Intrade data show us that in politics there can be some truly stunning reversals of fortunes. Obama is now #1 (at 60) and Clinton #2 (at 38). Note that 100 means certainty of winning the Dem. nominations, and 0 means a sure loss. A week ago, their positions were reversed, and Obama had been at 15.

Another example is McCain. He was in single digits. He’s now slated to win New Hampshire hands down (85) and is running slightly ahead of Giuliani for the nomination.

As with any market, the tough part is in knowing precisely what events drove these changes. Was Clinton hurt badly by the arrest of Hsu, for example? What did McCain do or say that helped him rise?

Why has Paul slipped to below 4 and what might he do to cause his fortunes to reverse dramatically?

I’m not following the campaigns as most bloggers here are, so it’s your ball game to find the answers. I swore off the main stream media sometime around 1970. I never watch their shows, and I avoid their commentators and media most of the time except when they are thrust upon me. This was a medical necessity for me to keep my nervous system intact. I wanted to be able to think straight as well.

When I do catch a snippet now and then, I must say that what I hear occupies a totally unreal reality. It is as if their world was some sort of insane asylum. Most of what is said is gibberish. I’m a big media hermit.

There was a time and day when newscasters broadcast news and newspapers presented news: where, what, when, who,…

Now they make speeches in the form of inept and windy questions and you have to hunt for the critical details.

I’d like to think the main stream media are a big nothing. Sad to say, they are worse. They are a big negative.

The Best of Michael S. Rozeff