As Go the Redskins, So Goes the Nation (Usually)

Statistics-driven sports fans might take some comfort in this:

In 16 of the 17 presidential elections since the Redskins moved to Washington in 1937, the incumbent party has kept the White House if the team won its last home game before the election while the out-of-power party has taken over if the Redskins lost. (The only exception came four years ago, when the Redskins lost to the Green Bay Packers but President Bush won reelection.)

The Packers did their part for good governance four years ago, even if the predictive streak ended. Last night the Pittsburgh Steelers did their best to assure an Obama victory by shutting down the Redskins in a 23-6 victory. Let's hope the streak resumes today.

< Voter Protection Resources | A Quick Break From Election Coverage >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Mixed emotions last night... (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Ed Drone on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 12:50:10 PM EST
    You want mixed emotions? Try being a Redskins fan and an Obama fan, with the game on the line.

    Ah, well, the 'Skins have a bye week (and need it desperately, with their injuries and all) and can bounce back, and the lop-sided score is (I hope, I hope, I hope) an indicator of the electoral math about the come down on Fibber McCain.

    But, dang, it wasn't fun rooting for the team and having this itch in the back of my mind, "Go Steelers! Go Obama!"


    Can you believe (5.00 / 0) (#21)
    by lentinel on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 02:19:37 PM EST
    that in this day and age, we have a team named the "Redskins"?

    No harder to believe (none / 0) (#26)
    by jondee on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 03:13:11 PM EST
    than that that abomination Mt Rushmore is still flashed around as national icon.

    Of course, maybe some day they'll get around to puting Crazy Horse on the hundred dollar bill and that'll make up for everything.


    Redskins vs. Zogby. (none / 0) (#1)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 11:09:48 AM EST
    Who's more accurate?

    Go Steelers! (none / 0) (#2)
    by gtesta on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 11:10:57 AM EST
    I knew the Black and Gold would come through!!

    Voted in NC at 6:35a.m. took about 20 minutes...light rain. Not bad at all.

    BTW, Steelers and Giants in the Super Bowl.  

    Silly, (none / 0) (#3)
    by bocajeff on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 11:22:31 AM EST
    Silly, just plain silly.

    Amusing, but still silly.

    Its 17 of 17 if you go by popular vote (none / 0) (#4)
    by Virginian on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 11:32:09 AM EST

    Actually (none / 0) (#5)
    by eric on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 11:45:19 AM EST
    popular vote didn't pick the winner in 2000.

    That's why they changed the 'rule' to: (none / 0) (#6)
    by steviez314 on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 12:12:04 PM EST
    If the Redskins win, the party that won the popular vote last election (instead of incumbent party) wins the WH.

    So, 2004 now fits the "rule".


    FWIW.... (none / 0) (#7)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 12:13:34 PM EST
    the local Catholic elementary school in my hometown has predicted the winner in every election since 1992 with their mock election.  


    Of course they picked Obama...smart kids come from that little corner of Queens:)

    Another cool article about the alley where Obama spent his first night in NY.  Link

    From washing up with the homeless at a fire hydrant to the White House...if that doesn't restore your faith in the American Dream at least a little, you're hopeless...what a great story.  All elected officials should spend at least one night in an alley...that sh*t builds character.

    Obama has Reagan to thank for (5.00 / 0) (#17)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 01:50:03 PM EST
    having those homeless buddies around him while he "washed up" at a fire-hydrant when he first went to NYC.

    In my "American Dream", Obama will make a damn concerted effort to do away with the kind of supply-side Reagonomics that rendered tens of thousands of people homeless during the 1980s.

    If Obama fails to do that, I hope he will have the "character-building experience" of washing up at a fire hydrant when he's voted out of office in 2012.


    heh (1.00 / 0) (#11)
    by nycstray on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 12:58:13 PM EST
    isn't his autobiography "embellished"?  And really, I'm sure he's not the first college kid to sleep on the street or be without a bed for a night What does it have to do with the American dream? It's not like he rose from poverty/homelessness.

    Gosh, maybe I shouldn't have woken my LL up at 2AM when I accidentally locked myself out. I could have experienced part of the American Dream! Do my couch surfing days from college count when I didn't have an apt?


    Jesus H. Christ. (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 01:14:27 PM EST
    Will the carping never cease?

    This is the first charge I've heard of "embellishment" in his autobiography.  The guy slept in a friggin' alley -- can't you just give that to him without worrying about someone else, sometime, might have slept in a grosser alley.

    Poverty?  His family was on food stamps.

    Jesus H. Christ.


    Seriously.... (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 01:25:51 PM EST
    Not that big a deal, I know...but I thought it was pretty cool, and definitely a unique experience for a president.

    There's still hope. . . (5.00 / 0) (#15)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 01:31:03 PM EST
    that W. will end up in an alley someplace.  Although it's entirely possible he woke up in a few "Soho doorways" in his younger days.

    Wasn't his mother studying for a PHD (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by nycstray on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 01:44:42 PM EST
    while collecting food stamps? Hasn't he always had more than a decent roof over his head?

    I believe Obama himself says that the people in his books are composites etc.


