Paul Ryan Says He’s Run Sub-3:00 Marathon (Read 1921 times)

    so, are you saying it is an art, not a science?

     

    Yep -- but that probably says more about me than it does about the "correct way to approach making a political decision."

    DoppleBock


      I guess I was really bad at making my point - I mean stay focussed on the few issues that are really important.

       

      I am saying take the top 5 or 10 things.  I clicked through 15 - 20 of the things listed with all sorts of sources.  It listed things related to gay and lesbian rights or health insurance 4-5 times or 25-30%.  If Obama has listed his top 10 things that are material he will accomplish in 2008 would have listed this?  Maybe.  Should he had spent 25-30% of his time in office (As representative in how dominant it was in this political bomb) on this issue - Not in my opinion.

       

      This link was a perfect example of a political psychological manipulation that the candidates try on us.  They post some very important facts, grouped with some very small accomplishments that will have very large psychological responses and then a bunch of almost truths and some of the truth. 

       

      I am not saying that same sex rights are not important - But it is something that will bring a large response from a group much larger than in actually impacts.  There are many religious groups that are against, many other groups feeling strongly for the right - a 10-20% of the population that it actually impacts.  So it has a much bigger impact on a political race than the actual impact.

       

      I am sorry for offending people - But yes gay rights is a fundamental issue - peoples' rights, but not a top 5 or 10 issues our nation is faced with to avoid economic ruin (Deficit = taxes versus spending, unsolved issues in the finance and banking sectors, constant flood of manufacturing jobs out of country), personal ruin (Health Care, Medicare, Social Security, unemployment)

       

      I am sorry, but there are almost always only 4-6 issues, drivers or whatever you want to call them that need to be "Do at all costs" the rest of the issues are secondary to the overall success of the administration and will come along easily of the 4-6 are successful.  But instead we are hit with 20-30-40 issues that are mostly noise that should not be differentiators - They are thrown out there are psychological warfare to garner votes only - not as key issues.

       

      So my point - Make a list of the top 4-6 things that you think the candidates have to address in their 4 years in office and stay laser focussed on those issues - Do not let political bombs bring a ton of smoke or white noise into your focuss on those 4-6 issues.

       

      and

       

      Whatever you list as your 4-6 most important issues are the right issues for you.  I will have my own 4-6 issues.  Just do not let them play psychological games with you.

       

       But DB, you asked about what the president/candidate had done.  Also, each page links to a source article (i.e., not just partial info). 

      http://a-big-horse.blogspot.com/ 

      2013 Goals ~ Mar < 3:00, 5M < 29, 10k < 35  

       

        I couldn't care less who you vote for.
        DoppleBock


          I know I am putting myself out there - But here is my current top 6 that I tried to filter through the link Jeff posted

           

          1)  Deficit (This counts for 2-3 of any other)

          2)  Loss of Manufacturing Jobs and total Private sector unemployement (But for me MFG job is worth double)

          3)  Healthcare cost control

          4)  Policy around Middle East Involvement

          5)  Social Security and Medicare

          6)  Additional waves of banking / finance crisis 

           

          So when I see spending on an area that is not listed here it is a neagative, when I see action taken that is not relevant - It is smoke.

           

          The thing I am struggling with is the idea of the "Bridge"

           

          Obama said he would reduce the deficit - But without knowing what the exact inputs and outputs to accomplish this goal and then knowing what actual inputs or outputs occurred - I can only take that it has grown to the point of debt downgrading - In fact if the rest of the world economy was doing well and could afford it we would be rated as a junk bond.

          In his Control?

          or

          Out of his Control?

           

          #2)  I currently take as neutral as we stabalized but no real growth is happening - I need to decide if teh Repulican would have been any more or will be any more successful

           

          #3)  I do not believe a republican has the balls to face down this issue - I am very intrigued by the path Obama is taking us down.  I know it will hurt me short term as we head toward universal healthcare.  But long term something has to be done or we will continue to lose jobs and not be competetive in the world economy.  Universal Healthcare?  Our company spends $11-$12k per employee to provide healthcare.  They will be able to opt out in 2014(?) with a $2,200 penalty from providing healthcare - say it saves $9k per emplyee x 5,000 employees = $45M - We are a $1B company - saving $45M - easy choice,

           

          I take #3 as a large plus for Obama

           

          #4 - I am not going into my logic, but it is a push right now before further analysis.  I am not saying a push with Bush in 2008, but for 2012.

           

          #5-6  Are both big negatives to both right now - Convince me you are willing to deal with the issues in your 4 years!

           

          The candidates hope they can find the one thing that inspires you to voted for them - They do not care if it is one of your top 6 issues.  To me that is the art of politics.

          http://a-big-horse.blogspot.com/ 

          2013 Goals ~ Mar < 3:00, 5M < 29, 10k < 35  

           

          HCH


            Every time I think the partisan sniping is done we get these.

             

            Although I vote Dem 95% of the time even I know the Dems would not look good if people want to compare VPs on truthfulness about remembering facts and dates and details both trivial and important.  Both look bad.  Let's move on from that angle. 

             

            Not intended as a partisan snipe at all. Believe me, there are plenty of Democrats that I would argue have also demonstrated a similar or even more sinister clinical pathology. Don't even get me started on John Edwards. Or Rob Blagojevich. Or Anthony Weiner. Or Marion Barry. But this thread was about Paul Ryan, and not them.

             

            It does make you wonder if being character-compromised is an asset in politics.Confused

            - Holly

            DoppleBock


              To me at this point it is a toss up

               

               

               

              I couldn't care less who you vote for.

              http://a-big-horse.blogspot.com/ 

              2013 Goals ~ Mar < 3:00, 5M < 29, 10k < 35  

               


              Blue Moon Hater

                You know what is visionary?  A cell phone that charges wirelessly!  Catch up, Motorola!

