Bush will lose the 2004 election by a landslide

[MattK]

Bush has no chance in 2004. He is a 1 term president just like his dad.

:bwave: :salute:

[Mike AI]

and you base your reasoning on?

[Hooper]

Matt, I like you already.... but i'd like to hear your logic.

Dont be a pussy who says things without backing it up.

[MattK]

I have inside information from the Bildebergers. :D

Seriously though. W will lose for the same reason his dad did -- the economy. Even though things look ok now for stocks and the economy, there are some major cracks showing. After a huge decline in the stock market over the next year, the economy will contract, real estate prices will go down, and more importantly people's moods will be angry and negative.

Based on election history over the past 150 years, when the market falls over the president's last 2 years, he is very likely to lose. So it does not matter what W and the republicans say or do from now until the election, he is still gonna be toast.

:okthumb:

[TheEnforcer]

Now I'm gonna shock a few people here and say while in the past the economy has been by far the biggest factor in an election that Bush has the possibility of being able to be someone who can defy that trend. IF he can frame the election much more around national security AND the dem candidate doesn't come up with an effective way to deal with that Bush can win despite a bad economy.

Clinton said it best when he visited the college class in Arkansas that studied his presidency http://www.c-span.org/VideoArchives.asp?Ca...ssue,PE;&Page=2 (http://www.c-span.org/VideoArchives.asp?CatCodePairs=Issue,PE;&Page=2) when he said that the dem candidate, or any candidate for that matter, has to be able to convince voters by doing this:

1) You have to point out something that the public might not have taken notice of that they won't like about the other guy and point out it's something you won't do.

2) You have to point to something that they DO like about the guy and convince them you can do that as well (in our current situation defense)

3) And going back to point two you also have to offer something ELSE you will do on that issue they will like that he won't do.

Even for people who DON'T like Clinton I suggest you watch that video (anyone know what player works for that type (.rm) of file to watch it?) as it's an extremely interesting and candid discussion and whether you like him or not you can get some very interesting political information from the show.

BTW- not sure if that's just a clip or the full show.

[Mike AI]

MattK I think there is plenty of time for economy to get better....

I also think the group of democrats are a very weak bunch....

I think Bush will win. He is a true leader... I think he has potential to be a great leader.

His father raised taxs, and a bunch of other stupid things.... he was not a leader.... he was a beauracrat... and did not deserve to win the election! Only reason he was elected the first place was thanks to Ronald Reagan ( Who Bush 43 is much closer to in actions then his father)

The number 1 issue, at least for me right now is the war on terror, and National Security, then the ecnomy.... Both I think Bush would do better handling then any democrat....

[Digipimp]

As much as I hate it, right now the group of dumbasses running against King George doesn't have a fucking chance. And if you doubt for one second that this dude will get us into another conflict at election time and then sell it to the masses that he needs to stay in to finish it then you'll be real surprised. Fuck I hate George Bush, fuck that I hate politicians.

[Winetalk.com]

son, the re is no prizes for the longest thread on Oprano
;-)))

[wig]

Originally posted by MattK@Jun 14 2003, 04:50 PM
After a huge decline in the stock market over the next year, the economy will contract, real estate prices will go down, and more importantly people's moods will be angry and negative.


I don't know what it may mean for the election, but I agree with your assesment.

I also think the middle east will see major problems, most likely in Saudi Arabia and the Israeli / palestinian conflict.

If we are right, Bush's best chance is national security.

[Mike AI]

Anyone willing to put some bets against GW Bush in 2004, I am taking offers....

Might as well make some money on this!

[wig]

Not me. :P

Personally, I could care less who wins. I'd rather see Bush than any of the Democrats, but I guess if it really mattered I would like to see a Libertarian win.

I mean, why not. Let's see what they can do for a change. :rokk:

[SykkBoy]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Jun 14 2003, 06:34 PM
Anyone willing to put some bets against GW Bush in 2004, I am taking offers....

Might as well make some money on this!
...are we going to go by popular vote or electoral vote? ;-)))


personally, it doesn't matter who wins, we'll most likely be thrown into a world war 3 situation anyways, sharon and arafat will see to that...

I think we need to more carefully focus on our homegrown terrorists....I personally feel more threatened by the fire and brimstone right to lifers and religious zealots who condone bombing abortion clinics and blame the 911 attacks on homosexuals, white supremacy groups, blind faith right wing zealots, blind faith liberal zealots and the ever-ready to boil over ethnic war that is inevitable in this country more than bad arabs across the ocean.

[wig]

Originally posted by SykkBoy@Jun 14 2003, 07:38 PM
I think we need to more carefully focus on our homegrown terrorists....I personally feel more threatened by the fire and brimstone right to lifers and religious zealots who condone bombing abortion clinics and blame the 911 attacks on homosexuals, white supremacy groups, blind faith right wing zealots, blind faith liberal zealots and the ever-ready to boil over ethnic war that is inevitable in this country more than bad arabs across the ocean.
I think the extremists on both sides of the ideology spectrum represent a very small % of the ppl.

They just get the most coverage. B)

[SykkBoy]

Originally posted by wig@Jun 14 2003, 07:32 PM
but I guess if it really mattered I would like to see a Libertarian win.

I mean, why not. Let's see what they can do for a change. :rokk:
I would like to see it too, but they're having enough of our own problems.

while no doubt Dr. Brown will run again and I'll vote for him again, the Libertarians need to work harder to make strids locally before attmepting anything of substance nationally...

[MattK]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Jun 14 2003, 06:34 PM
Anyone willing to put some bets against GW Bush in 2004, I am taking offers....

Might as well make some money on this!

hmmm, ok

I'll bet you $30,000 Bush loses in the 2004 presedential election

you guys think you know politics!? time to put up or shut up baby!

[wig]

Sykk,

I voted for Brown as well and would do so again. What problems are they having?

I must admit that even though I vote, I do not take much of a personal interest in trying to further the cause.

[wig]

Mattk,

Who would you vote for and why?

[SykkBoy]

wig, same problems as plaguing the "big two"...a lot of petty bickering and in-fighting over the focus of the party...

[wig]

too bad, cause if things do get crazy there may be a ripe time period for new approaches to gather some interest and momentum.

Right now it's a joke, but it has to be started somewhere.

[MattK]

Originally posted by wig@Jun 14 2003, 07:59 PM
Mattk,

Who would you vote for and why?

It does not matter who the democratic candidate is. The election is about how people are feeling, it is not about rational decision making. When the economy hits the crapper, people will be pissed at the current administration, and W will get voted out. If there is not a popular democrat at the time, someone like Nadar has a shot at making it.

Personally I don't vote or I vote libertarian.

[SykkBoy]

Originally posted by wig@Jun 14 2003, 08:04 PM
too bad, cause if things do get crazy there may be a ripe time period for new approaches to gather some interest and momentum.

Right now it's a joke, but it has to be started somewhere.
Yup, but that's also why I feel it's important for the party to act locally. If the libertarians can get a nice foothold locally and start influencing local politics, it can set a pathway to more national attention.

[wig]

Originally posted by MattK+Jun 14 2003, 08:12 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (MattK @ Jun 14 2003, 08:12 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--wig@Jun 14 2003, 07:59 PM
Mattk,

Who would you vote for and why?

