It doesn’t work any better with social change than it does with games of chance. With leftism, the coin never comes up heads.
And David Solway writes that we shouldn’t rely on the children of the left to run our affairs.
It doesn’t work any better with social change than it does with games of chance. With leftism, the coin never comes up heads.
And David Solway writes that we shouldn’t rely on the children of the left to run our affairs.
Comments are closed.
Not sure what’s going on, but I made a post which isn’t appearing in the thread. When I attempt to report (even hours later), I get an error message saying that a duplicate post has been detected.
Bah, typo. report -> repeat.
I’ll wait a bit and attempt to repost tomorrow with a cosmetic change, in case the post is hiding in a queue somewhere.
It is widely believed that casinos instituted betting limits specifically to stop Martingale players, but in reality the assumptions behind the strategy are unsound.
Then why limits? There’s a false assumption here (though Martingale is unsound.)
What in the world? I’ve lost another post here. Oh well, I’ll see if it was the link to transterrestrial that killed it.
I was thinking of a post by Jim (can’t link because that goes down some hole):
Getting rid of the filibuster would make it easier for the winners of elections to enact the program they ran on, and thus for elections to have their intended consequences. Getting rid of the filibuster is a means, not an end.
I think certain progressives/leftists look for the big win, the “revolution”. That’s not the Martingale strategy, but more always betting on the long shot because you so much with the money. Then it’s supposed to be “easy street”. Just as a lucky gambler probably didn’t expect the IRS to take a piece of their win, Democrats over the past year and a half, didn’t expect Republicans to delay their legislation.
That frustrates people like Jim, who are looking for instant gratification. This is significant because all the laws and such passed over this period of time, if they really were good ideas supported by the public, could be passed a couple years from now. There shouldn’t be a hurry in getting such law passed.
It all looks like lazy, primitive thinking to me and a strong indication that the breed of politician currently in power didn’t deserve that power.
Typo:
because you can do so much with the money
…the breed of politician currently in power didn’t deserve that power.
Going for understatement of the century Karl? We may have a winner.