Lucy In The Sky With Obamacare

Not even Paul and John would have any clue what the message is or what is going on in this psychedelic, Yellow Subamrine-inspired TV ad slot for Obamacare titled “Fly With Your Own Wings”, part of the Cover Oregon campaign (funded by US taxpayers). Perhaps: enroll in Obamacare, get a lifetime supply of LSD for free…

 


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/ZuutNJ1KxP4/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Virginia Governor's Race: Can Cuccinelli Beat McAuliffe – and What About Libertarian Sarvis?

The Virginia governor’s race is being widely
viewed as a bellwether about…something. It pits the ultimate FOB
(does anyone still remember what that means?) Terry McAuliffe (D)
against the conservative Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli (R), with
a suprisingly popular Libertarian candidate, Robert Sarvis, polling
near on in double digits (read Reason’s
inteview with him
).


The latest poll
, from Emerson College, has McAuliffe at 42
percent, Cuccinelli at 40 percent, and Sarvis at 13 percent. Not
long ago, McAuliffe was winning in a total rout. Other polls show
the race tightening before the election Tuesday, though nothing as
tight as Emerson’s.
RealClearPolitics’ average
has McAuliffe up by about 8 points
and Sarvis just over 10 percent (important because cracking double
digits would guarantee the LP ballot access through 2016).

Depending on who you ask, it’s about how awful the GOP is
overall and their foolhardiness in shutting down the federal
government (which is hugely important to the Old Dominion’s
economy). Or it’s about just how disastrous the Obamacare debacle
really is, or how inexperienced and dirty McAuliffe really is; how
brave and stand-up Cuccinelli is (he was a leader in bringing legal
action against Obamacare) or how insanely socially conservative he
is; or how reckless the Libertarian Party is (depending on whom you
ask, the LP is either gifting the election to McAuliffe or showing
the deepening appetite for a third-party to the Dems and Reps.

I suspect that there’s a mix of all of the above at play in the
race. But this is certainly worth hammering home: The notion that a
third-party candidate, in this case a Libertarian, in any way,
shape, or form “costs” a Democrat or Republican an election is a
category error.

This type of argument was made most famously to
explain the outcome of the 2000 election, which was supposedly
thrown to George W. Bush by Green Party candidate Ralph Nader. The
methodology to prove this is simple: You take the spread between
the major party players and then see if a third-party candidate
more votes than that, and blame them. Don’t you see that Nader
obviously tossed the election to Bush, because all of Nader’s
voters would have turned out even if he wasn’t running and would
have voted for Gore…?

There’s a basic logic that seems persuasive, but it glosses over
too many things to really be convincing. In the 2000 election, it
skims over the fact that if Al Gore had been a semi-decent
candidate, he should have won in a rout. He was the VP of a flawed
but effective administration that had overseen a massive and
general increase in wealth (even despite the tech bubble bust at
the very end of the 1990s). This was a guy who had various scandals
of his own on top of Bill Clinton’s and then made the bizarre
decision to show up in orange-face for a
presidential debate
 and also vaguely physically threaten
Bush at the end of one too. However close – and ultimately
arbitrary – the final vote tally was, Al Gore lost the election
because he was a rotten candidate that voters (and yes, ultimately
the Supreme Court) rejected.

The whole “third party are spoilers” presupposes that the
two major parties have a prior claim on votes and voters, which is
simply wrong. This sort of logic typically get
trotted out by conservatives
around election time, when they
suddenly realize that small-L libertarians exist and vote on issues
that go beyond patently unconvincing promises to reduce the size,
scope, and spending of government at any given level. Candidates
such as Cuccinelli, who is by all accounts extremely socially
conservative, are a tough sell to libertarian-minded voters
(45
percent
of whom say they identify with the Republican
Party). 

Which is another way of saying: If GOP candidates aren’t
convincing to libertarians, don’t blame libertarians. Don’t
conservatives believe in personal responsibility? Take a look at
the man in the mirror then. Blame a party that has never lived up
to its limited government rhetoric or its insistence that
government should leave people alone as much as possible (in
Virginia, this meant among other things, having Republican
legislators vote against a plan to get the government out
of the liquor business. Really).

