Doggedly searching for the crux of the biscuit.
I'm not quite sure what to make of some results from this Opinion Research poll matching Hillary Clinton against McCain and Giuliani. Or should I say Hillary Rodham Clinton? Because it seems to make a difference.
Hillary Rodham Clinton 51%
John McCain 44%
Hillary Clinton 47%
John McCain 48%
Hillary Clinton 50%
Rudy Giuliani 46%
Hillary Rodham Clinton 48%
Rudy Giuliani 47%
Weird, ain't it?
I wonder, if Hillary Clinton were to face off against Hillary Rodham Clinton, who would win?
Cloning would allow us to answer this question, and other more interesting questions as well.
Posted by: My Alter Ego at October 23, 2006 03:20 PMHmm.. Maybe it's an illustration of the + - 4% margin of error that we're always hearing about and ignoring.
or
Let's look at "Rodham". With "rod", you get a connotation of strength and directioon, as in a rigid pole, a "rod", if you will. And "ham" makes people think of a plump, round, salty, but kinda sweet, hunk of meat.
Combine the two, a rod and a ham, and you've got a very strong image indeed.
I think you see where I'm going with this, so I'll stop now.
Posted by: dAVE at October 23, 2006 05:38 PMProbably still not statiscally significant, within the margins of error.
Hmmm.. Rodham....wonder if it would be helpful if the maiden name were "Porkshaft."
Posted by: Jon at October 23, 2006 08:13 PMAnagrams... hmm...
HINT: RADICAL HORNY MOLL
versus:
ORAL CHILL; TINNY
I'd go with the full name.
Posted by: Gaijin Biker at October 24, 2006 12:11 AM