<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for B. Mac</title><link>http://disqus.com/people/186f9c134f0b817de60d69b49794f0a1/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Sun, 31 May 2009 18:42:47 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: My Review of the Obama Infomercial</title><link>http://electiongeek.disqus.com/my_review_of_the_obama_infomercial/#comment-3385738</link><description>I have a vested interest in one party winning, so I couldn't have been swayed either way by the informercial, but why did you find it disappointing?  My cursory impression is that it was too victim-centric.  I mean, if John McCain were doing this sort of commercial to sell his security policies, I think that it would be equally cheesy for him to use a WTC survivor.  Surely the voters that are interested enough to see a 30 minute campaign presentation are mature enough to think abstractly about the problems facing the nation.  &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;--B. Mac&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href=http://www.superheronation.com rel="nofollow"&gt;http://www.superheronation.com&lt;/a&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">B. Mac</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2008 00:16:20 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Power Line - 	Americans Oppose GM Bailout</title><link>http://powerline.disqus.com/power_line_americans_oppose_gm_bailout/#comment-10327151</link><description>What are other pollers saying?  I wouldn't recommend relying too much on Rasmussen because they're considerably  more conservative than average... usually 5-10 points, sometimes more.      For example, the RealClearPolitics average indicates that Obama's approval is more positive than negative by 28%.  Rasmussen has a spread of +17%.     I think that relying on Rasmussen is probably wishful thinking.   That said, I suspect that a strong majority agrees that the US government will mismanage GM.  But when it comes to determining how strong that majority is, Rasmussen is about as reliable as CBS/NYT.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">B. Mac</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 31 May 2009 18:42:47 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: @ Cable Show: News Corp.&amp;#39;s Murdoch: NYT Would Do &amp;#39;Fairly Well&amp;#39; With WSJ.com Pay Model</title><link>http://paidcontent.disqus.com/cable_show_news_corp39s_murdoch_nyt_would_do_39fairly_well39_with_wsjcom_pay_model/#comment-18896538</link><description>Actually, I don&amp;#39;t think there are 20 million people out there that would pay $100 a year for the Times.  I&amp;#39;d be surprised if there were 5.   For whom is the Times indispensable?</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">B. Mac</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 04 Apr 2009 11:52:44 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>