99.9% probability this week.

ClintonTrump16Jul16-16Aug16New Hampshire

One new North Carolina poll pushes Clinton from a 50.1% probability of taking the state to a 90.8% probability. She leads in the most recent two of the three current polls.

ClintonTrump16Jul16-16Aug16North Carolina

Ohio loses one poll that aged out, and has shrunk Clinton’s chances from 81% to 65%. Clinton leads in three polls (+4%, +4%, +2%) and Trump leads in one (+3%). The result is a near toss-up

ClintonTrump16Jul16-16Aug16Ohio

South Carolina finally gets a current poll, but Trump is only up by +2% in the new poll. This small lead gives him a 72.6% probability of winning the state today.

ClintonTrump16Jul16-16Aug16South Carolina

In Virginia, two new polls come in and one old one ages out. Clinton leads in the most recent three polls by double digits with Trump leading (+4%) in the oldest poll. Clinton would almost certainly win Virginia in an election now.

ClintonTrump16Jul16-16Aug16Virginia

Washington state gets a current poll that gives Clinton a +19% lead. Needless to say, she approaches a 100% probability of winning the state right now.

Last week, the most recent Wisconsin poll was from Marquette University taken in mid-July. Clinton was up +4.1%. Marquette just released their August poll and Clinton now has a +14% lead over Trump. The results suggest she would take Wisconsin with a 99.7% probability today.

ClintonTrump16Jul16-16Aug16Wisconsin

The distribution of electoral votes [FAQ] shows all possible Electoral College outcomes:
[Read more…]

3 Stoopid Comments

Did the $200,000 Anti-Jon Grant PAC Ever Intend to Spend $200,000?

by Goldy — Thursday, 10/15/15, 2:47 pm

Civic Square rendering

Architectural rendering of Triad Development’s ironically named “Civic” Square.

When two independent expenditure campaigns were announced last week, one explicitly pro Seattle City Council president Tim Burgess (“United for Tim”) and one explicitly against Burgess’s challenger, former Tenant’s Union leader Jon Grant (“Seattle Needs Ethical Leaders”), I wasn’t the only one to read this as a sign that Seattle’s business establishment was very nervous about Burgess’s reelection prospects. Seattle Needs Ethical Leaders was on the record promising to spend about $200,000, while the insider buzz had United for Tim budgeting at least the same. That’s an awful lot of money to spend on an incumbent who is already outspending his challenger by six to one.

But now in the wake of the Triad shakedown scandal it appears we all may have been half-fooled: that “Seattle Needs Ethical Leaders” was never more than an unethical ruse.

Of course, the PAC’s threatened $200,000 war chest never appeared—and it never will appear—and while some might attribute this collapse to fallout from the shakedown scandal, it is reasonable to suspect if the committee’s sole purpose was to facilitate a shakedown in the first place. Think about it. The committee has its spokesperson go public with a $200,000 budget, while whispering that it would be accusing Grant of some sort of personal ethical lapse. Was the money ever real? Or was it just an elaborate political bluff created by those hoping to profit from a potentially lucrative real estate deal?

(Or even more conspiratorially, perhaps it was an effort to entrap Grant in an ethical lapse? Hmm. That might explain the otherwise inexplicable creation of a text message trail.)

To be clear, Burgess’s backers are clearly nervous. United for Tim has already raised $218,000, most of it from a Chamber of Commerce funded PAC. But that other $200,000? I wouldn’t be surprised if it was always a fiction. Which means this shakedown scandal could be a lot more scandalous than it first appears.

4 Stoopid Comments

Initiative 1185 Signature Firm Paid Tim Eyman $308,000

by Goldy — Friday, 9/18/15, 1:23 pm

No Tim Eyman

Tim Eyman is a horse’s ass.

Three years ago I brought to my editors at The Stranger a scoop detailing the undisclosed funding of one Tim Eyman initiative with money raised from another, and they were so concerned about the seriousness of the allegations (I was accusing him of, you know, breaking the law), that they took the somewhat rare step of vetting the piece with the paper’s attorney before publishing. I was never concerned about libeling Eyman because the case I was making was so well documented, but regardless, I joked to the attorney at the time, Eyman would never sue anybody for libel out of fear that legal discovery would expose how much money he was secretly making on kickbacks from his favored signature gathering firm, Citizens Solutions.

Well, three years later, we now know how much: $308,000!

