Friday, October 17, 2008


Word up.

CNN's finger on the pulse of thirty "undecideds" (winners, all) in Ohio has been a matter of contention in my apartment. Leila likes the idea of "more information," while I call it "distracting bullshit" and swear I'll start throwing furniture if we don't switch to the calm of MSNBC. God forbid we don't find out what a gender split of THIRTY "undecideds" thought until immediately after the politicians have finished talking.


John C. said...

The other problem with the squigglies is that it's not always easy to tell what exactly they mean. If Obama's line drops while he's speaking, is it because CNN's pool disapproves of the policy he's outlining or because he's pausing too much? I guess it's useful for getting a rough idea of who "won" the debate (just look at who stayed above the median for the longest), but it's a pretty simplistic mechanism for extrapolating much else.

Leila said...

I maintain that the squigglies would have improved my debate-watching experience. I don't especially care if they're that useful, I just like immediate data. Also, I already knew what both candidates were going to say: the squigglies would have provided new information.

The Manthony said...

So you KNEW that McCain was going to promote Troops For Teachers and cry about Rep. Lewis, but you didn't know how 30 dimwits in Ohio would take each second on a binary level. And that's something worth knowing. That's "immediate data" worth influencing your take on the debate with. Right.

Or rather, WRONG.



The Manthony said...

Btw, outside world, this is exactly how I talk at home.