About this site

  • Comments
    When you submit a comment, it won't be published until approved. This is to cut down on comment spam. However, I will also edit or block comments that are profane or offensive.
  • No Legal Advice
    Although I may from time to time discuss legal issues on this blog, nothing that I post should be construed as legal advice, nor as creating an attorney-client relationship between you and me. In fact, there's a good chance I'm not licensed to practice law wherever you are. If you need legal advice, you should consult an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.
  • Personal View
    This blog is neither affiliated with my employer nor hosted by it. It is maintained through TypePad, and I pay the hosting fees. Nothing that is posted here should be construed as anything other than the views of the particular author of the post.
  • Tung Yin's Recent Papers (SSRN)

April 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30      

Stats


  • Check Google Page Rank

« Is Senator Obama a "Bob the Builder" fan? | Main | How Hillary Clinton has lost my vote »

January 16, 2008

Comments

Jason

I just got Kucinich, Huckabee, and Richardson. That's not bad, because it does put Kucinich first, which is where he should be. I don't have anything nice to say about Huckabee, so I won't say anything at all.

The key is the silly choices on most questions, especially Iraq. Troop levels? Funding? My real answers (which are based on neither jingoism nor shortsighted "bring 'em home" sentiments) weren't in the selections. That actually reflects most poorly on the candidates: the only choices they're putting forward are "support the troops by giving them money" or "support the troops by not letting any more of them getting killed" -- the lack of thought about what'll actually happen in the region based on what we choose in Iraq is accurately reflected in these poll questions.

The comments to this entry are closed.