Libertarians are incredibly consistent in what they
believe and getting their vote is pretty easy: All you have to do
is present a credible plan to cut the role of government across the
board. As leading libertarian Republican Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)

has concisely put it
, you have to “embrace liberty in both the
economic and personal spheres.” As I noted in a recent
Time.com column
, this isn’t complicated, but it has often
proved a bridge too far for Republicans. That’s their problem and
it may well spell their doom going forward, as libertarian-minded
voters gain numbers and influence:

If the Republicans can’t figure out a way to accommodate broadly
popular, socially tolerant libertarian policies on gay rights, drug
legalization, and more, they will not just lose the race for the
White House in 2016, but quite possibly their status as a major
party.


More here.

Related and highly relevant: Scott Shackford on
which candidate is “losing”
more votes to Sarvis
.

from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/02/virginia-governors-race-can-cuccinelli-b
via IFTTT

Virginia Governor’s Race: Can Cuccinelli Beat McAuliffe – and What About Libertarian Sarvis?

The Virginia governor’s race is being widely
viewed as a bellwether about…something. It pits the ultimate FOB
(does anyone still remember what that means?) Terry McAuliffe (D)
against the conservative Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli (R), with
a suprisingly popular Libertarian candidate, Robert Sarvis, polling
near on in double digits (read Reason’s
inteview with him
).


The latest poll
, from Emerson College, has McAuliffe at 42
percent, Cuccinelli at 40 percent, and Sarvis at 13 percent. Not
long ago, McAuliffe was winning in a total rout. Other polls show
the race tightening before the election Tuesday, though nothing as
tight as Emerson’s.
RealClearPolitics’ average
has McAuliffe up by about 8 points
and Sarvis just over 10 percent (important because cracking double
digits would guarantee the LP ballot access through 2016).

Depending on who you ask, it’s about how awful the GOP is
overall and their foolhardiness in shutting down the federal
government (which is hugely important to the Old Dominion’s
economy). Or it’s about just how disastrous the Obamacare debacle
really is, or how inexperienced and dirty McAuliffe really is; how
brave and stand-up Cuccinelli is (he was a leader in bringing legal
action against Obamacare) or how insanely socially conservative he
is; or how reckless the Libertarian Party is (depending on whom you
ask, the LP is either gifting the election to McAuliffe or showing
the deepening appetite for a third-party to the Dems and Reps.

I suspect that there’s a mix of all of the above at play in the
race. But this is certainly worth hammering home: The notion that a
third-party candidate, in this case a Libertarian, in any way,
shape, or form “costs” a Democrat or Republican an election is a
category error.

This type of argument was made most famously to
explain the outcome of the 2000 election, which was supposedly
thrown to George W. Bush by Green Party candidate Ralph Nader. The
methodology to prove this is simple: You take the spread between
the major party players and then see if a third-party candidate
more votes than that, and blame them. Don’t you see that Nader
obviously tossed the election to Bush, because all of Nader’s
voters would have turned out even if he wasn’t running and would
have voted for Gore…?

There’s a basic logic that seems persuasive, but it glosses over
too many things to really be convincing. In the 2000 election, it
skims over the fact that if Al Gore had been a semi-decent
candidate, he should have won in a rout. He was the VP of a flawed
but effective administration that had overseen a massive and
general increase in wealth (even despite the tech bubble bust at
the very end of the 1990s). This was a guy who had various scandals
of his own on top of Bill Clinton’s and then made the bizarre
decision to show up in orange-face for a
presidential debate
 and also vaguely physically threaten
Bush at the end of one too. However close – and ultimately
arbitrary – the final vote tally was, Al Gore lost the election
because he was a rotten candidate that voters (and yes, ultimately
the Supreme Court) rejected.

The whole “third party are spoilers” presupposes that the
two major parties have a prior claim on votes and voters, which is
simply wrong. This sort of logic typically get
trotted out by conservatives
around election time, when they
suddenly realize that small-L libertarians exist and vote on issues
that go beyond patently unconvincing promises to reduce the size,
scope, and spending of government at any given level. Candidates
such as Cuccinelli, who is by all accounts extremely socially
conservative, are a tough sell to libertarian-minded voters
(45
percent
of whom say they identify with the Republican
Party). 