It does not matter who the democratic candidate is. The election is about how people are feeling, it is not about rational decision making. When the economy hits the crapper, people will be pissed at the current administration, and W will get voted out. If there is not a popular democrat at the time, someone like Nadar has a shot at making it.

Personally I don't vote or I vote libertarian.[/b][/quote]
Yeah, I understood your philosophy from the first post.

Nader? :blink:

[wig]

Originally posted by SykkBoy+Jun 14 2003, 08:15 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (SykkBoy @ Jun 14 2003, 08:15 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--wig@Jun 14 2003, 08:04 PM
too bad, cause if things do get crazy there may be a ripe time period for new approaches to gather some interest and momentum.

Right now it's a joke, but it has to be started somewhere.
Yup, but that's also why I feel it's important for the party to act locally. If the libertarians can get a nice foothold locally and start influencing local politics, it can set a pathway to more national attention.[/b][/quote]
That's a good point Sykk. :okthumb:

[MattK]

Originally posted by wig+Jun 14 2003, 08:18 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (wig @ Jun 14 2003, 08:18 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Originally posted by -MattK@Jun 14 2003, 08:12 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--wig@Jun 14 2003, 07:59 PM
Mattk,

Who would you vote for and why?

It does not matter who the democratic candidate is. The election is about how people are feeling, it is not about rational decision making. When the economy hits the crapper, people will be pissed at the current administration, and W will get voted out. If there is not a popular democrat at the time, someone like Nadar has a shot at making it.

Personally I don't vote or I vote libertarian.
Yeah, I understood your philosophy from the first post.

Nader? :blink:[/b][/quote]

I don't think the Green party could win, but if social dissatisfaction gets really bad, far left democrat could get elected.

[sextoyking]

Good points Sykk,

you are correct, many diff. people have said that the green party and other parties except the 2, have to gain some ground locally before going for the gold nationally. I still think Ventura might run for national office someday, I don't know when, but I think so.

as of right now, the only dems I see as strong are Kerry and Lieberman.

I like Kerry better as I think he is more mainstream. I would love to see a jew in office someday at the whitehouse, but I don't think I want him.

Kerry's very strong on foreign affairs and has a superb record in Vietnam, Purple heart, silver star, etc, etc. Plus I have always loved him since the early 90's when he was chairman of the Sub Comm. on Pow's, him and Sen. Smith &reg;. For 1 whole year he dedicated himself to hearings, and all for the info on pow's..

You never know, mabey some Dem. Gov will come into the race later. Clinton started a little late, and won :)

[wig]

Originally posted by MattK+Jun 14 2003, 08:26 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (MattK @ Jun 14 2003, 08:26 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Originally posted by -wig@Jun 14 2003, 08:18 PM
Originally posted by -MattK@Jun 14 2003, 08:12 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--wig@Jun 14 2003, 07:59 PM
Mattk,

Who would you vote for and why?

It does not matter who the democratic candidate is. The election is about how people are feeling, it is not about rational decision making. When the economy hits the crapper, people will be pissed at the current administration, and W will get voted out. If there is not a popular democrat at the time, someone like Nadar has a shot at making it.

Personally I don't vote or I vote libertarian.
Yeah, I understood your philosophy from the first post.

Nader? :blink:

I don't think the Green party could win, but if social dissatisfaction gets really bad, far left democrat could get elected.[/b][/quote]
I would think it would then go to the Dems. I just don't see any of the other parties taking enough votes.

I'd have to say that Nader scared me. I don't know much about him other than the few times I saw him on TV pitching college kids.

His MO was basically, everything that was invented, perfected, designed etc, was because of the Government.

Yeah, that's just what we need. :huh:

[sextoyking]

Wig,

While Nader might be a little to left for me, I do like and respect him.

He has dedicated his life to fighting big corps that polluted, gov. agency's, etc.

I think after law school, a few yrs. later he won a huge case I belive against Ford???

He is Def. Pro labor and union from what I see.

[wig]

Originally posted by sextoyking@Jun 14 2003, 08:38 PM
Wig,

While Nader might be a little to left for me, I do like and respect him.

He has dedicated his life to fighting big corps that polluted, gov. agency's, etc.

I think after law school, a few yrs. later he won a huge case I belive against Ford???

He is Def. Pro labor and union from what I see.
Todd,

I'm sure that he is a good man at heart. He did not come across conniving, like many career pols.

I just totally disagree with his ideology.

btw, you need checks yet? :yowsa:

[SykkBoy]

Nader scares me as he seems to get a too overboard on some issues. While I appreciate what he has done as far as forcing big corps to clean it up, I don't like his ideas that would seem to almost punish succcessful companies (some of his labor policy ideas). It is refreshing to see someone who cares about the proverbial little man, but unfortunately the little man doesn't vote but boards of directors of large corps do.

While I do think corporations who do pollute the environment should be taken to task (yeah, I'm a tree hugger, so what, try breathing without the oxygen plants produce and take yourself a big gulp of water that is full of lead, rocket feul and/or toxic waste, buy a house up in Yucca Mountain where they want to deposit all of the nuclear waste) I don't agree with so many other things the Green Party suggests.

Of the dems, I like Kerry best as Lieberman scares me with his views on Hollywood and media censorship.

but, I'll most likely "waste" my vote on Dr. Brown again this year ;-)))

[Hell Puppy]

The Green Party is downright scary. At best it's socialist, at worst it's on the fringes of communistic.

Consider the current paragraph from their platform (available online at http://www.gp.org/platform/2000/index.html). See Article II Section C number 7:

7. The accumulation of individual wealth in the U.S. has reached grossly unbalanced proportions. It is clear that we cannot rely on the rich to regulate their profit-making excesses for the good of society through “trickle-down economics”. We must take aggressive steps to restore a FAIR DISTRIBUTION OF INCOME. We support tax incentives for businesses that apply fair employee wage distributions standards, and income tax policies that restrict the accumulation of excessive individual wealth.

Their underlying ideology is that for the good of society, everyone should make a decent living but there should be no big gap between the rich and the poor. They propose to cap wages and put in place legislation where those who bust their ass, grow mega-successful corporations, or have that one killer idea for an invention or something would no longer be able to become mega-rich. There would be no more Bill Gates, Howard Hughes, J. Paul Getty, John Rockefeller, etc.

This goes against the basic ideas of free market, free enterprise and capitlism. There are no more individuals, only what is good for the group. I believe this was tried in Russia for most of the last century.

[Hell Puppy]

I think there's a lot of Libertarians out there. Some libertarians are actually getting elected at the local levels. It would be very interesting if everyone weren't so scared of our two party system and would vote their conscious and vote Libertarian without fearing putting a Democrat in office.

Green Party may actually help in that regard. Hopefully they'll suck away as many Democratic votes as the Libertarians suck away from the Republicans and level the playing field for all of them.

It'll also be interesting to see how Dr. Brown's post 9/11 statements impact his support. They were moronic and brought up some very scary images of what might've happened had he been in office when 9/11 occurred.

He basically had no good answers. 9/11 was an action that called for a show of strength and muscle and that's in direct conflict with the Libertarian ideal of isolationism. Isolationism is all well and good, but if someone brings the fight to you, you gotta be ready to answer.

