Thomas Malthus says:
Should success be still incomplete, gigantic inevitable famine stalks in the rear, and with one mighty blow levels the population with the food of the world.
The Malthusian dilemma shows the problem when one resource is increasing linearly while another increases geometrically. The variable increasing at a geometric rate will inevitably overtake the other. That variable is Barack Obama.
The pattern being seen across the country in contest after contest is this phenomenon. More after the fold.
Wow. For me to saying this I must be some rabid Obama supporter and hate Hillary.
No.
Just trying to use a little math to understand patterns in the world.
So, the striking trend from the national polls looks exactly like what is happening in Texas.
This is a visual representation of political momentum.
On to Ohio.
This is a case where both lines are linear, albeit a steeper line for Obama. However, what I find interesting is that it appears that Obama's line will become geometric after a few more polls. If you make a line of the most recent batch of polls for each candidate, Hillary's is a sharp downward trend while Obama's is the exact same line in opposite.
Analysis:
Hillary's ability to win either contest is in question given the trend lines seen in these graphs.
I have previously calculated that Hillary will need 70% of all pledged delegates at stake on March 4 to tie Obama. This outcome approaches the impossible daily.
People are freaking out these days about what you should say, what you shouldn't say, blah blah blah. The point of these graphs and the numbers is that, probability wise, Obama's a good bet.
I thought liberals/progressives were more able to take a pragmatic look at reality and make an informed analysis. Maybe I'm wrong, and if so, how much different are we than the insane christian right?
P.S. I have a degree in economics, so if you want to parse that route, I know what Z is.