Voters Want More Choices, the Eyman-led political committee behind I-1185, paid Citizen Solutions nearly $623,000 between April and July 2012, according to court records. Overall, the firm earned $1.2 million for its efforts to get I-1185 on the ballot.

In July 2012, Citizen Solution paid $308,000 to Eyman’s [private company] Watchdog for Taxpayers. Eyman told the PDC that he was paid to find new clients for the firm.

That same month Eyman loaned $190,000 to Citizens in Charge which used it to pay for gathering signatures for I-517, according to court records.

Neither the payment nor the loan was reported to the Public Disclosure Commission, according to court documents.

I don’t know that there’s anything inherently illegal about Citizen Solutions paying Eyman $308,000, as long as he declares it on his taxes. It’s his failure to fully disclose I-517’s transactions that led to this investigation.

But given the unusually large gap between what the signature gatherers on the street say they’re being paid and the inflated cost of Eyman’s signature drives, it is fair to speculate that this isn’t the first or only payment that Eyman has received from Citizen Solutions. In fact, I publicly speculated exactly that way back in June, 2006:

I have another theory which, lacking the subpoena power to open up the private books of Eyman and Citizens Solutions I cannot possibly prove, but… I think Tim’s ripping off his patron, Woodenville investment banker Michael Dunmire, who’d already contributed $307,700 to I-917 through the end of May.

[…] Again, I can’t prove it, but I’ve always suspected that Eyman has a financial stake in Citizens Solutions, or receives some kind of monetary “consideration”, and while none of this may be illegal it is certainly dishonest. Something is just not right here, and knowing Timmy, I can’t help but suspect that he’s cooking the books for personal gain. Again.

Nine years later the Attorney General finally used his subpoena power to open up Eyman’s books on I-1185, and he found exactly what I predicted. And considering the inflated costs Eyman has paid over the years for printing and mailing, I wouldn’t be surprised if he earned “monetary considerations” from that too. We’ll never know for sure (unless he sues me for libel), but Eyman’s probably made several million dollars this way from his initiative campaigns over the years.

Ever since he emerged on the scene Eyman has gone to great pains to deny that he earns anything off his initiative campaigns. At first, he just plain lied about it. Then, he concocted this byzantine web of campaign committees and vendors and private corporations to cover up the money trail.

Of course, as long as you disclose it, it’s neither illegal nor unusual to pay oneself to run an initiative campaign. So why does Eyman hide it? I’m guessing because if his backers knew he was skimming 25 percent right off the top, they might have the common sense to cut out the middleman. And that would mean the end of Tim Eyman’s lucrative “volunteer” career.

6 Stoopid Comments

Open Thread 11/10

by Carl Ballard — Monday, 11/10/14, 7:41 am

– Oh hey, it looks like the class size initiative is probably going to pass.

– I’m glad to read about the good work being done by the UW chapter of United Students Against Sweatshops [h/t]

– It’s a little late, but an immigration reform executive order sounds pretty OK.

– Chuck Todd is bad on policy even if he knows process.

– Welcome, Oregon to the you can get stoned at a gay wedding club.

– Oh man. The culture war is really heatingzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

– I know that light very well. The worst is then if the bridge is up.

40 Stoopid Comments

Mayor Proposes 4-Year, $58 Million Levy to Fund 2,000 Preschoolers

by Goldy — Thursday, 5/15/14, 1:54 pm

Seattle Mayor Ed Murray released a 22-page proposal (pdf) today for implementing high-quality universal preschool in Seattle, starting with a four-year demonstration project that would serve 2,000 three- and four-year-olds in 100 classrooms by 2018. If approved by the city council, a $58 million property tax levy ($14.5 million a year) that would add about $43 a year to the average Seattle homeowner’s property tax bill would be put before voters on the November, 2014 ballot.

(FYI, while the document is boldly labeled “Mayor Murray’s Proposal,” it is largely the result of an effort led by city council member Tim Burgess long before Murray was sworn in as mayor. So credit where credit is due.)

I’ve only just skimmed the proposal, so you’ll have to wait for a more detailed analysis, but my initial response is that it is very thorough, very promising, and not quite as ambitious as I had hoped for.