Which is another way of saying: If GOP candidates aren’t
convincing to libertarians, don’t blame libertarians. Don’t
conservatives believe in personal responsibility? Take a look at
the man in the mirror then. Blame a party that has never lived up
to its limited government rhetoric or its insistence that
government should leave people alone as much as possible (in
Virginia, this meant among other things, having Republican
legislators vote against a plan to get the government out
of the liquor business. Really).

Libertarians are incredibly consistent in what they
believe and getting their vote is pretty easy: All you have to do
is present a credible plan to cut the role of government across the
board. As leading libertarian Republican Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)

has concisely put it
, you have to “embrace liberty in both the
economic and personal spheres.” As I noted in a recent
Time.com column
, this isn’t complicated, but it has often
proved a bridge too far for Republicans. That’s their problem and
it may well spell their doom going forward, as libertarian-minded
voters gain numbers and influence:

If the Republicans can’t figure out a way to accommodate broadly
popular, socially tolerant libertarian policies on gay rights, drug
legalization, and more, they will not just lose the race for the
White House in 2016, but quite possibly their status as a major
party.


More here.

Related and highly relevant: Scott Shackford on
which candidate is “losing”
more votes to Sarvis
.

from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/02/virginia-governors-race-can-cuccinelli-b
via IFTTT

Remy: The Healthcare Mash (It Was a Keyboard Smash!)

 

Watch the latest Reason TV collaboration with Remy!

Originally released on October 30, this video is now over the
100,000-view mark at YouTube, a testament to Remy and producer Sean
Malone’s talents – and the ongoing trainwreck that is
Obamacare.

More links, videos, and downloadable versions at Reason.tv.

Here’s the original writeup for the vid:

Remy channels Bobby “Boris”
Pickett
 for this Healthcare.gov-Halloween
mash-up. 

Written and performed by Remy. Video by Sean Malone. 

About 1.50 minutes. Scroll below for lyrics and and downloadable
versions.

Subscribe to Reason
TV’s YouTube channel
 to get automatic notifications when
new material go live. Follow Reason on Twitter at @reason.

Follow Remy on Twitter at @goremy and on You Tube here.

For all of Remy and Reason’s collaborations, go
here
.

Lyrics:

He was working on his laptop late one night
when his eyes beheld a ghoulish site
He could not log in despite several tries
then suddenly to no one’s surprise

(he did the Mash)
He did the Healthcare Mash
(the Healthcare Mash)
it was a keyboard smash
(he did the Mash)
the website was trash
(he did the Mash)
He did the Healthcare mash

Who could design such a site so flawed and so sloppy?
The code is so ancient, perhaps it was Hammurabi
He’d try to apply but the site would suspend
I’ve seen a eunuch with a more functional front end

(he did the Mash)
He did the Healthcare Mash
(the Healthcare Mash)
it was a keyboard smash
(he did the Mash)
He tried to clear his cache
(he did the Mash)
He did the Healthcare mash

Hundreds of millions of dollars were spent
for a website that has trouble loading
How could the government’s web designers
create a site with such awful coding?

(they did the Mash)
Ahh, they did the Healthcare Mash
(the Healthcare Mash)
it was a keyboard smash
(they did the Mash)
they spent all of our cash
(they did the Mash)
They did the Healthcare Mash

from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/02/remy-the-healthcare-mash-it-was-a-keyboa
via IFTTT

Baylen Linnekin Warns Against Washington State's Wrongheaded GMO Labeling Initiative

GMO food

Much of the labeling fight that’s going on these days is not so
much about a consumer’s right to adequate information as it is
about a select group forcing the government to unfairly stigmatize
foods they don’t like and that they’re competing against. Take
Washington State’s mandatory GMO labeling ballot initiative, I-522,
which goes before voters in the state next week. A recent report by
Washington State’s independent Academy of Sciences concluded that
I-522 would likely raise grocery prices in the state. Instead of
mandatory labeling, writes Baylen Linnekin, consumers who support
GMO farming or don’t care about GMOs should be free to seek out
foods they want. And if there’s enough support among those
consumers for private “Contains GMO” labeling, then those labels
will likely appear.

