BitaTruble
Posts: 9779
Joined: 1/12/2006 From: Texas Status: offline
|
Oh crap. I forgot to answer the subject itself! hehe.. I am easily distracted by bright shiny's so it would seem. Okay, at first glance, I would have to say this is going to bode better for the McCain camp (and will be reflected as such in places like Gallup) than the Obama camp until the pundits start to talking to the people (as good little political automatons do) that it was the bailout and the effect of the bailout which caused the upswing and any future stabalization through the elections. Once the talking heads get into the mix, it's probably, actually, a wash. Both camps signed the bailout (er.. rescue) and I, for one, am not about to drink kool-aid here and believe that the package is the cause of the upswing until such is proven by long-term stability. When I think about it, and perhaps I'm paranoid rather than skeptical (I do read Grisholm so that's to be expected) there something smelling 'round these parts and even though I live in Minnesota, it ain't the fish. An upswing that big calls for massive buying which means people with massive money. After the 40% drop over the last year, who was in a position to do all that mass buying? Certainly not Joe Schmoe down the street who just lost his house when he failed to make his payments after losing his job last year. Someone is now walking around with brand new millions, possibly billions in his pocket. Who is he? Where's he from? Is he a capitalist (which is way cool.. I have no problems with that) .. or is he an anarchist with ulterior motives biding his time? ::looks behind me right quick:: Is it just coincidence that Islamic fundamentalists were told just yesterday to buy, buy and, today, someone does? Just questions that float through my head as I watch .. and watch.
_____________________________
"Oh, so it's just like Rock, paper, scissors." He laughed. "You are the wisest woman I know."
|