Coming Soon:
The following books by Robert Paul Wolff are available on
Amazon.com as e-books: KANT'S THEORY OF MENTAL ACTIVITY, THE AUTONOMY OF REASON, UNDERSTANDING MARX, UNDERSTANDING RAWLS, THE POVERTY OF LIBERALISM, A LIFE IN THE ACADEMY, MONEYBAGS MUST BE SO LUCKY, AN INTRODUCTION TO THE USE OF FORMAL METHODS IN POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY.
Now Available: Volumes I, II, III, and IV of the Collected Published and Unpublished Papers.
NOW AVAILABLE ON YOUTUBE: LECTURES ON KANT'S CRITIQUE OF PURE REASON. To view the lectures, go to YouTube and search for "Robert Paul Wolff Kant." There they will be.
NOW AVAILABLE ON YOUTUBE: LECTURES ON THE THOUGHT OF KARL MARX. To view the lectures, go to YouTube and search for Robert Paul Wolff Marx."
14 comments:
The race, at this point, seems fractured, and I note that while Bernie certainly has the best numbers, Biden only days ago was where Bernie is now. More importantly, Nate Silver has Bernie's average pledged delegates at 1670, which would put him short of a majority of pledged delegates. I hate to think what will happen if Bernie has a plurality of pledged delegates, and the superdelegates throw the election to someone else.
By the way, my wife just returned from doorbelling for Warren. She said many people were open to talking with her. She said that the mood was completely unlike years ago when she doorbelled for Obama. This time people seemed worried and frustrated. Beating Trump was their number one consideration.
I get the feeling that for many people it was sort of like door-to-door political therapy. The vast majority of voters out there are not connected to a party or candidate, and when a campaign volunteer arrives at their door, it's their chance to talk about something that's on their minds with someone who is, however tangentially, part of the political world they are not part of.
Prof. Wolff,
I checked a few days ago when Bernie was still at 60%, sadly.
More importantly, I think you're misreading the data. The link you post gives the chance of candidates winning a majority. Hence, 20% chance there is no majority. So I'm not sure what you mean by "Bernie and Warren together as having enough to win".
As a side note: Silver also has a page explaining why having a majority is not foolproof. US America politics goes over my head.
I mean that if no one has a majority after the last primary, Sanders and Warren could make a deal to run a Sanders/Warren ticket and pool their delegates [which I believe they could do], thereby creating a winner.
If these are odds, then the sum of the individual odds for Sanders and Warren has no relation to whatever the odds for a Sanders/Warren ticket might be.
It isn't odds I am summing, it is delegates! I am aware of the point about odds.
To avoid the above confusion, readers need to open the link Professor Wolff provides and look at the second graph.
Does anyone here know how it works at the convention? Do the candidates actually control the delegates and are able to compel them to vote for another person? Or does it turn into a free for all where Warren begs her delegates to vote for Bernie but they can do whatever they want? Along the same lines, what happens to the delegates of someone that eventually drops out? E.g. if Klobuchar is out by the time of the convention who determines where her delegates go?
Here's a novel idea for the Democrats: Don't televise the convention. When the nominee emerges, show a unified party committed to defeating Trump.
Keep in mind that Silver had HRC 's odds of winning at 75% just before the election while his aggregated polls showed a 2% HRC advantage. Now I confess to not gambling and being unfamiliar with how odds are constructed, but in 2016 Silvers calculation was way off. Lots of people accepted odds as a better metric than poll data that was well within the margin of error.
The idea that odds are a better metric than poll data is a corollary of the wisdom of markets fallacy; it's the illusion that when money is involved, people, especially people with lots of money, think better.
Warren will not ask her delegates or supporters to vote for Bernie or agree to a VP slot on his ticket. Bloomberg, Buttegeig, and even Amy are rising, she's running 3rd or 4th in polls, and yet she's still attacking Ssnders. Just today: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/11/us/politics/elizabeth-warren-new-hampshire.html#click=https://t.co/Rpq4YVmUeU
"Senator Sanders starts with a ceiling that's significantly lower than the support he had four years ago," Lau wrote. "And he hasn't yet faced the scrutiny of his record that will surely come with any further rise."
She knows at this point she's not going to win and she's helping give the nomination to a moderate. She's no friend of the left.
Just so! Benjamin and Aimee on the "What's Left?" podcast have had Warren's number for quite some time. Here are three of the most relevant (though pretty much all of their episodes are worth a listen):
The Left Case Against Elizabeth Warren
Warrren's Medicare For All "Plan"
Et tu, Warren?
Best Merchant Cash Advance Leads are exclusive Leads addressed to you Merchant Cash Advance Leads is the Qualified MCA Leads provider as a firm in the entire globe.
Post a Comment