View this article.

from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/02/baylen-linnekin-warns-against-washington
via IFTTT

Baylen Linnekin Warns Against Washington State’s Wrongheaded GMO Labeling Initiative

GMO food

Much of the labeling fight that’s going on these days is not so
much about a consumer’s right to adequate information as it is
about a select group forcing the government to unfairly stigmatize
foods they don’t like and that they’re competing against. Take
Washington State’s mandatory GMO labeling ballot initiative, I-522,
which goes before voters in the state next week. A recent report by
Washington State’s independent Academy of Sciences concluded that
I-522 would likely raise grocery prices in the state. Instead of
mandatory labeling, writes Baylen Linnekin, consumers who support
GMO farming or don’t care about GMOs should be free to seek out
foods they want. And if there’s enough support among those
consumers for private “Contains GMO” labeling, then those labels
will likely appear.

View this article.

from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/02/baylen-linnekin-warns-against-washington
via IFTTT

The Dollar has Game

It appeared the US dollar was bottoming in the first half of October.  We had noted the possibility of head and shoulders reversal patterns in sterling and the Swiss franc.   These proved for naught, and yet, it still appears the dollar is carving out a bottom. The technical tone for the greenback has improved in recent days.  

 

There has also been a  shift in the fundamental focus toward somewhat better news from the US and somewhat poorer news from Europe. There is mounting speculation that the European Central Bank will have to have some sort of policy response to the continued decline in private lending, weak growth in money supply, and near record low inflation. 

 

The Dollar Index, which despite the fact that it is not reflective of US trade flows (two of the US 4 largest trading partners, China and Mexico, are not included, and it is heavily weighted toward the euro and currencies that move in the euro’s orbit), many participants see it a rough-and-ready proxy for the US dollar in general.  The key technical development is that it finished last week above the downtrend line drawn off this year’s highs in early July and the bounce in early September.   

 

If that down move is being retraced, the next target for the Dollar Index is the 81.20 area and then the 81.75-90 area, which corresponds to a 61.8% retracement and the 200-day moving average.   We note that the RSI and MACDs suggest additional gains and the 5-day moving average has crossed above the 20-day average.  A move now much below 80.00 would cast doubt on this constructive outlook.  

 

For its part, the euro has not violated a similar trend line, drawn off the early July and Sept lows. On Monday it comes in near $1.3425.  That area also corresponds to a retracement objective.  By the end of the week it is closer to $1.3460.  The 5-day average has not cross below the 20-day average, but it most likely will on Monday.  The RSI and MACDs are moving lower. Assuming the trend line is convincingly violated, the next target would be in the $1.3300-35 area, which represents the next retracement objective and the 100-day moving average.  The 200-day moving average comes in closer to $1.3270.  Given the magnitude of the decline in recent days, it probably requires a move back above the $1.3600-50 area to negate this bearish technical view. 

 

The dollar has also not violated its similar downtrend against the Swiss franc.  That trend line comes in near CHF0.9180 at the start of the new week, which corresponds to last month’s high, and finishes the week near CHF0.9150. The 5- and 20-day moving averages have not crossed, but they are poised to on Monday.   Once the trend line goes, the immediate objective is near CHF0.9220.  It will ultimately take a break of the CHF0.9420-50 area to raise confidence that a low of some import is in place.  

 

The dollar posted an outside up-day against the yen and the premium the US pays over Japan (on 10-year government paper) widened back above 200 bp for the first time since mid-October.   The technical tone is constructive, but within the context of the broad trading range conditions that have prevailed for five months now.   The dollar has been making lower highs and higher lows against the yen since the middle of Q2.  Last month’s high was near JPY99.00 and this represents the next target.  However, even a move a bit higher, even a little of JPY100, wouldn’t violate 5-month only trading range.  A move above September high near JPY100.60, though would suggest something more important is taking place technically.   The weekly technical readings warn of the upside risks to the dollar against the yen.  

 

Sterling appears to have carved out a double top (reversal pattern) in October, with gains in early and late in the month, stalling out near $1.6260.  It depends on how one draws the neck line, but it can be found in the $1.5890-$1.5915 area.  The pre-weekend low was near $1.5910.   A convincing break of the neck line, perhaps encouraged by accumulating evidence that the data is no longer surprising the market on the upside, would suggest potential toward the mid-$1.5500 area, which also roughly corresponds to a 50% retracement of the rally from the July lows near $1.4800. The 5-day moving average crossed below the 20-day before the weekend and the technical indicators are weak.   Resistance now is pegged in the $1.6040-70 area. 

