Comments on: More on Delay http://www.poliblogger.com/?p=9527 A rough draft of my thoughts... Mon, 08 May 2006 20:53:38 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1.2 by: Matthew Shugart/Fruits & Votes http://www.poliblogger.com/?p=9527#comment-468024 Wed, 08 Mar 2006 19:53:32 +0000 http://www.poliblogger.com/?p=9527#comment-468024 More... "... especially with multiple opponents, one of which was quite credible." In other words, for all practical purposes he faced only one opponent. One serious one, that is, in the sense that anyone who wanted to defeat Delay presumably knew which one actually had some chance. 62-30, an "effective" number of candidates of about 2.1. More…

“… especially with multiple opponents, one of which was quite credible.”

In other words, for all practical purposes he faced only one opponent. One serious one, that is, in the sense that anyone who wanted to defeat Delay presumably knew which one actually had some chance.

62-30, an “effective” number of candidates of about 2.1.

]]>
by: Matthew Shugart/Fruits & Votes http://www.poliblogger.com/?p=9527#comment-468013 Wed, 08 Mar 2006 19:48:36 +0000 http://www.poliblogger.com/?p=9527#comment-468013 How often has a member of his party's leadership obtained less than 2/3 of the vote in a primary? Not too often, I would imagine. What was turnout? The story linked above does not seem (in a quick scan) to indicate. How often has a member of his party’s leadership obtained less than 2/3 of the vote in a primary? Not too often, I would imagine.

What was turnout? The story linked above does not seem (in a quick scan) to indicate.

]]>