You aren't familiar with mortality rates, are you? A standardised mortality rate for a 73 year old male is 85 years. Your avg. life span includes all males, including those who die at infancy, due to accidents, etc.
I haven't memorized any data tables, no. But I understand statistics very thoroughly. A life expectancy, measured in years, is an absolute average, with a large standard deviation. It could be true that the mean life expectancy for a 73 year old is in the 80's (I cannot confirm your statement, and you provide no link). I doubt those numbers are true for males, since anecdotally we see very few who surpass 85, but let's say the statistics and data support your number, for the sake of argument; again, that's just an average value, with a large standard deviation. Plenty of 73 year olds, sadly, expire before they turn 77, or 81. What is absolutely true is that the risk of serious illness, or worse, is statistically much greater for a 73-year-old than for a man in his 40's or 50's. I'm not so worried about McCain passing away while in office, but there's a chance he could get fairly ill, and the VP would be very important. Why is that controversial? Again, he has some good options, IMO. Again, in the end, his age not a major issue for me; his policy positions, and even moreso the damage done to America by his party and their policies, are my guiding problems with his candidacy. And a "mortality rate" is not measured in "years," FWIW.
Life Expectancy, mortality rate: tomato, tamato. If you were an annuity company, these #'s are very important. I just input the data and averaged it. If you know a person's history, it becomes even more focused on the LE. Here's a decent link. See what you come up with. http://calculator.livingto100.com/calculator
Does that link factor in 4 cancer surgeries with the last coming in 2000 when one is diagnosed with stage 2 Melanoma?
It'll only upstage Obama if it's a woman. I like Romney and he'd be a solid pick, but to the media and the Democrats, it's a snoozer.
Romney would be good for several swing states, but you know the media would beat this "another wealthy guy with multiple houses" thing to death.
I think Romney helps with NV/CO/MI. The original rationale for a Romney pick was to solidify the base. Given that most of the base already now supports McCain, I don't think you'll see a huge polling impact. But where it might help is getting the base to actually come out and vote (which will be seen on election day, but not in polls).
hutchinson was vetted actually and asked but she turned it down SIX times according to MSNBC reporter. it wouldn't work policy-wise b/c mccain has not been pro-women in general.
I always preferred Romney over McCain, though as VP it does open the GOP ticket for some major attack ads. But if he can deliver those states, it might be worth it.
Ah, it is nice to bust a pompous blowhard like yourself. Life Expectancy rates are based on an individual person. Standardised mortality rates are based on a group in a specific age bracket. Since he was referring to the 75 LE rate of all males, which is what he was explaining was McCain's life expectancy, and due to the fact that we don't know all of McCain's health history, I referred to the standardised mortality rate. However, if you DO know McCain's health history, you are more than welcome to place it in the calculator I linked above. EDIT: Apparently, in some references, they are the exact same thing. Follow the links, if you'd like. http://www.boston.com/business/pers..._your_life_expectancy_rate_adjusts_each_year/ According to a table used by the trustees of the Social Security system, for instance, a 70-year-old has a life expectancy of 13.27 years. The IRS table for required minimum distributions has a distribution period of 27.4 years for the same age. Divide the distribution period figure into 100 and you get the percentage of your account that must be distributed for the first RMD, 3.65 percent. Your life expectancy doesn't remain constant. For each additional year, your expectancy decreases. But it doesn't decrease by a full year. From 70 to 71, for instance, the Social Security table says your expectancy declines to 12.64 years. That's a loss of 0.63 percent of a year. Your distribution period also declines. From 70 to 71 it falls to 26.5, indicating a distribution of 3.77 percent. By age 80 the distribution period is down to 18.7 years, a distribution of 5.3 percent. (Your life expectancy is down to 7.62 years, so it can't be argued that you're being unreasonably pushed.) The longer you live, the greater the RMD as a percentage of your account value. At age 95, when 97 percent of all people born in America can expect to be dead, your RMD is 8.6 years, dictating an 11.6 percent distribution. http://www.lho.org.uk/viewResource.aspx?id=9459 The ASR for an area is the number of deaths, usually expressed per 100,000, that would occur in that area if it had the same age structure as the standard population and the local age-specific rates of the area applied. Directly standardised mortality rate is calculated by dividing the number of deaths by the actual local population in a particular age group multiplied by the standard population for that particular age group and summing across the relevant age groups. The rate is usually expressed per 100,000. The template below provides details of the data required and the calculations performed to calculate a standardised mortality rate for a particular area. It also provides links to some other information on methods of standardisation that may be useful.
As an Obama fan, I want a VP who will sink McCain like a stone. My choices: Romney Lieberman Ridge Coburn Ridge Santorum Brownback Pawlenty
Lieberman or any qualified woman are the ones I don't want (as an Obama supporter). I think the only way McCain can win is a wildcard that shakes things up, and both of those options do that. Lieberman will wreak havoc with the base, but if he's able to re-energize them and pick up some moderates who like the idea of a bipartisan ticket, it may just work. I'd much rather him pick a traditional option.
I don't know. I think that would backfire on the media and Obama. In fact, it's already played out. Where Romney could really hurt McCain is with the Mormon issue. Much like Obama's race and Hillary's gender, Romney's religion would be a problem for some voters.
also it would undermine's mccain's ads against obama using biden and hillary's quotes as attacks. romney said some really harsh things about mccain in the primaries so the dems can use that. but romney also said his explanations for those harsh comments were simply things you only say in the heat of the primaries. that would basically denouce all of the attack ads mccain has put out. or at least a smart democrat would put that argument out.