[JR]

I think there should be a pool for this with prizes. people should make their picks and give their reasoning and see who in the end is closest.

personally, i think Bush without a war is a political disaster. but i dont see anyone who can challenge him. there are no Democrats that can convince the American public that they will be tough on terrorism, Iran, North Korea, National Defense. The US economy is recovering and growing at more than twice the rate of the EU economy. If anyone thinks that the economy is going to be a political issue in the elections, they are dreaming.

I also believe in the balance of power and the election process and our system of government. i think it would and should also find its center again since there is now one party controlling the 3 branches of government. i doubt that will happen in the presidential elections, it seems more likely that either the house or senate will go back to Democrats in their next election.

People can hate Bush all they want... but the bottom line is that he is and has remained quite popular throughout his presidency regardless of what has happened and what he was accused of (Enron, recession, kyoto, steel tarrifs, abm treaty etc etc). It seems that he and his team are more politically savy than the opposition... whether anyone feels they are right or wrong.

[Timon]

Don't you guys watch the news? The 2004 elections are off!
***********************************************

2004 Presidential Election Canceled

Bush Cites National Security Concerns, Inconvenience

WASHINGTON, June 13 — President Bush announced today that the 2004 presidential election will be canceled due to the war on terrorism and other scheduling conflicts.

Although the U.S. Constitution expressly mandates that presidential elections be held every four years, a little-known clause in the USA Patriot Act, which Congress hastily approved in the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, gives the sitting president the option to cancel a presidential election and remain in office indefinitely if he deems it in the national interest.

In a brief statement from the Oval Office, Bush said, ""A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, there's no question about it," adding, "My administration is where our nation finds hope, where wings take dream."

Upon hearing the news, Democrats on Capitol Hill promptly rolled over and capitulated.

Former Vice President Al Gore was unavailable for comment, as he could not be immediately resuscitated.

Experts agree that the election likely would have been only a formality anyway, with Bush currently enjoying approval ratings unmatched in presidential history. The latest Fox News Opinion Poll put Bush's job performance rating at 165 percent.

The 2004 Re-Election Security Act is the latest in a series of presidential initiatives intended to bring Americans aid and comfort during a time of unprecedented fear and uncertainty. It comes on the heels of Bush's highly touted Economic Security Act and Energy Security Act, as well as the more controversial Snack Food Security Act.

The cancellation of the election is expected to save the oil, energy, accounting, tobacco and gun industries an estimated $50 million in expenditures over the next two years. Instead, the corporations will be asked to make voluntary donations to a new pet project Bush announced today.

Under the plan, known as the Mt. Rushmore Security Act, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and Theodore Roosevelt will be joined by new stone carvings of both George W. Bush and his father, former President George H. W. Bush. A dedication ceremony will be held on the first Tuesday of November 2004 in lieu of the presidential election.

It is not clear when, if ever, another presidential election will be held. But congressional researchers announced today that they had discovered another obscure clause in the USA Patriot Act that sheds some light on the matter.

The clause, buried in a subsection called the Bush Dynasty Security Act, states that in the event George W. Bush should ever leave office, anyone not named Jeb, Jenna or Barbara is expressly prohibited from governing the country.



Last edited by Timon at Jun 14 2003, 11:32 PM

[Winetalk.com]

Originally posted by Hell Puppy@Jun 14 2003, 10:06 PM


This goes against the basic ideas of free market, free enterprise and capitlism. There are no more individuals, only what is good for the group. I believe this was tried in Russia for most of the last century.
they surelly did and Stalin fullfilled the promise of equality.
There were no rich and poor in Russia,
he made everybody EQUALLY poor.

My parents salary was $200 a month each...not bad for medical doctors with 30 years experience
;-)))

[Winetalk.com]

Originally posted by MattK+Jun 14 2003, 07:55 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (MattK @ Jun 14 2003, 07:55 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--Mike AI@Jun 14 2003, 06:34 PM
Anyone willing to put some bets against GW Bush in 2004, I am taking offers....

Might as well make some money on this!

hmmm, ok

I'll bet you $30,000 Bush loses in the 2004 presedential election

you guys think you know politics!? time to put up or shut up baby![/b][/quote]
MattK,
time to be a man...I accept your bet,
do you have any escrow agent in mind or do you trust mine?

put up and collect $60k if Bush loses election by landslide.

[JR]

Originally posted by MattK@Jun 14 2003, 05:12 PM

It does not matter who the democratic candidate is. The election is about how people are feeling, it is not about rational decision making.
i think your position is about "how you are feeling" not "how PEOPLE are feeling"

elections if you recall are about "how the MAJORITY of people are feeling"

to support your position, it means you have to prove that most people are dissapointed with Bush. he still remains popular.

[sextoyking]

Timon,

That was great!!!!!!

:rokk:

[TheEnforcer]

Originally posted by Timon@Jun 14 2003, 11:31 PM
Don't you guys watch the news? The 2004 elections are off!
***********************************************

2004 Presidential Election Canceled

Bush Cites National Security Concerns, Inconvenience

WASHINGTON, June 13 — President Bush announced today that the 2004 presidential election will be canceled due to the war on terrorism and other scheduling conflicts.

Although the U.S. Constitution expressly mandates that presidential elections be held every four years, a little-known clause in the USA Patriot Act, which Congress hastily approved in the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, gives the sitting president the option to cancel a presidential election and remain in office indefinitely if he deems it in the national interest.

In a brief statement from the Oval Office, Bush said, ""A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, there's no question about it," adding, "My administration is where our nation finds hope, where wings take dream."

Upon hearing the news, Democrats on Capitol Hill promptly rolled over and capitulated.

Former Vice President Al Gore was unavailable for comment, as he could not be immediately resuscitated.

Experts agree that the election likely would have been only a formality anyway, with Bush currently enjoying approval ratings unmatched in presidential history. The latest Fox News Opinion Poll put Bush's job performance rating at 165 percent.

The 2004 Re-Election Security Act is the latest in a series of presidential initiatives intended to bring Americans aid and comfort during a time of unprecedented fear and uncertainty. It comes on the heels of Bush's highly touted Economic Security Act and Energy Security Act, as well as the more controversial Snack Food Security Act.

The cancellation of the election is expected to save the oil, energy, accounting, tobacco and gun industries an estimated $50 million in expenditures over the next two years. Instead, the corporations will be asked to make voluntary donations to a new pet project Bush announced today.

Under the plan, known as the Mt. Rushmore Security Act, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and Theodore Roosevelt will be joined by new stone carvings of both George W. Bush and his father, former President George H. W. Bush. A dedication ceremony will be held on the first Tuesday of November 2004 in lieu of the presidential election.

It is not clear when, if ever, another presidential election will be held. But congressional researchers announced today that they had discovered another obscure clause in the USA Patriot Act that sheds some light on the matter.

The clause, buried in a subsection called the Bush Dynasty Security Act, states that in the event George W. Bush should ever leave office, anyone not named Jeb, Jenna or Barbara is expressly prohibited from governing the country.
LOL :lol:

Let me guess.. that came from The Onion?