During the demonstration period, enrollment would be open to all 4-year-olds, and all 3-year-olds from families earning less than 300 percent of the federal poverty level ($71,550 for a family of four). Tuition would be free for students below 200 percent of the federal poverty level ($47,700 for a family of four), and subsidized on a sliding scale based on income. Families up to 600 percent of poverty ($143,100) would pay no more than 40 percent of the project $10,700 per student costs.

That’s a bargain. So of course demand will far outstrip supply. Enrollment will be prioritized to children already in the program (the previous year’s three-year-olds), children with siblings concurrently in the program, and geographic proximity to the classroom. The plan calls for prioritizing the initial placement of classrooms in neighborhoods with the lowest levels of academic achievement. These enrollment and location priorities will tilt demonstration project access to Seattle’s neediest families.

The stated 15- to 20-year goal is to serve 80 percent of of all three- and four-year-olds from families under 300 percent of poverty by 2035. Which like I said, could be more ambitious. But considering the existing constraints on both classroom infrastructure and trained teachers, the demonstration program looks like a very good start.

Again, this is a very thorough proposal, so a more thorough analysis will have to wait. But with both $15 minimum wage and universal preschool proposals working their way through council, 2014 is shaping up to be a very exciting year.

25 Stoopid Comments

Open Thread 12/10

by Carl Ballard — Monday, 12/10/12, 8:01 am

– Congrats to all of the couples who got married yesterday.

– Bikes galore on the Fremont Bridge.

– War on Catholics.

– Perhaps Michael Dunn would have told those kids to turn down their music, no matter what. But perhaps knowing that he had the ultimate power in his hands to annihilate all of them, gave him a little edge. Very few people, no matter how “responsible,” would be immune to such a feeling.

– I was just goofing on this Christmas card from the Obamas, and apparently it’s part of the war on Christmas.

– Modesty is bullshit

– You’ve clearly done something right as a team when you force the other team to apologize to their fans.

54 Stoopid Comments

Open Thread 10/15

by Carl Ballard — Monday, 10/15/12, 8:02 am

– I’m sure all of the reporters who were concerned about Darcy Burner’s inelegant explanation of her Harvard degree will be equally upset with Brad Toft’s makie uppie degree.

– Me too, too.

– Important news about the Northwest in national publications.

– Those who know the history of state hotline slipups involving Republican governors is clearly the greatest phrase ever.

– Gee, it’s almost like running a campaign full of racist dog-whistles and overt racism attracts racist supporters! GO FIGURE!

– Happy Reloan Day, people on Kiva

182 Stoopid Comments

Open Thread 4/10

by Carl Ballard — Tuesday, 4/10/12, 7:52 am

– Just put a school downtown.

– It’s not a future many in the Northwest had considered in the past. A region that prides itself on green energy, new economy jobs, and a clean environment is about to crown a new king—coal.

– Republicans on Twitter have found the real racists.

– The best encapsulation of every problem with Slate.

– Because we were in Iraq promoting freedom (h/t).

– Whatever you think of Obama’s policies, this GIF of him reading Where The Wild Things Are is pretty great (h/t).

– Middle aged is different for sports stadiums than for people, but I think the Safe is going to be around for a while.

87 Stoopid Comments

Poll Analysis: Newt gains a bit but still loses 100% to Obama

by Darryl — Monday, 2/20/12, 6:02 pm


Obama Gingrich
100.0% probability of winning 0.0% probability of winning
Mean of 397 electoral votes Mean of 141 electoral votes

It has been over two weeks since the previous analysis of the Obama–Gingrich match-up using state head-to-head polls. This is largely because Newt Gingrich’s second lead over Mitt Romney in the national G.O.P. primary polls was rather transient—even more fleeting than his late-2011 lead.

As the life is sucked out of the Gingrich campaign, these analyses become less relevant. A telltale sign of a dying campaign is when pollsters no longer include a candidate in its state head-to-head polls. That has begun to happen for Gingrich. Rasmussen polled Romeny and Santorum, but not Gingrich, in its most recent Florida, New Mexico, and California polls. A Civitas poll in North Carolina and a WBUR poll in Massachusetts did the same. A recent Elway poll in Washington only reported results for Romney.

So, for President’s day, here is an analysis for Gingrich. This may be Newt’s last. I’ll also post an update for Romney, and post Santorum’s very first analysis.

The previous analysis showed President Barack Obama with 100% probability of beating Gingrich, and leading by (on average) 421 to 117 electoral votes.

