You can vote for None of the Above, but you'd be a fool to waste your time at the poll

By -
Make your predictions on the US Presidential race here:

I say Obama 306 McCain 232. I hope I'm being conservative, and that it's an Obama landslide.

(I'm not including apportioned results)

Comments

  1. Bob Murphy12:29 AM

    Is the title of your post in reaction to my previous post? And if so, are you suggesting that it's not a waste of time if you go vote for Obama, who is going to win in a landslide?

    (And just to clarify, I wasn't saying people should vote for someone other than Obama/McCain. I was saying people shouldn't vote at all.)

    ReplyDelete
  2. gcallah6:47 AM

    364 to 174.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more