Dan, not David.

this isn't really my area of expertise, but from what i've read, y'all cuts across almost all southern dialects and its meaning isn't a hundred percent established. as david says, it seems to behave like its own word, not just a contraction of you and all. but that may depend on the context in which it's used, since grammar rules can depend on the dialect.

gina richardson of georgetown equates it with the french vous - a more formal address. people tend to just assume that it's plural, including speakers of the dialects that use it. presumably that's because standard english tends to be pretty specific about singular and plural - when a word doesn't have its own grammatical number, we throw one in by using a determiner - and in some dialects presumably y'all still does mean "you all."

however, the usages i've read about do seem to suggest that it's sort-of collective rather than being singular or plural. i can't quite tell whether or not that makes it a collective pronoun, but there seems to at least be ambiguity about whether or not there's a semantic number. if not, "y'all" could potentially mean you and everyone who could possibly be associated with you, or just you.

My reply is down at [140] on that page. To follow the whole thread, just search repeatedly for "inherently".

The surprise to me was LBJ, when I went looking for who was closest to Obama right at the moment, I have to admit.

Hey, you're being paged over on the last FTP column's comments, on a grammar question; see my long comment around #125, and search for your bolded name... it's about the propriety of "y'all"...

Heh.

-CW

i guessed that one of them was Clinton and another might be Reagan, but I didn't make any formal guesses before i read the answers.

as best i can tell, the president's ratings have been bouncing around 45/50 for almost a year and a half. my prediction is that he stays around 45/50 for the next year, and whether or not he wins will depend on outside factors.

Didn't anyone guess the presidents? Who got any of the three right?

'Fess up!

:-)

-CW

Why does this plaque that was in my 3rd Grade Principle's office come to mind.

I am sure you think you know what I said. But I believe that what you heard is not what I meant

Seems I just said the same thing you said, in a different way...

"Now that I hear it out loud, I like what you said better."
-Kurt Fuller, PSYCH

:D

Michale
107

I would agree with this, with the addition;

.... if they vote at all.

It's likely that the votes for Obama will not even be on the same planet as his 2008 numbers..

This is what will do him in....

Michale.....
099

Perhaps "depresses" was the wrong choice of words..

Affects would have been a better word...

I would say that what's affected is not so much the vote itself, but the campaign. even among the president's supporters, there is not a whole lot of enthusiasm, which will most likely have the consequence of depressing the vote total. that's probably why you used the word depressed, even though it might not be strictly accurate.

my impression is that most folks who voted for Obama last time are planning to vote for him again, but there are definitely going to be fewer people canvassing, phone banking, or otherwise volunteering to help get out the democratic vote.

CW,

No problem. Ask and ye shall receive. Unemployment continues down at the same rate it did last month (0.4% per mo.). 11 months of this, and unemployment would be down to 4.2%.

Can you say landslide? I knew you could!

i consider that scenario unlikely considering the current economic climate and the recent behavior of corporate america. but it's nice to dream...

Affects would have been a better word...

Michale
092

nobody (and i mean nobody) depresses the jewish vote. for jews in america, the order of importance of our holy days is as follows:

1. Yom Kippur
2. Passover
3. Rosh Hashana
4. The Tuesday After The First Monday In November
5. Every Other Holiday

we'll vote alright, perhaps for the president, perhaps not (and perhaps not for the reasons you think)

OK, I've fixed a bug, or made it more elegant (take your pick).

The preview box should not show up until you actually click on "Preview". Still working on the paragraph thing, but found a way to fix this part of it.

Let me know if anyone has any problems...

-CW

No problem. Ask and ye shall receive. Unemployment continues down at the same rate it did last month (0.4% per mo.). 11 months of this, and unemployment would be down to 4.2%.

Can you say landslide? I knew you could!

I completely agree with you..

IF that happened, it WOULD be an Obama landslide..

But to be honest, I think there is more of a chance of First Contact.. :D

But, seriously... The fact that Unemployment has gone down is not so much because of Job Creation as it is that people have simply stopped looking for work...

What will you say if Walker is successfully recalled, hmm?

If Walker is successfully recalled, I would say it's a win for the Democrats..

But it's a drop in the ocean compared with the shellacking of the mid-terms...

If there are more decisions like a successful Walker recall that favor the Democrat agenda, then you might have something..

But to date, Democrats have lost footing BIG TIME since 2008...

This is undeniable...

Michale.....
087

No problem. Ask and ye shall receive. Unemployment continues down at the same rate it did last month (0.4% per mo.). 11 months of this, and unemployment would be down to 4.2%.

Can you say landslide? I knew you could!

Heh.

Now, I'm not saying it's likely to happen, mind you. I'm just answering your request for how Obama would be a lock for a second term, that's all.

DerFarm [2] -

Heh. Now that's a more practical route, I have to admit...

DerFarm [9] -

Either way is fine with me. It's kind of a style issue, more than anything. Long, or multiple short, I still read them all...

Michale [10] -

What will you say if Walker is successfully recalled, hmm?

-CW

You must have missed it when I said Scott Brown, the 2010 Midterms (remember that shellacking??) and Weiner..

Yes, there are a few that are outliers.. But, by and large, every time the American people spoke with their votes, Democrats came out on the losing end...

Polls are crap because they can be twisted to say anything that anyone wants...

The only TRUE compass is the results of elections..

And the past 3 years have shown that Democrats are on the losing end practically each and every time..

But, by all means. Continue to delude yourself into thinking that the American people are on Obama's side...

It'll just make the results of Election 2012 all the more sweeter.. :D

But don't worry.. I am not the kind of person to exclaim, "I TOLD YA SO"....

