I doubt that. The whole reason the DNC pushed him in and then kept him in the race wasn’t to stop Trump, it was to stop eftists from sneaking through the nomination process. The DNC “centrists” haven’t run a square primary since Obama stole the nomination from “it’s her turn” Hilary in 2008.
Eh, Hanlon’s Razor. There are certainly plenty of dirty neo-libs, but I also think the Democratic party is where passionate, practical minded, progressive political science types wind up, and I think that demographic is well-meaning but caught up in metrics.
Metrics rely on historical data. Obviously Biden should be the candidate, he’s an incumbent, and incumbents have an advantage. The problem is the sample size is too low (n = 47) to really control for most variables. Especially since when you consider the study longitudinally, n = 1.
Anyway, politics is hard, and I’m willing to give a little grace to those who are least trying to be smart. Strategists seem like the smart move, but the big paradox of analyzing a quickly-changing subject is that the more data-backed your strategy, the more outdated it is. The world moves too fast now.
I suspect a not-insignificant segment of the caucus has been been just sincerely trying to play the right moves.
I doubt that. The whole reason the DNC pushed him in and then kept him in the race wasn’t to stop Trump, it was to stop eftists from sneaking through the nomination process. The DNC “centrists” haven’t run a square primary since Obama stole the nomination from “it’s her turn” Hilary in 2008.
Eh, Hanlon’s Razor. There are certainly plenty of dirty neo-libs, but I also think the Democratic party is where passionate, practical minded, progressive political science types wind up, and I think that demographic is well-meaning but caught up in metrics.
Metrics rely on historical data. Obviously Biden should be the candidate, he’s an incumbent, and incumbents have an advantage. The problem is the sample size is too low (n = 47) to really control for most variables. Especially since when you consider the study longitudinally, n = 1.
Anyway, politics is hard, and I’m willing to give a little grace to those who are least trying to be smart. Strategists seem like the smart move, but the big paradox of analyzing a quickly-changing subject is that the more data-backed your strategy, the more outdated it is. The world moves too fast now.
I suspect a not-insignificant segment of the caucus has been been just sincerely trying to play the right moves.