Today, after 100,000 simulated elections, Obama still wins 100,000 times (i.e. Obama has 100% probability of beating Gingrich in an election held now). Obama receives (on average) 397 to Gingrich’s 141 electoral votes.

That newt gains in average electoral votes while losing steam in the primary is because polling is so infrequent at this point. We are now seeing the “fruits” of Gingrich’s surge two months ago.

Electoral College Map

Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Lousiana Maine Maryland Massachusettes Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Electoral College Map

Georgia Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Delaware Connecticut Florida Mississippi Alabama Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Here is the distribution of electoral votes [FAQ] from the simulations:
[Read more…]

8 Stoopid Comments

Poll Analysis: Obama nearly 100% against Romney

by Darryl — Wednesday, 2/15/12, 11:20 am

[Update: An analysis using more recent polls can be found here.]

Obama Romney
100.0% probability of winning 0.0% probability of winning
Mean of 348 electoral votes Mean of 190 electoral votes

A handful of new state head-to-head polls, including two from swing states, have come out since the previous analysis. Obama leads in all five:

start end sample % % %
st poll date date size MOE O R diff
CA SurveyUSA 08-Feb 10-Feb 2088 2.1 60 31 O+29
FL Rasmussen 09-Feb 09-Feb 500 4.5 47 44 O+3
MA WBUR 06-Feb 09-Feb 503 4.4 55 34 O+21
NY Quinnipiac 08-Feb 13-Feb 1233 2.8 52 35 O+17
OH Quinnipiac 07-Feb 12-Feb 1421 2.6 46 44 O+2

California has Obama crushing Romney by +29%. Massachusetts, a state Romney once governed, has Obama up by nearly as much (+21%). New York supports Obama over Romney by +17%.

In Ohio, the new poll gives Obama a slender +2% lead over Romney. Obama has led in all four Ohio polls taken this year. The polling suggests to me that Ohio may not be so much a swing state this year….
ObamaRomney15Jan12-15Feb12Ohio

We now have our first February poll out of Florida. This one gives Obama a thin +3% lead over Romney. Obama leads in the two most recent Florida polls; Romney led in the two January polls before that.

Florida looks more like a swing state than does Ohio, but the recent trend looks favorable for Obama:
ObamaRomney15Jan12-15Feb12Florida

The previous analysis showed President Barack Obama leading Romney by 344 to 194 electoral votes and a probability of winning of 99.8%.

With the new polls included, after 100,000 simulated elections, Obama wins 99,989 times and Romney wins 11 times. If an election was held now, we expect Obama to win with nearly 100% probability. Obama’s average electoral vote total climbed by +4 to 348, whereas Romney’s average is now 190 electoral votes.

Electoral College Map

Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Lousiana Maine Maryland Massachusettes Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Electoral College Map

Georgia Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Delaware Connecticut Florida Mississippi Alabama Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

[Read more…]

16 Stoopid Comments

Radiation “emissions are 10 times higher”

by Darryl — Wednesday, 3/16/11, 9:58 am

No…this isn’t about Japan. It’s about SeaTac and American travelers:

The Transportation Security Administration is re-analyzing the radiation levels of X-ray body scanners installed in airports nationwide, after testing produced dramatically higher-than-expected results.

The TSA, which has deployed at least 500 body scanners to at least 78 airports, said Tuesday the machines meet all safety standards and would remain in operation despite a “calculation error” in safety studies. The flawed results showed radiation levels 10 times higher than expected.

You know who is going to be gloating over this, don’t you?

Goldy:

I, for one, will refuse to allow my daughter through one of those scanners, and will refuse to walk through one myself. […] I mean, honestly… would you trust TSA to bombard you or a loved one with ionizing radiation?

You know who is laughing over this, don’t you?

The “terrorists”. You know…the ones who “hate our freedoms.”

“They” have scared the living shit out of politicians, driving them to a state of frenzied security overreaction. It isn’t just the trillion dollar wars, the costly military build-up, the absurdly bloated domestic security infrastructure…those things that have drained our coffers with little substantive return on investment. It isn’t just the disgrace of our government getting caught committing torture in our names and starting wars under false pretenses that have killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

For our dignity, it’s also a “death” by 1,000 cuts. We’ve succumbed to ludicrous restrictions and procedures for air travel and we’ve accepted those increasingly invasive inspections.