..... Much... :D

Michale.....
076

But as a serious question:

Assuming that you have 3 or 4 points to make about any given issue, is it preferable to make them in one post or multiple posts?

arguements can be made in both directions.

Signing off for today.

It is a FACT, not a poll, that most of the stuff that Newt has done, said, perpetrated are going to be NEW THINGS to a great part of the electorate. If you were born after 1985, you probably don't know diddly over sqat about Gingrich and what he has done with his life. (12-15 year olds tend not to pay attention to former congress people.)

Of course, this is MY opinion which has been formed by actually thinking about what it would take for Newt to win.

And that stuff about Newt energizing the conservatives? Get real. If there were any true love for Newt he wouldn't have had to wait while the clowns got their shot. He can no more energize the base with his tired ideas than Romney could. Just my opinion.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/no-happy-ending-the-end-of-obamas-hollywood-romance-6272851.html

Now, will this translate into votes for the GOP??

Unlikely...

But it WILL mean that stars like Damon, Clooney and Lear will likely keep their money OUT of Obama's coffers..

And their legions of fans might also follow suit and not be voting for Obama...

Wherever you turn, there is bad news for Obama...

Michale....
075

You have a fine stable of people behind you: Miller, Angle, and McDonnell. They all believed the polls were "fixed" also. People like Karl Rove, Jim Carville, David Axelrod and others are just throwing $$$ away down the toilet.

Ignoring polls in preference to opinion is a good way to get your candidate in last place. Among other things, polls will tell you where to spend your $$ and what ads and approaches might be better suited for your political environment.

You mean like

Ohio?

Wisconsin where 2 of 6 republicans were recalled?

Arizona?

NY 26? (I'll grant it was a pluratlity, but big one in a VERY red district).

Are THOSE the elections you mean???? You must mean those elections because you don't give any references of your own.

Your water is being carried in a leaky bucket, Michale. I'd think elections since 2010 would be more important than since 2009 ... of course, I'm not struggling to put lipstick on a pig, either.

And yes, there are stinging defeats of the R's over D's in that same time frame. That's not the point. You're the one predicting an anti-Obama wave. Not me.

Do you know what really has meaning??

Elections...

Look at all the election results since 2009...

Do you see the pattern??

In practically every election since 2009, the American people choose conservatives over liberals, GOP over Dem, Republican agenda over Dem agenda..

THAT is what is telling... Not polls, not wishcasting, not anything..

When the rubber hit the road, Americans voted against the Democrat agenda practically each and every time...

From Scott Brown thru the 2010 Mid Terms, thru Weiner's loss in a firm Democrat stronghold, the American People have said, "Enough is enough"...

If you have anything to counter those FACTS that is NOT a poll, well .........

"I am all ears"
-Ross Perot, 1992 Presidential Debate

Michale.....
074

Of for crying out loud. Here we go again. Michale, do understand the concept of REFERENCES????

I was stating an opinion... My "references" are all the crappy things Obama has done since he took office. Which are too numerous to list here...

What could make Obama a 2nd term president right now?
Bachmann to be to nominee

Ron Paul to be to nominee

The only realistic possibility you list here is Gingrich, and you provide no references to support your claim that a Gingrich candidacy would guarantee an Obama re-election..

A Gingrich candidacy would excite the conservative base..

Obama has already depressed the Left Wing base.. Obama has also depressed the Independent/NPA vote AND the Jewish vote..

I see no reason to believe that a Gingrich candidacy would result in anything but a Gingrich presidency...

The problem your having is that you think just because someone disapproves/dislikes/hates Obama they will automatically vote against him and for whatever is run against him. The old the enemy of my enemy is my friend arguement. It ain't so Virginia.

Really?? The facts say differently...

Obama's Virginia Defeat
Democrats were trounced in Tuesday's state legislature election, despite the president's heavy investment of time in the state.
online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204358004577030481545613916.html

You'd better hope so, because the guys currently running won't win against Obama. At least right now.

Again, the facts don't support this assertion. Sure you may find a poll here or a poll there that may make the claim, but polls are crap...

What IS real is that, with one or two exceptions, Obama has depressed and/or pissed off every group that he NEEDS to win re-election, predominantly the NPA/Independent and the jewish groups...

He is even losing support amongst black groups.. Granted that group probably won't support the R nominee (racism at it's "finest"), but they'll stay home.. Which is the same thing...

Obama's numbers are DOWN, across the board. And there is no sign that the downward turn will stop anytime soon...

Barring a third party candidacy, a Ross Perot, Obama doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell..

Michale.....

What could make Obama a 2nd term president right now?
Bachmann to be to nominee

Perry to be to nominee

Santorum to be to nominee

Gingrich to be to nominee

Ron Paul to be to nominee

The problem your having is that you think just because someone disapproves/dislikes/hates Obama they will automatically vote against him and for whatever is run against him. The old the enemy of my enemy is my friend arguement. It ain't so Virginia.

I don't know who is going to be the R nominee. I strongly suspect that it won't be Romney. I think it will be someone not currently running. You'd better hope so, because the guys currently running won't win against Obama. At least right now. And that, after all IS what you are arguing.

... "based on what is happening now ..."

Based on events in the here and now, what could realistically happen that would guarantee Obama's chances of being re-elected..

About the only thing I could come up with was that First Contact happens...

But that's not really realistic... :D Seriously, about the only thing I can see that would make a re-election a sure thing would be a third-party run by one of the current (or former) GOP candidates..

So, anyone?? What could realistically happen, based on what is happening now, that would absolutely make Obama a second-term President??

Enquiring minds want to know.. :D

Michale
071