I was a cocksure SOB, and Murphy warned me about it after Iowa

By -
Although only 12% of the vote is in, it is obvious Ron Paul will be well over 30% in Virginia when all the ballots are counted. And I am a man of my word. Paul is still going to lose by quite a bit, but I am truly surprised to see him doing this well.

Comments

  1. Gabe Ruth9:16 PM

    You're being a little generous. The two man race is pushing the parameters of the bet.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bob Murphy9:30 PM

    Ah, I see you are no Krugman. And actually you might have gotten away with it for a while; I very well may have forgotten. BTW the original formulation didn't include caucuses (like Maine); were you doing that intentionally? (I'm genuinely curious.)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Bob Murphy12:42 AM

    Gabe how so? In fact the two-man race perfectly isolates the different interpretations Gene and I gave to the Iowa outcome. (But I'm not claiming victory, since I was just saying at the time that Gene's theory was only one possible explanation; I wasn't confident that my interpretation was the right one.)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Gabe Ruth9:14 AM

    I guess you're right. I am pretty confident Gene's take was right, though. When he says Paul would have done worse if Gingerich and Santorum (I caught a few lines of his speech yesterday, which would have been hilarious if it were in a movie) had already dropped out, I think he's also right, even though it's extremely hard for me to understand the mind of a person who vehemently opposes Romney but hates Paul even more. I suppose these are people who will make up the American Catholic Church when the prophecies of "Love In the Ruins" are finally fulfilled.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more