Lame Counterfactuals for $600, Alex

This has been going around:

Why is this such a dumb counterfactual?  Let me count the ways:

1. Unlike parliamentary elections, individual voters could not vote for the full range of candidates--they voted in either the Democratic process or the Republican process
2. Unlike parliamentary elections, the primary/caucus processes in the US were not simultaneous but sequential.  Which meant that folks voting later had few choices and were reacting to the outcomes of the previous primaries/caucuses
3. Turnout? Primaries have lower turnout than general elections.  In primaries, the most passionate tend to turn out, so you tend to get more extreme wings of the parties show up.  Indeed, this is one reason why Trump is so confused and ill-prepared--he thinks the electorate is the same for the general as for the primaries, so he just has to do more of the same.
4. Um, this conflates type of political system with electoral laws.  There are parliamentary systems with majoritarian electoral laws (that would be most of the Westminster places--NZ is wacky).  And presidential systems can have a variety of rules for picking the president and then different rules for the legislature.  

Ok, that's just a few (Economist also assumes most proportional of electoral systems), but I just did a bunch of tax forms (F-Bars!), so I could be forgetting some other reasons.  What have I missed?

It would probably be far more accurate to take a look at surveys of the entire electorate on a variety of issues and then figure out how they would shake out if we had a proportional representation electoral system combined with a parliamentary system.

Sorry, to be a killjoy, Economist, but this is the kind of infographic that creates ignorance, not enlightenment.

Tournament of War: The Original

A few years ago, I wrote this post, where I pondered about a lost graphic--a tourney bracket of countries as they warred over the centuries.  That is, in a tournament like the NCAA playoffs, or TwitterFightClub, pairs of actors confront each other until there is only one left (if only Highlander had a tourney bracket!). 

I had seen the graphic long ago, but could not remember where I had seen it.  I did remember the final outcome, which was quite brilliant.  Vietnam, having defeated the US, was to face Afghanistan, having defeated the Soviet Union.  That was the punchline. 

The good news is that I was contacted yesterday by a scholar who was looking for the original ... and then contacted again when he found it.  It was in Spy magazine and then re-posted at the Atlantic!

My memory was not all that far off:

Mine

Given how history really played out--that Nazi Germany was defeated by the USSR, I think I prefer US vs Japan and USSR vs. Germany.  Otherwise, still quite good.

Anyhow, big H/T to AM for letting know where we can find this wonderful graphic!