[Timon]

I got it from About ;-)

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/we...y/aa040102a.htm (http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/weekly/aa040102a.htm)

[Vick]

You all have forgotten I' M RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT OF THE USA in 2004
With Richard Milhouse Nixon as my VP candidate

I plan to have spam in every fucking email addy in the world

Ye ha motherfuckers let's rock
With the Vick yes all dig don't stop
Got riffs to rock
Brought booze to slam
Now who's the man
Vick Rock
God Damn
Back on the scene like a fiend four beats
ain't slept in weeks
Got too many freaks
Seen too many geeks
Try to rock the rap

So I'm back with heat
To unseat the whack
I'm a unpack and setup shop
I'm a step back
And watcha rock
I'm a bomb tracks
To stop the pop
Then I'm a master blast it
Thru the after shock
I got
Dug ditches
To bury you bitches
Who whoa the flow
Who wanna stop the show
So I'm a roll and throw
Another on point seven
From north of America
to Way south of heaven

[Mike AI]

I'd vote for you Vick!

I will put up 30k against MattK that Bush does not lose in a landslide.....

Who is going to be escrow?

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by Serge_Oprano@Jun 14 2003, 05:52 PM
son, there is no prizes for the longest thread on Oprano
;-)))
Classic.

[Almighty Colin]

Too early too tell. Too many factors undecided (you know, small stuff like the state of the world and who the Democratic candidate will be).

Of all the main possibilities:
A Bush wins in landslide
B Bush wins close
C Democrat wins in landslide
D Democrat wins close

I would think C is least likely at this point but possible if economy slides or Osama strikes again or something like that.

I think it's an impossible prediction to make from this point but that some people will hit it on luck.

[Timon]

Originally posted by Colin@Jun 15 2003, 04:35 AM
I would think C is least likely at this point but possible if economy slides or Osama strikes again or something like that.
I think C becomes even more unlikely if Osama strikes again, if there is one thing people can depend on it's that Bush kicks terrorist butt.

[JR]

Originally posted by Colin+Jun 15 2003, 01:24 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Colin @ Jun 15 2003, 01:24 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--Serge_Oprano@Jun 14 2003, 05:52 PM
son, there is no prizes for the longest thread on Oprano
;-)))
Classic.[/b][/quote]
kinda cruel. like turning back Cubans once they made it to Florida.
i feel sorry for GFY refugees.

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by Timon+Jun 15 2003, 04:55 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Timon @ Jun 15 2003, 04:55 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--Colin@Jun 15 2003, 04:35 AM
I would think C is least likely at this point but possible if economy slides or Osama strikes again or something like that.
I think C becomes even more unlikely if Osama strikes again, if there is one thing people can depend on it's that Bush kicks terrorist butt.[/b][/quote]
That could be too. I think it would depend on the timing and how well the Democrats market it as a Bush failure vs. how well Bush can market it as
a Bush success. It could be done poorly or well on either side.

Osama still being out there could be marketed well as a Bush failure I think ESPECIALLY if he strikes again. If Osama is caught near election time though that would really give Bush a push and no marketing needed.

This is where guys like Rove and Carville really shine.

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by Timon@Jun 15 2003, 04:55 AM
If there is one thing people can depend on it's that Bush kicks terrorist butt.
I think a lot of die-hard Republicans say "Bush kicks terrorist butt" and a lot of die-hard Democrats say "But where's Osama?" with a lot of people in between leaning a little more towards the former though.

[Timon]

I bet they have Osama tied up in some basement, if he'd be dead the US wouldn't need Bush no more ;-)

[Timon]

Originally posted by Colin@Jun 15 2003, 05:13 AM

I think a lot of die-hard Republicans say "Bush kicks terrorist butt" and a lot of die-hard Democrats say "But where's Osama?"
Those die hard democrats.... you have to be a pretty die hard moron to argue Rumsfeld is sitting on his ass and that the failure to capture Osama is due to incompetence.... and then to add insult to injury claim that some tree-hugger is going to do a better job.

[Timon]

If any new candidate is going to beat Bush I think his strongest selling point is going to be charisma, good speaking skills and the ability to give a good spin on whatever his agenda is.

To win over the masses it's not what you're selling that's important, it's how you sell it ;-)

[TheEnforcer]

Originally posted by Timon@Jun 15 2003, 05:22 AM
If any new candidate is going to beat Bush I think his strongest selling point is going to be charisma, good speaking skills and the ability to give a good spin on whatever his agenda is.

To win over the masses it's not what you're selling that's important, it's how you sell it ;-)
I'm telling ya...... watch that Cinton piece at C-Span!! Like him or hate him the guy is a very interesting speaker and he nails it right on the head when asked about the 2004 election. He basically gives an answer for what a politician in any election needs to do to beat their opponent and it's an awesome response.

[sextoyking]

Love Cliton or Hate Clinton.

Dems and Repubs alike say he is a politcal master. I am not sure we can pull it off in 2004, but I am hoping.

Glad that Carville's wife is gone from the white house, or is going. Mabey James will work for 1 of the canidates.

I have always loved and respected that guy. he might have that Southern drawl to him, but he is a master in his own right. oh and belive me when I say he loves the good fight!!!!

Mike must love him, being a fellow LA person :)

[MattK]

Originally posted by Serge_Oprano+Jun 15 2003, 12:25 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Serge_Oprano @ Jun 15 2003, 12:25 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Originally posted by -MattK@Jun 14 2003, 07:55 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Mike AI@Jun 14 2003, 06:34 PM
Anyone willing to put some bets against GW Bush in 2004, I am taking offers....

Might as well make some money on this!

hmmm, ok

I'll bet you $30,000 Bush loses in the 2004 presedential election

you guys think you know politics!? time to put up or shut up baby!
MattK,
time to be a man...I accept your bet,
do you have any escrow agent in mind or do you trust mine?

put up and collect $60k if Bush loses election by landslide.[/b][/quote]

ok, but how do we define "landslide"? I'd like to have use of the 30K from now until the election (since it is 1.5 years from now) in a seperate investment account, like keeping it at Etrade for example. I am going to be shorting the market as it goes down, so I would rather double the 30K versus just having it sit around earning 1% in some escrow account.

We should meet at internext and work out some kind of arrangement B)



Last edited by MattK at Jun 15 2003, 03:04 PM

[Winetalk.com]

MattK,
I know it's unfortunate,
but I have no clue about your solvency, and therefore,
escrow is mandatory.

are you gambling with your last 30k?

you shouldn't, son.

being a good guy,
I'll save you some money and give you FREE advice.

Behind EVERY stock market rally,
was invention drastically changing people's lives.

Railroads,
automobiles,
computers,
internet and now, for the first time,
company after company reports they found the cure for CANCER.

I beleive that we are in the "compuserve" stages of the "internet boom" with biotech.

Hopes and cures will fuel the new bull market and shorting the market might prove futile.
I also have a vested interes in your finances,
if you lose your last 30k,
my chances of collecting will be greatly diminished
;-)))

[MattK]

Originally posted by Serge_Oprano@Jun 15 2003, 03:15 PM
MattK,
I know it's unfortunate,
but I have no clue about your solvency, and therefore,
escrow is mandatory.

are you gambling with your last 30k?

you shouldn't, son.

being a good guy,
I'll save you some money and give you FREE advice.

