Brown Out (With a bit o’ Science Bleg)

Avatar

Chris Dierkes

Chris Dierkes (aka CJ Smith). 29 years old, happily married, adroit purveyor and voracious student of all kinds of information, theories, methods of inquiry, and forms of practice. Studying to be a priest in the Anglican Church in Canada. Main interests: military theory, diplomacy, foreign affairs, medieval history, religion & politics (esp. Islam and Christianity), and political grand bargains of all shapes and sizes.

Related Post Roulette

12 Responses

  1. Avatar JV
    Ignored
    says:

    What is your point? It seems to be that if people voted logic it would be different? or that when you reduce it to 2 variables, D vs R it would be a D win?

    Don’t forget that in MA Independents outnumber Ds & Rs put together. They were the ones who gave Obama 63% a year ago. Your analysis ignores that entirely.

    Maybe the Web future of “superempowered” citizens who are networked globally is emerging and an old fashioned 2-party system exists in name only.Report

    • Avatar Chris Dierkes in reply to JV
      Ignored
      says:

      I don’t know if people voted logic it would be different. In any regards, they don’t, so I think it a rather moot issue.

      My point is that analysts project way too much and miss the rather obvious causes involved.

      e.g. If you see (as I have) commentary talking about “how could Mass abandon health care?” I think that’s off the mark by a wide margin. The vast majority of people don’t vote based on policy (#4) or facts about policy (#5). Only political junkies do. And then they (imo) tend to assume that is the mindset (or really the emotion-set) of the voters.

      Voters as Brian Caplan showed are not rational. But too much of political organizing is still based on the idea that they are.

      As to independents, I didn’t mention them specifically but they are implicit in the entire discussion, as independents are the ones most likely to be swayed (from election cycle to election cycle) based on the 2 parties’ images and the individual candidate’s personal and presumed leadership qualities.Report

      • Avatar Jaybird in reply to Chris Dierkes
        Ignored
        says:

        Imagine, if you will, an Amendment to repeal the 17th.

        What do you think that that would do to the process?Report

        • Avatar Chris Dierkes in reply to Jaybird
          Ignored
          says:

          I don’t know. Who would be picking them? Kyle if I recall suggested Govs of each state become the Senate and meet on a regular cycle yearly, doing an advise/consent kind of thing only, instead of writing legislation (at the same the House is which I find patently absurd).

          Govs are elected so it would still follow (basically) this formula, although as I recall Gubernatorial elections aren’t as easily pigeonholed into national party politics (usually Gov races precede runs by either party).Report

  2. Avatar ThatPirateGuy
    Ignored
    says:

    One thing to note is that I heard of some rather vile attack ads against brown from the coakly campaign that would certainly count as scare tactics. Not that I am happy with Massachusett’s new senator(I’d rather have a party hack who votes the way I want than someone who is pledged to get in the way) but thats no reason to ignore facts.

    I can’t tell you what they said exactly because I didn’t want to look at them from what i heard.Report

  3. Avatar steve
    Ignored
    says:

    Your explanation does help to make sense out of the fact that it is hard to find those on the right who usen numbers in their analysis very much. Other than Manzi, and some libertarians, you seldom see actual numbers/data being used by writers from the right. I have sometimes felt as though the right must be innumerate. Very frustrating for us numbers geeks.

    SteveReport

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *