regulator 0 #1 November 5, 2012 The Redskins Rule is a trend involving National Football League games and United States presidential elections. Briefly stated, there is a high correlation between the outcome of the last Washington Redskins home football game prior to the U.S. Presidential Election and the outcome of the election: when the Redskins win, the incumbent party wins the electoral vote for the White House; when the Redskins lose, the non-incumbent party wins. This coincidence has been noted by many sports and political commentators and has held true in every election since 1940, except for that of 2004.[1][2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redskins_Rule Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #2 November 5, 2012 the problem of late is that the Redskins are dreadful, since Synder took over and starting throwing stupid amounts of money at free agents that don't pan out. So they lost their game in 2000, 2004, 2008, and 2012. in 2000 and 2008, this worked for the prediction, but in general the incumbent loses slightly more than half of the time, so that's not worth much. This will probably be the last election this correlation is talked about. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,182 #3 November 5, 2012 Did you know that, by nation, there is a remarkable correlation (correlation coefficient > 0.7) between per capita chocolate consumption and per capita Nobel prizewinners? Eat chocolate, be smart!... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,602 #4 November 5, 2012 QuoteEat chocolate, be smart!I'm doing my part. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #5 November 5, 2012 Quote Did you know that, by nation, there is a remarkable correlation (correlation coefficient > 0.7) between per capita chocolate consumption and per capita Nobel prizewinners? Eat chocolate, be smart! Does it need to be Fair Trade chocolate? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #6 November 5, 2012 Quotethe problem of late is that the Redskins are dreadful, since Synder took over and starting throwing stupid amounts of money at free agents that don't pan out. So they lost their game in 2000, 2004, 2008, and 2012. in 2000 and 2008, this worked for the prediction, but in general the incumbent loses slightly more than half of the time, so that's not worth much. This will probably be the last election this correlation is talked about. nearly 50% of the time? - sweet. better than some science project projections ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,182 #7 November 5, 2012 QuoteQuote Did you know that, by nation, there is a remarkable correlation (correlation coefficient > 0.7) between per capita chocolate consumption and per capita Nobel prizewinners? Eat chocolate, be smart! Does it need to be Fair Trade chocolate? I believe "dark chocolate" is preferred.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