Behind EVERY stock market rally,
was invention drastically changing people's lives.

Railroads,
automobiles,
computers,
internet and now, for the first time,
company after company reports they found the cure for CANCER.

I beleive that we are in the "compuserve" stages of the "internet boom" with biotech.

Hopes and cures will fuel the new bull market and shorting the market might prove futile.
I also have a vested interes in your finances,
if you lose your last 30k,
my chances of collecting will be greatly diminished
;-)))

ok we can compromise and do the escrow some months before the election or at the start of 2004.

I'm a little confused, am I betting you for 30K AND MikeAI for 30K? if you both want to bet I'd rather keep it at 20K each.

we should just bet on where the dow and nasdaq will be 6 months from now. I say below 7000 and below 1200. any takers :groucho:



Last edited by MattK at Jun 15 2003, 03:39 PM

[MattK]

Originally posted by MattK@Jun 15 2003, 03:38 PM

we should just bet on where the dow and nasdaq will be 6 months from now. I say below 7000 and below 1200. any takers :groucho:

this is a very large decline from current levels so I would want 2 to 1 odds on this bet.

[Winetalk.com]

Originally posted by MattK+Jun 15 2003, 04:08 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (MattK @ Jun 15 2003, 04:08 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--MattK@Jun 15 2003, 03:38 PM

we should just bet on where the dow and nasdaq will be 6 months from now. I say below 7000 and below 1200. any takers :groucho:

this is a very large decline from current levels so I would want 2 to 1 odds on this bet.[/b][/quote]
MattK,
I don't think you have enough money for all those bets you propose......
are you short since March,
which would probably explain your lack of solvency
;-)))

[Winetalk.com]

Originally posted by MattK+Jun 15 2003, 04:08 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (MattK @ Jun 15 2003, 04:08 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--MattK@Jun 15 2003, 03:38 PM

we should just bet on where the dow and nasdaq will be 6 months from now. I say below 7000 and below 1200. any takers :groucho:

this is a very large decline from current levels so I would want 2 to 1 odds on this bet.[/b][/quote]
cool,
I'll take this bet too...
now you are for 80,000 in bets...unless MikeAI would wanna get on the action too, than it's a round number $100,000

[MattK]

Originally posted by Serge_Oprano+Jun 15 2003, 04:20 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Serge_Oprano @ Jun 15 2003, 04:20 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Originally posted by -MattK@Jun 15 2003, 04:08 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--MattK@Jun 15 2003, 03:38 PM

we should just bet on where the dow and nasdaq will be 6 months from now. I say below 7000 and below 1200. any takers :groucho:

this is a very large decline from current levels so I would want 2 to 1 odds on this bet.
cool,
I'll take this bet too...
now you are for 80,000 in bets...unless MikeAI would wanna get on the action too, than it's a round number $100,000[/b][/quote]

80,000 in bets? so far I thought it was a proposed 40K for the election.

I think we should start with a smaller bet on the direction of the markets as a trial run. Then we can do the bigger election bet when the first bet is over and everybody is satisfied.

I'll put up 15K on this market bet. If the dow is below 7300 (notice I changed it by 300 points) and the nasdaq composite is below 1300 (notice I bumped it up by 100) on friday december 5, 2003 at the end of trading day, I collect 45K from the escrow account. If either index is above those levels you collect 45K from the escrow account. You can set up the escrow account and I wire the 15K.

are we breaking any laws by doing this? I think some online casinos take prop bets on things like market direction and elections, etc but they are all offshore.

[Winetalk.com]

MattK,
I noticed that you raise the bar,
like most liberals do,
'till I finaly say:
Fuck it, enough,
I've had it"

can you, liberals stick to somethign and STAY with it????

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by MattK@Jun 15 2003, 03:00 PM
I am going to be shorting the market as it goes down
That's optimistic.

[MattK]

Originally posted by Colin+Jun 15 2003, 06:53 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Colin @ Jun 15 2003, 06:53 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--MattK@Jun 15 2003, 03:00 PM
I am going to be shorting the market as it goes down
That's optimistic.[/b][/quote]

yeah it is very optimistic. next week is pretty important as far as wether we will see a top to the recent rally or not.

[MattK]

Originally posted by Serge_Oprano@Jun 15 2003, 06:37 PM
MattK,
I noticed that you raise the bar,
like most liberals do,
'till I finaly say:
Fuck it, enough,
I've had it"

can you, liberals stick to somethign and STAY with it????

I'm not a liberal

ok well if there is no escrow issue we could bet now. Otherwise we will have to wait till some time in 2004. so we wait :)

if I had an extra 100,000 I would say it is an excellent wager for the markets declining big time over the next 1.5 years and Bush not winning the election.

[Winetalk.com]

Originally posted by MattK@Jun 15 2003, 07:09 PM


if I had an extra 100,000 I would say it is an excellent wager for the markets declining big time over the next 1.5 years and Bush not winning the election.
do you know WHY I have $100,000 and you don't?

there is only ONE reason:
I don't piss away money on
bets on the markets, elections, etc

I only do the sure things
;-))))

...and finding cure for cancer is a SURE THING in not to distant future,
the train already left the station.

As for taking "critical week" in the week of tripple witching,
is somewhere childish, can go 300 points either way depending on options/futures relations...

one day you figure out how this all woiks
;-))

[MattK]

Originally posted by Serge_Oprano@Jun 15 2003, 03:15 PM
MattK,
I only do the sure things
;-))))



hmmm.

Porn site owners charged with billing for free services (http://news.com.com/2100-1023-244881.html?tag=bplst)




Last edited by MattK at Jun 15 2003, 07:28 PM

[Winetalk.com]

MattK,
I am an honarary Gambino or Bonbano, I don't remember exactly,
my honorary certificate is burried with Hoffa...

as for "connections to collect the debts",
one thing I learned,
you can't collect NADA from those who don't have it
;-(((

skinning you alive still won't add one single penny to your solvency....

and to quote my favorit charecter to sum it all:
"Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son"

for $10, without looking into SE,
who said it?

[Winetalk.com]

for pasterity:
this was the post MattK posted before he edited it and the post I responded:


"Don't you have some good nyc connections from your days promoting high society and that whole "your credit card will not be billed" thing?

Porn site owners charged with billing for free services

If I lost the bet and did not pay you could get some big guys to come over and take care of it, so then I would have to pay up Thus no escrow account would be required "

[MattK]

Originally posted by Serge_Oprano@Jun 15 2003, 07:30 PM
and to quote my favorit charecter to sum it all:
"Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son"

for $10, without looking into SE,
who said it?



Bill Clinton?

[Winetalk.com]

Originally posted by MattK+Jun 15 2003, 07:38 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (MattK @ Jun 15 2003, 07:38 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--Serge_Oprano@Jun 15 2003, 07:30 PM
and to quote my favorit charecter to sum it all:
"Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son"

for $10, without looking into SE,
who said it?



Bill Clinton?[/b][/quote]
shit,
you can't make even $10 and you wanna bet $40k????

[MattK]

Originally posted by Serge_Oprano@Jun 15 2003, 07:32 PM
for pasterity:
this was the post MattK posted before he edited it and the post I responded:



you guys need a delete post button, editing takes a few seconds.

