Skip to main content

View Diary: The Ubiquitous Political Junkie Fallacy (200 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Well, but if the average (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cardinal, sancerre2001, zedaker

    race is severely constricted, a) how constricted are we talking? 90% structural, 10% tactical? Because most races are won or lost within a fairly constricted range. If tactical considerations only sway races 3%, and a quarter of races are won or lost within 3% range, then tactical decisions decide a quarter of races.

    But more than that ... doesn't this argue that we should focus even more on tactics? We're screwed with structure, so it's incumbent upon us to harness every ounce of tactical advantage?

    "Gussie, a glutton for punishment, stared at himself in the mirror."

    by GussieFN on Sun Sep 12, 2010 at 07:29:26 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Yes, I think that's a fair assessment (7+ / 0-)

      My read of Bowers' essay is that he is absolutely NOT saying "don't even try to win the tactical war, since it doesn't matter."  Rather, it's more a caution not to blame tactics for the aggregate outcome, since most of it was constricted by the underlying conditions.

      In Rand McNally, they wear hats on their feet, and hamburgers eat people!

      by cardinal on Sun Sep 12, 2010 at 07:31:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site