John Bakke: ‘The Corrente essay you linked to Friday is an interesting read, albeit unpersuasive. But it really appears to me as though you are pointing readers to it under entirely false pretenses, ‘enthusiastically neutral’ notwithstanding. It’s equivalent to push-polling.’
☞ You’re right. It was an error in judgment. I linked to it because I thought it was really interesting. But – as it does, clearly, have a point of view that disfavors one of the candidates – I shouldn’t have done it. (And have removed it.) I remain enthusiastically neutral among all our fine Democratic candidates.
Speaking of whom . . .
AN ENCOURAGING WAY TO LOOK AT IOWA
James Musters and others:
Total Iowa Voter Turnout (approximate) 356,000
Percentage of total vote:
S/HE WHO GETS THE MOST VOTES WINS?
Now, THERE’S a Novel Idea
There’s one good thing about the Electoral College. Imagine a recount – tough enough to do for a single state, but imagine, in a very close election, having to do it for the entire nation. Not a trivial concern, I think, especially when we still haven’t secured our voting machines (see yesterday’s Sunday Times Magazine cover story).
Still, Maryland just passed a law that would – once enough other states to total 270 electoral votes had passed similar legislation – assign its votes in the Electoral College to the candidate who won the national popular vote. A clever end run around the current system. Click here for details.
James Hickel: ‘Slate offers this article advertised as, ‘The Left Needs to Shut Up About Bill Kristol’s New Column.’ In my opinion, the willingness of the New York Times to hire one of its own worst critics as a columnist is one of the reasons why it is probably the greatest newspaper in the English-speaking world.’