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by Serge_Oprano@Jun 15 2003, 07:30 PM
and to quote my favorit charecter to sum it all:
"Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son"
Great flick.

[Winetalk.com]

Originally posted by MattK+Jun 15 2003, 07:45 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (MattK @ Jun 15 2003, 07:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--Serge_Oprano@Jun 15 2003, 07:32 PM
for pasterity:
this was the post MattK posted before he edited it and the post I responded:



you guys need a delete post button, editing takes a few seconds.[/b][/quote]
yeah, and you are slow too
;-)))

my-my....

[Winetalk.com]

Originally posted by Colin+Jun 15 2003, 07:50 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Colin @ Jun 15 2003, 07:50 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--Serge_Oprano@Jun 15 2003, 07:30 PM
and to quote my favorit charecter to sum it all:
"Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son"
Great flick.[/b][/quote]
I've seen it probably 20 times and we'll see it again,
this one IS a classic!
;-)))

[MattK]

Originally posted by Serge_Oprano+Jun 15 2003, 07:52 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Serge_Oprano @ Jun 15 2003, 07:52 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Originally posted by -MattK@Jun 15 2003, 07:45 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Serge_Oprano@Jun 15 2003, 07:32 PM
for pasterity:
this was the post MattK posted before he edited it and the post I responded:



you guys need a delete post button, editing takes a few seconds.
yeah, and you are slow too
;-)))

my-my....[/b][/quote]

ok: fat, stupid, drunk, and slow

3 out of 4 ain't bad

:nyanya: :headwall: :groucho: :stout: :hic: :rokk:

[Timon]

Originally posted by Serge_Oprano@Jun 15 2003, 07:30 PM

as for "connections to collect the debts",
one thing I learned,
you can't collect NADA from those who don't have it
;-(((
HAHAHA you'd be amazed how much you can collect if you're convincing enough ;-))

[Timon]

Originally posted by TheEnforcer@Jun 15 2003, 01:23 PM

I'm telling ya...... watch that Cinton piece at C-Span!! Like him or hate him the guy is a very interesting speaker and he nails it right on the head when asked about the 2004 election. He basically gives an answer for what a politician in any election needs to do to beat their opponent and it's an awesome response.
I went to go see it but it's 1 hr 50 min, a bit too long for a streaming video clip ;-(

But you're right about Clinton, he's an extremely good speaker and always comes across as if he really knows what he's talking about, always nails it right on the head. The same goes for James Rubin who is simply brilliant at giving press conferences.

Bush is the exact opposite, he comes across as if he is reciting someone elses speaches, poorly, and if he get's asked a question he wasn't expecting he starts stuttering and forgets what he was trying to say halfway through a sentence. Doesn't neccesarily mean he's stupid but it does make him look stupid. It's a definite weakness for a presidential candidate.

I think if the democrats can put forward a candidate with the charisma and speaking skills of Bill Clinton or James Rubin he may just win over that portion of voters that is not overly loyal to democrats or republicans and just votes for the president they like best.

IMHO the election between Gore and Bush was such a close call, Gore would have won if the American people wouldn't have been so disgusted by the Lewinsky affair. Now that the Lewinsky case is history and the current republican president is lacking the needed verbal skills I think it is quite likely the democrats will win the next election. If I were a betting man my money would be on the democrats for the next election.

But what do I know, I'm just a stupid foreigner ;-)

[TheEnforcer]

Our political system is nothing more than a Hollywood production these days. All flash and very little substance. :blink: From scripted press conferances with a lapdog media to stagecraft for any and all speeches. The debates between candidates, while very interesting, are so rigidly structured that it practically all comes down to personality.

Both parties practice it but these days every time I hear about how Bush is such a "genuine" and "regular" guy I just about die laughing. :lol:

[Timon]

Originally posted by TheEnforcer@Jun 16 2003, 02:03 AM

Both parties practice it but these days every time I hear about how Bush is such a "genuine" and "regular" guy I just about die laughing. :lol:
HAHAHA he's about as genuine as a Barbie doll ;-)

[Ironhorse]

Originally posted by Timon@Jun 15 2003, 04:13 AM
I bet they have Osama tied up in some basement, if he'd be dead the US wouldn't need Bush no more ;-)
He's sharing a cell with Noriega.

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by MattK@Jun 15 2003, 03:00 PM
ok, but how do we define "landslide"?
It's your thread. What did you mean?

[JR]

Originally posted by Serge_Oprano@Jun 14 2003, 09:25 PM


I'll bet you $30,000 Bush loses in the 2004 presedential election

you guys think you know politics!? time to put up or shut up baby
i think his bigger problem will be when someone asks to define "bet" and "$30,000.00"

:lol:

i think that someone who can't spell "presidential" should reconsider betting on the outcome of the elections.

[sarettah]

Originally posted by MattK@Jun 15 2003, 07:45 PM
you guys need a delete post button, editing takes a few seconds.
Most of us usually don't post stuff we want to get rid of later.... :yowsa:

[MattK]

Originally posted by Colin+Jun 16 2003, 07:07 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Colin @ Jun 16 2003, 07:07 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--MattK@Jun 15 2003, 03:00 PM
ok, but how do we define "landslide"?
It's your thread. What did you mean?[/b][/quote]

land·slide
n.
1.
1. The downward sliding of a relatively dry mass of earth and rock.
2. The mass that slides. Also called landslip.
2.
1. An overwhelming majority of votes for a political party or candidate.
2. An election that sweeps a party or candidate into office.
3. A great victory.

if Bush gets less than 30% of the electorial votes, I'd say that would qualify as a landslide.

[MattK]

Originally posted by Serge_Oprano@Jun 15 2003, 03:15 PM

internet and now, for the first time,
company after company reports they found the cure for CANCER.

I beleive that we are in the "compuserve" stages of the "internet boom" with biotech.

Hopes and cures will fuel the new bull market and shorting the market might prove futile.


Go ahead and put all your $ in biotech and tech. stocks, that is another bubble waiting to blow up. Along with anything to do with the housing market.

[MattK]

Did I win the prize for the longest thread yet?

:moon:

[sarettah]

Originally posted by MattK@Jun 16 2003, 02:12 PM
Did I win the prize for the longest thread yet?

<center><font size="+2">You sure do !!!</font></center>
and what kind of prizes do we have for Matt, Don Pardo ?