    So? (5.00 / 0) (#18)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 01:53:32 PM EST
    Poor people go to college.  The middle class isn't on food stamps.

    I haven't read Obama's books, but if they're memoirs as opposed to autobiographies, compositing characters is common practice and is different from "embellishing", which is making oneself look better.


    I believe NYCStray's (2.00 / 0) (#20)
    by Landulph on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 02:12:28 PM EST
    point was that Obama wasn't actually living with his mother during the period she was on food stamps. And while it is true that poor people go to college, Bank Vice-Presidents (the late Madolyn Dunham, tragically RIP) and their families are not generally ranked in their number. Look, Obama's story is impressive enough. You don't need to add these (borderline racist) fairy tales about his hardscrabble upbringing on the mean streets of Honolulu. By most accounts, Obama underwent a stable middle to upper-middle class upbringing in an two-[grand]parent household in a place free of racism--and there is NOTHING wrong with any of that.

    Wha? (5.00 / 0) (#22)
    by CST on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 02:20:55 PM EST
    The story linked talked about how he spent one night in an alley in NY b/c he was locked out of his apartment.  That's hardly a fairy tale about a hardscrabble upbringing in Honolulu.  I don't think anyone is suggesting that.

    However, the fact remains that he came from a pretty modest background, and probably went through some hard times, regardless what his up-bringing was (although I'd hardly call it stable with all the moving around and living with different people and not knowing his father).

    There is also no need to try and minimize anything he DID go through because of the fact that his Grandma was bank V.P.  It is possible to be middle-class and also go through hard times without your whole life being hard.

    When all we've had to choose from in recent years is between super-rich and even-richer, forgive us for talking about the somewhat modest background of the current candidate.


    Well, yes, his upbringing was modest (none / 0) (#24)
    by Landulph on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 02:52:24 PM EST
    in comparison to GW, and most other Republican candidates, and even to Gore and Kerry. But it was assuredly more affluent than than of Bill Clinton, and more arguably that of Hillary Clinton. (Remember, his Indonesian stepfather was a well-to-do oil company geologist, and he attended the most exclusive private school in Hawaii). And it is not quite true to say "all we've had to choose from in recent years is between super-rich and even-richer." In '92, the Clintons did not even own a house apart from the Gov Mansion in Little Rock (Bill's salary was something ludicrous, less than $30,000, I believe). BTW: Today, by almost anyone's standards, the Obamas are quite well-off; the man wrote two best sellers, after all, and made ~$4 mil in royalties in '07. (There is nothing wrong with THAT either).

    Also: The Obama's net worth today (none / 0) (#25)
    by Landulph on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 02:57:34 PM EST
    appears to be greater than that of the Gores in 2000, in the interests of accuracy.

    You're right (5.00 / 0) (#19)
    by CST on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 01:55:52 PM EST
    It's impossible for students to be broke.

    Speaking for me only, I was living off $30 a week at one point in school (including food) and I was getting a degree at a good school.  Shockingly, knowledge alone did not fill my belly and I lost over 30 pounds.

    But I'm sure that experience didn't influence me at all, since later I got a degree out of it and I was lucky enough to have a roof over my head at the time.


    Heh (none / 0) (#8)
    by Steve M on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 12:40:23 PM EST
    I used to live on that very street!  Can't say as I slept in the alley, though.

    Has anyone located the guy (none / 0) (#9)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 12:43:15 PM EST
    at the fire hydrant?  

    I'd say more like (none / 0) (#23)
    by jondee on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 02:51:35 PM EST
    a week or month, though, unfortunatly, it can also build negative character.

    At this point.... (none / 0) (#27)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 03:43:57 PM EST
    I'm sorry I brought it up:)

    Regarding the accuracy of exit polls... (none / 0) (#14)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 01:27:24 PM EST
    In '04 when there was a disconnect between the exit polls and the final vote count, the analysts assumed the error lay with the exit polls rather than the official count.

    Well the story isn't over. Here's a TruthOut news item addressing an ongoing lawsuit regarding evidence of deliberate vote flipping in OH in 2004:

    Last Friday, a federal court judge in Cleveland, Ohio, ordered Michael Connell, an information-technology consultant to the McCain '08 campaign, to give a deposition in a court proceeding. Mr. Connell, whose firm, GovTech Solutions, built Ohio's 2004 election results computer network, was in a position to have knowledge about the alleged manipulation of electronic voting results in that presidential contest (a technique known as "flipping") in order to switch the winner in Ohio from Sen. John Kerry to President Bush. The deposition is scheduled to take place today, November 3, one day before the 2008 general election.

    Four years later, and we're still waiting for a legal conclusion that the '04 Ohio exit polls were correct and the official count was manipulated.

    TChris, (none / 0) (#28)
    by cpinva on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 06:24:16 PM EST
    i read that article also, before the game. it didn't make me feel any better, half way through the 3rd quarter.

    a banged up offensive line facing the best defense in the league. they definitely need the bye-week break. the skins just aren't good enough to get away with letting their qb be sacked what, 6 times?, and still win.

    the only positive to come out of it was that hometown boy byron leftwich made good, after replacing an injured ben rothlisberger. it so happens leftwich's college coach was my old high school coach.