 

The Australian dollar posted a key downside reversal on October 23, after poking through the 50% retracement of this year’s decline, and has not looked back since. The 5- and 20-day moving averages crossed in the second half of last week.  MACDs are have turned lower, but the RSI is not generating a strong signal.  A break of the $0.9430 area would target the $0.9325 area, though the real technical test may not come until closer to $0.9225.  If this correction in the Aussie is indeed over, the $0.9480-$0.9520 area should hold back stronger gains.  

 

The Canadian dollar is the only major currency to have gained against the US dollar last week (~0.25%).   Yet the Canadian dollar is not very inspiring.  It has been in a broad range for several months.  The US dollar has found demand near CAD1.02 and supply near CAD1.06.  The technical indicators are not generating strong signals.  Look for narrow CAD1.0350-CAD1.0450 range to dominate until toward the end of the week.  Both countries report Oct employment data on Nov 8.  

 

The US dollar is likely to push higher against the Mexican peso.  The 5- and 20-day moving averages are set to cross on Monday and, while the RSI is neutral, the MACDs are turning higher. A downtrend line drawn off the early Sept and early Oct highs comes in near MXN13.20 and this is a reasonable near-term objective.   If this near-term view is valid, the greenback should spend little if any time below MXN12.96.

 

 

Observations from the speculative positioning in the CME currency futures:

 

1.  There were mostly minor position adjustments in the most recent reporting week that ended October 29.   Of the 14 gross positions we track, 12 changed by less than 6k contracts, and of those, a third were less than 1k contracts.  Two gross positions were adjusted by more than 10k contracts:  long euros were added to while long yen positions were cut.  

 

2.  The gross long euro position came with spitting distance of the record high set in April 2007. Many observers focus on the net position, which will fail to reveal how large of a speculative long position has been accumulated.  The cut in the gross long yen position, almost in half from the previous week, is the smallest since March 2012.  

 

3.  In the week ending Oct 29, the gross long currency positions generally grew, with the yen and sterling being the exceptions.  There was a less of a pattern among the currency shorts, except to note the position adjustments were minor.  

 

4.  The net long sterling and Swiss franc positions are the largest since the start of the year, but were little changed from the previous period.  The net short Australian dollar position is the smallest since May.  


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/Mta4Kjb6GCE/story01.htm Marc To Market

Friday night football roundup

Sandy Creek 24, Carrollton 7: The Patriots (8-0-1, 6-0) remain unbeaten after winning this battle of the two top-ranked teams in the state in AAAA. Having clinched first place in the region, the Patriots close out the regular season with a Saturday game at Columbus.

McIntosh 37, Northgate 14: The Chiefs (7-2, 2-2) wrapped up second place in the subregion and will host a Region 4-AAAAA play-in game next Friday.

read more

via The Citizen http://www.thecitizen.com/articles/11-01-2013/friday-night-football-roundup

Whitewater 38, Starr's Mill 35

With possible playoff spots on the line, the Whitewater Wildcats broke open a close game late in the third quarter and held off a furious late rally by the Starr’s Mill Panthers to secure a 38-35 home victory.

Both teams went into the game with the possibility of finishing anywhere from second to fifth in their half of Region 4-AAAAA, meaning either team could host a play-in game next week for a state playoff spot, go on the road for a play-in game, or simply close out the season against one of the bottom teams in the other subregion.

read more

via The Citizen http://www.thecitizen.com/articles/11-01-2013/whitewater-38-starrs-mill-35

Whitewater 38, Starr’s Mill 35

With possible playoff spots on the line, the Whitewater Wildcats broke open a close game late in the third quarter and held off a furious late rally by the Starr’s Mill Panthers to secure a 38-35 home victory.

Both teams went into the game with the possibility of finishing anywhere from second to fifth in their half of Region 4-AAAAA, meaning either team could host a play-in game next week for a state playoff spot, go on the road for a play-in game, or simply close out the season against one of the bottom teams in the other subregion.

read more

via The Citizen http://www.thecitizen.com/articles/11-01-2013/whitewater-38-starrs-mill-35