<font size="+1" color="red">Well Sare,
Matt wins an all expense paid trip to the center of intelligence on the net

That's right Matt, we're sending you on back home to:
</font>
<center><font size="+2" color="red">GO FUCK YOURSELF !!!
</font>
Click here to claim your prize (http://gofuckyourself.com)
</center>
<font size="-3">all prizes are certified by an independent judging authority and are dependent upon your immedite acceptance and departure upon the next available means of transportation. failure to avail yourself of the prize removes all liability upon Oprano, Mike, Serge and any and all agents of Oprano, by Oprano or for Oprano, shall they not perish upon the earth.If winner, heretofore and forever known as the weener chooses to continue to participate on Oprano heretofore and forever known as the board, said board and all participants are hereby absolved and removed from all liability of harm caused by saidtofore and herebygotten postings until that time that it can be reasonably determined that there are yes indeedy icicles within or upon that hot place down below that is commonly referred to as hell. for more fine print, click here (http://www.partyafterdark.com/pornco)



Last edited by sarettah at Jun 16 2003, 11:27 PM

[PornoDoggy]

Originally posted by MattK+Jun 16 2003, 02:07 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (MattK @ Jun 16 2003, 02:07 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Originally posted by -Colin@Jun 16 2003, 07:07 AM
<!--QuoteBegin--MattK@Jun 15 2003, 03:00 PM
ok, but how do we define "landslide"?
It's your thread. What did you mean?

land·slide
n.
1.
1. The downward sliding of a relatively dry mass of earth and rock.
2. The mass that slides. Also called landslip.
2.
1. An overwhelming majority of votes for a political party or candidate.
2. An election that sweeps a party or candidate into office.
3. A great victory.

if Bush gets less than 30% of the electorial votes, I'd say that would qualify as a landslide.[/b][/quote]
You would be far better using the Republican 2002 definition of landslide, by which you could declare a 5% margin of victory a landslide. After all, -1,000,000 is a mandate these days.

[mailman]

i should run..... :unsure:

wonder if i would get any votes!

[Opti]

I saw the General that was sacked as leader of Nato foces in the Balkans interviewed on Meet the Press... Kelly I think his name was.

He said he was a definite maybe to run.... I liked the cut of his jib :salute: . Don't know a lot about him though.

[Winetalk.com]

Originally posted by MattK+Jun 16 2003, 02:11 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (MattK @ Jun 16 2003, 02:11 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--Serge_Oprano@Jun 15 2003, 03:15 PM

internet and now, for the first time,
company after company reports they found the cure for CANCER.

I beleive that we are in the "compuserve" stages of the "internet boom" with biotech.

Hopes and cures will fuel the new bull market and shorting the market might prove futile.


Go ahead and put all your $ in biotech and tech. stocks, that is another bubble waiting to blow up. Along with anything to do with the housing market.[/b][/quote]
I made over 25k yesterday....how did you do with your shorts?
;-)))

[Winetalk.com]

Originally posted by MattK@Jun 16 2003, 02:12 PM
Did I win the prize for the longest thread yet?

:moon:
yes, we call this prize in Yiddish -
Kadohas
;-)))

[MattK]

Originally posted by Serge_Oprano+Jun 17 2003, 08:31 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Serge_Oprano @ Jun 17 2003, 08:31 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Originally posted by -MattK@Jun 16 2003, 02:11 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Serge_Oprano@Jun 15 2003, 03:15 PM

internet and now, for the first time,
company after company reports they found the cure for CANCER.

I beleive that we are in the "compuserve" stages of the "internet boom" with biotech.

Hopes and cures will fuel the new bull market and shorting the market might prove futile.


Go ahead and put all your $ in biotech and tech. stocks, that is another bubble waiting to blow up. Along with anything to do with the housing market.
I made over 25k yesterday....how did you do with your shorts?
;-)))[/b][/quote]

I decided to stay on the sidelines until friday or maybe next week so I'm sitting in money market. The bulls and hopers are running out of steam.

[wig]

Hey Matt,

What's your methodology? What do you trade?

just curious

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by mailman@Jun 16 2003, 03:02 PM
i should run..... :unsure:

wonder if i would get any votes!
You could probably pull a few votes in Utah.

[Winetalk.com]

Originally posted by MattK+Jun 17 2003, 02:24 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (MattK @ Jun 17 2003, 02:24 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Originally posted by -Serge_Oprano@Jun 17 2003, 08:31 AM
Originally posted by -MattK@Jun 16 2003, 02:11 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Serge_Oprano@Jun 15 2003, 03:15 PM

internet and now, for the first time,
company after company reports they found the cure for CANCER.

I beleive that we are in the "compuserve" stages of the "internet boom" with biotech.

Hopes and cures will fuel the new bull market and shorting the market might prove futile.


Go ahead and put all your $ in biotech and tech. stocks, that is another bubble waiting to blow up. Along with anything to do with the housing market.
I made over 25k yesterday....how did you do with your shorts?
;-)))

I decided to stay on the sidelines until friday or maybe next week so I'm sitting in money market. The bulls and hopers are running out of steam.[/b][/quote]
I dunno who is running out of what,
I still trade every day and find things to buy and sell....
keep sitting on money market @ .7%,
while I collect 9.75% div PHK tomorrow
;-))))

[MattK]

Originally posted by wig@Jun 17 2003, 02:29 PM
Hey Matt,

What's your methodology? What do you trade?

just curious

For individual stock trades and shorts I use Etrade. For shorting a particular index I use Pro Funds (http://www.profunds.com) they have some bear funds like "Ultra Short OTC" which tries to be 200% the inverse of the nasdaq 100 on a daily basis. For example on monday the nasdaq 100 closed up 3.2% so the fund was down 6.4%. Profunds also has bull funds and sector funds, and they make it easy to play a section of the market up. They have a bio-tech sector fund for example.

As far as methodology I read some investment newsletters about market timing and do my own research. A good book to read about why there will likely be a major decline in the markets and economy over the next few years is Conquer the Crash (http://www.elliottwave.com/conquer/). An excellent book I read about getting started in investing on your own without using a broker is "No Bull Investing: Straightforward Advice to Maximize your Returns in Any Market, with Any Amount of Money" by Jake Bernstein.

[wig]

Originally posted by MattK+Jun 17 2003, 02:56 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (MattK @ Jun 17 2003, 02:56 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--wig@Jun 17 2003, 02:29 PM
Hey Matt,

What's your methodology? What do you trade?

just curious

For individual stock trades and shorts I use Etrade. For shorting a particular index I use Pro Funds (http://www.profunds.com) they have some bear funds like "Ultra Short OTC" which tries to be 200% the inverse of the nasdaq 100 on a daily basis. For example on monday the nasdaq 100 closed up 3.2% so the fund was down 6.4%. Profunds also has bull funds and sector funds, and they make it easy to play a section of the market up. They have a bio-tech sector fund for example.

As far as methodology I read some investment newsletters about market timing and do my own research. A good book to read about why there will likely be a major decline in the markets and economy over the next few years is Conquer the Crash (http://www.elliottwave.com/conquer/). An excellent book I read about getting started in investing on your own without using a broker is "No Bull Investing: Straightforward Advice to Maximize your Returns in Any Market, with Any Amount of Money" by Jake Bernstein.[/b][/quote]
Do you practice Elliott Wave?

I know Bob Prechter personally and one of my partners of about ten years ago was his broker.

He was long metals and short the stock indexes as far back as 1994. He has written many books along the way, all predicting the "tidal wave" crash.

[MattK]

Originally posted by wig@Jun 17 2003, 03:16 PM

Do you practice Elliott Wave?

I know Bob Prechter personally and one of my partners of about ten years ago was his broker.

He was long metals and short the stock indexes as far back as 1994. He has written many books along the way, all predicting the "tidal wave" crash.

Yeah I read some of their stuff, but that is not the only technical analysis I use. They were bearish during most of the late 90s so they missed the market top by 6 years or so. They have had a much better track record since 2001 however, and they are one of the top newsletters I read (I only started reading them about 2 years ago). Bob Prechter is not their only author but I suppose he still is the main guy doing Elliot Wave analysis.

