Twitter roundup

Comments

[David in Cal]

If there a mirror image of Jonathan Bernstein's article -- that is, an article attacking Dems -- I think Brendan would be tearing it to pieces. Berstein's article includes unsupported slams, such as:

Republicans who have worked with Newt Gingrich know that he’s a fraud.

the Republican Party just doesn’t care very much about entire realms of public policy

Republicans certainly have an aversion to anything that Barack Obama supports

AFAIK Gingrich wasn't doing a bad job of managing the House.

It's true in a way that Gingrich "resigned in disgrace in the wake of marital scandals and ethics scandals." However, that's only half the story.

The main cause of Gingrich's bad reputation was disgracefully biased coverage by the mainstream media from the moment he became Majority Leader. Also, his ethics violation was bogus. It concerned a fund he has established that he claimed was entitled to favorable tax treatment. An IRS ruling has confirmed that Gingrich was absolutely right about the tax treatment.

[David in Cal]

"Rick Perry says in an interview to air Sunday that he has no doubt that President Obama is an American citizen, saying he was only kidding around about the issue when he raised doubts about where Obama was born."

See http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20125979-503544/perry-obama-is-an-american-citizen/

[David in Cal]

Brendan implies that because no recent nominee had as little experinence and as weak an organization as Cain, that's evidence that Cain has no chance of winning the nomination. It's a quibble, but I'd say these factors make Cain less likely to win the nomination, but don't prove that he has "no chance." After all, Brendan's conclusion is based on only on a handful of elections. And, each one had its own characteristics, which may not be same as the current election.

ISTM that political science generally provides more reasoned conclusions than seat-of-the-pants pundits. However, political science hasn't reached a level of certainty where it can predict that someone like Cain has no chance.

[bnyhan]

Sure, I'm using colloquial language. Of course the likelihood of him winning is non-zero, but it's far less than the polls imply. I'd put it at 1-3%.

[David in Cal]

Fair point, Brendan. Your use of odds reminds me of betting. Some sportswriters bet on weekly football games (perhaps just notionally) and keep running track of their winnings and losses in the newspaper. I recall one who didn't do much different from break-even. That result wasn't impressive.

John Maynard Keynes made a personal fortune as an investor. When he died, he left an estate worth some $30 million in present-day dollars. I think his financial success helps prove that his economic theories were valid, or, at least, more valid than other prevalent theories at the time.

One can now conveniently bet on various political results via the internet. It would be interesting if you were to bet on political events and keep running track of your results. If you won a lot of money, it would help confirm the validity of your political science deductions.

[Rob]

My recollection is that Keynes made his fortune by spending half an hour each morning in bed with the Times identifying bonds that deviated from the yield curve and going long or short in them. In other words, he was an arbitrageur before analysts and subsequently computers identified such investment opportunities. While impressive, this very smart investment strategy didn't have a great deal to do with the economic theories with which is he most identified, which is not to say that I question the validity of those theories.

Even if for nothing else, Keynes would deserve our approbation for his beautifully written essay "Economic Possibilities for Our Grandchildren," which I commend to all Brendan's readers. If pressed for time, the portion from the bottom of page 5 to the end is poetry.

In addition to being the most influential economist of his day and a successful investor, Keynes was a don at Cambridge, a member of the Bloomsbury Group and married to a prima ballerina. Looking back on his life, he said his only regret was that he hadn't drunk more champagne. I believe this may be the definition of a life well lived.

[Rob]

Jon Huntsman's latest charge against Romney is that he is a "well-lubricated weather vane." Is this to be the new face of the Republican Party--opposed to abortion, evolution and lubrication? Say what you will about the Clinton Administration, it was solidly pro-lubrication.

[David in Cal]

Well, Clinton was lubricious.