We’ve taken it to the extreme of “mainstreaming” the use of full body scanning using ionizing radiation administered by non-radiologists on equipment that, it turns out, was being inspected erroneously.

Ultimately we, the American electorate, by putting up with this shit, are self-terrorists.

I always opt out…and go for the free TSA massage.

Update:

Commenter Oxbrain takes me to task for fear-mongering. I’ll respond here, because I believe it will add some clarity to a post that was minimally about radiation and more about overreaction to terrorism.

“Your title is “Radiation “emissions are 10 times higher”” Taking the quote out of context as it is, this is a blatantly false statement that is obviously intended to strike at a fear of radiation.”

The title is not a statement. But I understand the point. The title is alarmist…I mean, given the context of concerns over the situation in Japan. But the purpose of the over-the-top title was to draw eyeballs. Incendiary titles are a tradition in blogging. I just wish they could all be as good as “Asshole inflamed over anuses”.

“I can’t imagine the mental disconnect required to try using an irrational fear of radiation as an argument against our irrational fear of terrorism.”

I appreciate your point, I really do. But what is rational about fear of radiation is that mistakes can, and will, happen. (Yes…even by a government agency.) That the particular mistake (one of several) highlighted in the article was not a radiation health threat, as the article made explicit, isn’t much comfort. It was still a mistake. The tests yielded numbers 10 times too high.

Apparently, someone at the TSA charged with reviewing the test results from the contractor, wasn’t surprised, or even curious about readings that were, apparently, ten-times too high. That’s not good.

And that wasn’t the only mistake. The TSA report cited other problems with the inspections:

  • Lack of notation for the latest calibration date for the machine being tested or the most recent calibration date noted had expired on survey meters
  • Information missing regarding warning labels and required labels
  • Calculation errors not impacting safety
  • Missing survey point readings
  • Inconsistent responses to survey questions
  • No reading of background radiation noted
  • Missing other non-measurement related information

(For context, I’ll just note that a missing placard on an aircraft renders it legally unairworthy.)

These errors add poignancy to Goldy’s question: do you trust the TSA to expose you to ionizing radiation?

So…yeah, I think it works using the irrational fear of radiation as an argument against the irrational fear of terrorism. Clearly people’s irrational fear of terrorism is so…well, irrational, that people succumb to it over their irrational fear of radiation and their rational fear that mistakes can happen.

19 Stoopid Comments

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • …
  • 96
  • Next Page »

Recent HA Brilliance…

  • Monday Open Thread Monday, 10/13/25
  • Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza! Friday, 10/10/25
  • Friday Open Thread Friday, 10/10/25
  • Was This What the Righties Wanted All Along? Thursday, 10/9/25
  • Wednesday Open Thread Wednesday, 10/8/25
  • Drinking Liberally — Seattle Tuesday, 10/7/25
  • Monday Open Thread Monday, 10/6/25
  • Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza! Friday, 10/3/25
  • Drinking Liberally — Seattle Tuesday, 9/30/25
  • Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza! Friday, 9/26/25

Tweets from @GoldyHA

I no longer use Twitter because, you know, Elon is a fascist. But I do post occasionally to BlueSky at @goldy.horsesass.org

From the Cesspool…

  • Roger Rabbit on Monday Open Thread
  • Roger Rabbit on Monday Open Thread
  • Roger Rabbit on Monday Open Thread
  • EvergreenRailfan on Monday Open Thread
  • Elijah Dominic McDotcom on Monday Open Thread
  • Elijah Dominic McDotcom on Monday Open Thread
  • G on Monday Open Thread
  • G on Monday Open Thread
  • Elijah Dominic McDotcom on Monday Open Thread
  • Elijah Dominic McDotcom on Monday Open Thread

Please Donate

Currency:

Amount:

Archives

Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?

Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!

Search HA

Follow Goldy

I no longer use Twitter or Facebook because Nazis. But until BlueSky is bought and enshittified, you can still follow me at @goldy.horsesass.org

HA Commenting Policy

It may be hard to believe from the vile nature of the threads, but yes, we have a commenting policy. Comments containing libel, copyright violations, spam, blatant sock puppetry, and deliberate off-topic trolling are all strictly prohibited, and may be deleted on an entirely arbitrary, sporadic, and selective basis. And repeat offenders may be banned! This is my blog. Life isn’t fair.

© 2004–2025, All rights reserved worldwide. Except for the comment threads. Because fuck those guys. So there.