                There was a point in my life when I ran. Now, I just run.

                 

                Well, fuckers

                He still stands

                 

                The Diary of a Once-ran.

                DoppleBock


                  http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/09/are_you_better_off_than_you_were_four_years_ago_how_democrats_will_frame_the_question_.html

                   

                  This is a perfect example of smoke that will be blown by both sides

                   

                  I personally am better off than 4 years ago, the Company I work for is better off than 4 years ago.  The down turn was a huge opportunity for us to apply lean principals to significantly grow sales (not to reduce jobs), invest aggressively and differentiate ourselves in the market place.

                   

                  I think the whole US is worse off only because of the deficit.  Overall we have stabalized - Some of this means parts of the storm have passed, some of it means we have stuck our heads in the sand hoping the issues vanish (Which they won't). 

                  http://a-big-horse.blogspot.com/ 

                  2013 Goals ~ Mar < 3:00, 5M < 29, 10k < 35  

                   

                    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/09/are_you_better_off_than_you_were_four_years_ago_how_democrats_will_frame_the_question_.html

                     

                    This is a perfect example of smoke that will be blown by both sides.

                     

                    I get the point, but the answer to that question does actually depend on how it is framed. Analyzing the frame and rebutting alternative framings is not "blowing smoke." It is communicating.

                    DoppleBock


                      All my blah-blah-blah = Don't let the bastards play mind games with you!

                      http://a-big-horse.blogspot.com/ 

                      2013 Goals ~ Mar < 3:00, 5M < 29, 10k < 35  

                       

                        All my blah-blah-blah = Don't let the bastards play mind games with you!

                         

                        Okay, but what does this mean? Does it mean not listening? Does it mean sticking to your political intuitions in the face of evidence to the contrary? 

                         

                        I do not agree with your warfare mentality here. The warfare mentality of politics is what they WANT us to have.

                        DoppleBock


                          I could never get elected as I would have a plan like

                           

                          1) Unemployement will reduce from 8.8% to 6.0% based on the following actions I will take

                          a) blah-blah-blah will cost $X and result in 1.0%

                          b) blah-blah-blah will cost $y and result in 1.0%

                          c) blah-blah-blah will cost $x and result in .8%

                           

                          2)  The deficit will be reduced from $15T to $10T

                          a)

                          b)

                          c)

                           

                           

                          At the end you can pull out what I promissed, but I will have to add points d-f for major possitive or negative unforseen things that happened and my administration reacted.  You job would be to decide how I executed on my plan, did I hit my metrics,  How well I minimized the unanticipated negative or took advantage of the unanticipated possitive wild cars and finally should I have been able to anticipate these wild cards.

                           

                          Are you better off - I am not sure why that is a frame of reference / frame of mind question - It has always been listed as an economic question and economics are about metrics - Things that are measureable.

                           

                          I know I am an idealist - I need to start running again to not get myself in trouble.

                          http://a-big-horse.blogspot.com/ 

                          2013 Goals ~ Mar < 3:00, 5M < 29, 10k < 35  

                           

                            I could never get elected as I would have a plan like

                             

                            1) Unemployement will reduce from 8.8% to 6.0% based on the following actions I will take

                            a) blah-blah-blah will cost $X and result in 1.0%

                            b) blah-blah-blah will cost $y and result in 1.0%

                            c) blah-blah-blah will cost $x and result in .8%

                             

                            2)  The deficit will be reduced from $15T to $10T

                            a)

                            b)

                            c)

                             

                             

                            At the end you can pull out what I promissed, but I will have to add points d-f for major possitive or negative unforseen things that happened and my administration reacted.  You job would be to decide how I executed on my plan, did I hit my metrics,  How well I minimized the unanticipated negative or took advantage of the unanticipated possitive wild cars and finally should I have been able to anticipate these wild cards.

                             

                            Are you better off - I am not sure why that is a frame of reference / frame of mind question - It has always been listed as an economic question and economics are about metrics - Things that are measureable.

                             

                            I know I am an idealist - I need to start running again to not get myself in trouble.

                             

                            All of this sounds very nice, but I do not believe I am in a position to evaluate a 6 part plan to reduce the economy. I am not as smart as you when it comes to technical politics. So, I just stick with what I know -- what sort of vision does this guy have for the future.

                             

                            You are also more optimistic about our ability to measure something like "better off" in an objective and unframed way than I am.

                            DoppleBock


                              I was light heartedly saying - I talked way to much to make the point.  The point was find your 4-6 key issues and do a deep dive on the candidates on these issues.   The mind games happen when we allow the candidates to make something not a key issue to us the deciding factor for whom we vote.

                               

                              My "Blah-blah-blah" part of post was a statement about my inability to deliver a short to the point message.  It was not about you - about me. 

                               

                              Okay, but what does this mean? Does it mean not listening? Does it mean sticking to your political intuitions in the face of evidence to the contrary? 

                               

                              I do not agree with your warfare mentality here. The warfare mentality of politics is what they WANT us to have.

                              http://a-big-horse.blogspot.com/ 

                              2013 Goals ~ Mar < 3:00, 5M < 29, 10k < 35  

                               

                              DoppleBock


                                Better off

                                1)  I have a job

                                2)  My wife has a job

                                3)  Financially better off

                                4)  I still have good health insurance

                                5)  Everything else I care about for immediate consideration is the same or better.

                                http://a-big-horse.blogspot.com/ 

                                2013 Goals ~ Mar < 3:00, 5M < 29, 10k < 35