[wig]

Originally posted by MattK+Jun 17 2003, 03:27 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (MattK @ Jun 17 2003, 03:27 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--wig@Jun 17 2003, 03:16 PM

Do you practice Elliott Wave?

I know Bob Prechter personally and one of my partners of about ten years ago was his broker.

He was long metals and short the stock indexes as far back as 1994. He has written many books along the way, all predicting the "tidal wave" crash.

Yeah I read some of their stuff, but that is not the only technical analysis I use. They were bearish during most of the late 90s so they missed the market top by 6 years or so. They have had a much better track record since 2001 however, and they are one of the top newsletters I read (I only started reading them about 2 years ago). Bob Prechter is not their only author but I suppose he still is the main guy doing Elliot Wave analysis.[/b][/quote]
I think Bob spends most of his time writing books and the Theorist. I have not followed any of his work in a long time. I don't spend much time reading other ppl's work or methods, as this is only an attempt to increase accurate perception, when execution is 90% of the game.

I've been trading futures for 17 years and I use a combination of the things I have found that worked well. All technical. But, my focus is on execution and discipline.

Elliott Wave is very subjective, but used with other indicators to filter signals I still find it a very valuable tool for trying to understand what phase a market is in.

Good luck in your trading!

[MattK]

Elliott Wave is very subjective, but used with other indicators to filter signals I still find it a very valuable tool for trying to understand what phase a market is in.



yeah, it seems they can always make the theory work AFTER the markets get to certain levels, but making the prediction before things happen is more of a "probable scenarios" situation. The theory behind it regarding the brain's herding impulse is pretty interesting.


Good luck in your trading!


thanks.

[wig]

Originally posted by MattK@Jun 17 2003, 04:48 PM
The theory behind it regarding the brain's herding impulse is pretty interesting.
This is certainly not something new. Research the Mississippi Scheme, Tulip Mania or the South Sea Bubble. People have been writing about "crowd behavior" for a thousand years or more.

R.N. Elliott just observed the "wave" pattern and attributed it as such. Same with market distribution (bell curve), Drummond Geometry, etc.

After many years of observing markets, fundamentals and technicals, I certainly believe that mass social psycholoy is patterned while at the same time irrational.

[Winetalk.com]

Originally posted by wig+Jun 17 2003, 05:01 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (wig @ Jun 17 2003, 05:01 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--MattK@Jun 17 2003, 04:48 PM
The theory behind it regarding the brain's herding impulse is pretty interesting.
This is certainly not something new. Research the Mississippi Scheme, Tulip Mania or the South Sea Bubble. People have been writing about "crowd behavior" for a thousand years or more.

R.N. Elliott just observed the "wave" pattern and attributed it as such. Same with market distribution (bell curve), Drummond Geometry, etc.

After many years of observing markets, fundamentals and technicals, I certainly believe that mass social psycholoy is patterned while at the same time irrational.[/b][/quote]
yes, it is...and I stopped timing the market and follow something different.

I open position and go 33% , and buy more on the way down.
if it goes up without going down,
I can live with that and take profits.

I ALWAYS take gradual profits on the way up,
I'll NEVER make a maximum on any position, but I'll never
a ) leave profits on the table

b ) take big loss

and another trick I found...always buy dividend paying stocks/ETF's,
you can sit on them quite long even being down and still collect every month/quarter
;-)))

woiks for me and saves ton of reading newsletters time,
so I cna post on Oprano
;-)))

[wig]

Originally posted by Serge_Oprano@Jun 17 2003, 05:09 PM
I open position and go 33% , and buy more on the way down.

Otherwise known as cannonballing. :D

Serge, are we going to do dinner with uncle mike in ausust or are you really not going to be around?

[Winetalk.com]

Originally posted by wig+Jun 17 2003, 05:17 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (wig @ Jun 17 2003, 05:17 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--Serge_Oprano@Jun 17 2003, 05:09 PM
I open position and go 33% , and buy more on the way down.

Otherwise known as cannonballing. :D

Serge, are we going to do dinner with uncle mike in ausust or are you really not going to be around?[/b][/quote]
wig,
I'll be in Norway. It's a bit colder than summer in Florida
;-)))

[Timon]

So many places to travel to and you choose Norway??

[Winetalk.com]

Originally posted by Timon@Jun 17 2003, 11:08 PM
So many places to travel to and you choose Norway??
no, not just Norway, Iceland too
;-)))

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by wig@Jun 17 2003, 05:01 PM
Research the Mississippi Scheme, Tulip Mania or the South Sea Bubble.
Wig,

I'm guessing that you've read "Extraordinary Popular Delusions And The Madness Of Crowds".

[Timon]

Originally posted by Serge_Oprano@Jun 18 2003, 06:09 AM

no, not just Norway, Iceland too
;-)))
Oh yeah now it all makes sense! ;-)

The G word is getting a little old so I won't use it but they have some interesting delicacies in Norway!

[wig]

Originally posted by Serge_Oprano+Jun 17 2003, 08:36 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Serge_Oprano @ Jun 17 2003, 08:36 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Originally posted by -wig@Jun 17 2003, 05:17 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Serge_Oprano@Jun 17 2003, 05:09 PM
I open position and go 33% , and buy more on the way down.

Otherwise known as cannonballing. :D

Serge, are we going to do dinner with uncle mike in ausust or are you really not going to be around?
wig,
I'll be in Norway. It's a bit colder than summer in Florida
;-)))[/b][/quote]
That's too bad, Serge, although it sounds refershing! ;-))

[wig]

Originally posted by Colin+Jun 18 2003, 06:14 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Colin @ Jun 18 2003, 06:14 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--wig@Jun 17 2003, 05:01 PM
Research the Mississippi Scheme, Tulip Mania or the South Sea Bubble.
Wig,

I'm guessing that you've read "Extraordinary Popular Delusions And The Madness Of Crowds".[/b][/quote]
Colin,

Was the author a frenchman? I remember this title and I thought I had the book, but I looked and could not find it. If it is the book, It was a long time ago that I read it -- probably 10 years.

I think I have lost a bunch of books between moves. They are probably all in a box somewhere.

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by wig@Jun 18 2003, 07:17 AM
Wig,

I'm guessing that you've read "Extraordinary Popular Delusions And The Madness Of Crowds".
Colin,

Was the author a frenchman? I remember this title and I thought I had the book, but I looked and could not find it. If it is the book, It was a long time ago that I read it -- probably 10 years.[/quote]
I believe so. I read it when I was about 18 so maybe about the same time as you. I don't have a copy anymore. Probably pilferred by an amateur book collector.

[wig]

I did find the book Millionaire - The Philanderer, Gambler, and Duelist Who Invented Modern Finance.

It was a good book about John Law and the Mississippi Company. Pretty interesting reconstruction of his life.

[Almighty Colin]

Wig,

We are getting to fond memories. Have you ever read "Reminiscences of a Stock Operator"?

[wig]

;-)) "There is only one side to the markets; and it is not the bull side or the bear side but the right side."

This quote has always remained burnt into my mind!

Great book!