Tangotiger Blog

Wednesday, May 04, 2016

Was #NeverTrump #AlwaysFake?

?In the first 4 contests, Trump got 32.7% of the votes, Cruz 20.7% and the rest of the field got 46.6%.  The media and experts and everyone with an opinion wanted us to believe that it was basically one-third Trump and two-thirds not-Trump.  That as the field would be reduced, Trump's solid minority would not be able to attract the fallouts for the dropping-candidates, that they'd all gravitate to whoever was left standing next to Trump.

But look what happens when you simply discard the rest of the field, and just focus on Trump and Cruz: Trump got 61% of the votes, when picking between him and Cruz, which is the kind of number we've seen when the two of them went head-to-head.  That is, for all the expert analysis that propped up the idea that the non-Trump non-Cruz voter would simply and overwhelmingly go with Cruz, the reality is that those voters who did not have Trump/Cruz as their #1 simply mirrored the voting of those that did have Trump/Cruz as their primary.

All of that discussion about unfavorability ratings and presumptions of behaviour, all that goes out the window.  The non-vocal supporters simply matched the vocal supporters when given the choice between Trump/Cruz.

Friday, April 01, 2016

Trump’s faithless delegates?

?Nate talks about a few things that I was tweeting a few weeks ago, namely:

We might say a candidate “racked up 44 delegates” in the same way we’d say Steph Curry scored 44 points. But those delegates aren’t just a scoring mechanism: Delegates are people, my friends. Delegates are people!...

If they wanted to, the delegates could deploy a “nuclear option” on Trump and vote to unbind themselves on the first ballot, a strategy Ted Kennedy unsuccessfully pursued against Jimmy Carter in 1980...

A final possibility is “faithless delegates,” where individual delegates simply decline to vote for Trump despite being bound to do so by party rules. It’s not clear whether this is allowed under Republican rules, but it’s also not clear what the enforcement mechanism would be.

And that last part is the key.  If a person has to actively participate in the voting, he now has a choice of what to do, regardless of the rules.  After all, if you are "forced" to vote, that's no vote at all.  There's no reason at all to vote.  Just count the Curry points like Nate analogizes.  If you are forced, the only thing they can do is give you an already punched ballot, then the only choice you have is to vote for that person, or not vote at all.

Without an enforcement mechanism, then all of this voting we've had so far is basically just for show.  It's a party that comes state to state like a circus.  But ultimately meaningless.

Wednesday, March 16, 2016

For such a liberal, Obama sure acts like a responsible centrist

Read More

Tuesday, March 08, 2016

538 1, Copyright thieves 0

?Terrific job by everyone involved with the 538 story.

Monday, February 22, 2016

Why do I need John Oliver to tell me the easily-verifiable history of Supreme Court Justices?

?John Oliver.  I love John Oliver.  My kid and I DVR five shows every week, without fail: The Flash, Arrow, Legends of Tomorrow, Modern Family, and John Oliver.  The way he slices through things is tremendous.  Not only that, but he makes it memorable.  Think of Civil Asset Forfeiture for example.  Anyway, Ted Cruz kept repeating the "80 year precendent", until John Oliver pointed out exceptions, and when Cruz kept adding conditions, it still wasn't true.  It was a pants-on-fire moment that we expect the media to call the speakers out on.  And I don't see it happening.  Maybe I don't watch enough news, but I watch as much news as sports.  Anyway, thank god for John Oliver.  Tonight, I'll be watching his take on abortion.

Friday, February 13, 2015

Jon Stewart’s BABIP

?Clayton Kershaw has SOME influence on his BABIP.  But not total.  He may have a career .271 BABIP, but chances are greater than 50% that in 2015, it'll be higher than .271.  But because he has SOME influence, some people think that anything we OBSERVE with regards to BABIP is a true reflection of Kershaw.

Jon Stewart announced his retirement, and Viacom stock dropped 1.5%.  So, some yahoos make the 100% causative connection that Jon Stewart is worth hundreds of millions of dollars.  Of course, since then, the price of Viacom stock is back at its pre-announcement price.  Basically, just because there is SOME relationship doesn't mean you get to ignore the most important element in all observations: random variation.  I know, I know, you hate to admit the truth, and you dearly would love to think there's meaning in everything that happens.  That meaning is called sh!t.  That's what happens.

Monday, February 02, 2015

Chris Christie’s nuanced position on vaccinations is disingenuous

?Chris Christie is a smart guy.  A very smart guy.  And it's painful to hear a very smart guy say things like this:

"All I can say is that we vaccinate (our children) and so that's the best expression I can give you as my opinion," Christie said.

"That's what we do but I also understand that parents need to have some measure of choice in things as well," Christie said. "So that's the balance that the government has to decide."

The comments came on the heels of Obama encouraging parents to vaccinate their children following a measles outbreak traced to California's Disneyland theme park that's spread to more than 100 people.

"I understand that there families that, in some cases, are concerned about the effect of vaccinations," Obama said during a recent NBC interview.

"The science is, you know, pretty indisputable," he said. "You should get your kids vaccinated."

So, what's he really saying?  Well, technically, there's probably dozens or hundreds of vaccines out there.  And some US governmental agency has decided which vaccines that children MUST be given at various ages.  So, from a technical sense, he's saying that he wouldn't want the US government to mandate children getting hundreds of vaccines.  But, no one is actually suggesting that.  That's the strawman he's building.

At the same time, he never actually said there are absolute minimum vaccines that all kids should have (say MMR... I'm not a doctor... I'll just assume this is a given, but if there's another that is even more obvious, fine, use that as an example).  Clearly, a very smart guy like this would suggest that it's "n > 0".  He's just saying that "n < max", where the parents get to choose what vaccines to give... but beyond the very minimum.

As an example, the HPV vaccine is now being recommended for BOYS as well as girls.  But it's not mandated (yet).  That's the "choice" that Christie would really be talking about, that kind of vaccine.

But Christie is being disingenuous by not being very clear about where he stands, and instead he takes what seems a reasonable position by some, but also an extremely ignorant position by others, because he's leaving the door wide open for misinterpretation.  

For such a straight-shooter, he certainly speaks in ambiguous terms on this issue.

Monday, December 29, 2014

Constraints lead to innovation

There's something to be said for pushing the envelope to the edge.  When Sony announced they would pull a movie from the? theatres, it was only a matter of time when it would launch it for an online platform.  In the past, this would have meant a "straight to DVD", a sure sign of a terrible movie.  But today, it is a viable option with HBO, or OnDemand, or various streaming and downloading platforms.  Sony said that over the past few days, the Rogen/Goldberg/Franco movie was downloaded over two million times, at a cost of either 6$ or 15$, and raking in 15 million$.  Basic math suggests that's around 1.67 million rentals and 0.33 million sales (a 5:1 ratio of rentals to sales). I'm not sure what the expectation is at this point, but total sales of 50MM$ to 100MM$ seems reasonable enough, enough to breakeven.

Tuesday, December 23, 2014

Black police officers while off-duty racially profiled (and worse) by White police officers

A very interesting story.  The author starts it off by noting that 24 of the 25 Black officers interviewed were racially profiled.

However, the author made no mention of HOW these 25 were selected.  The article leaves it open to speculation, and perhaps as an implicit assumption, that the 25 were randomly selected, and as it turns out, 24 were racially profiled.  However, if you read the article further, there is mention that some of these officers were part of high-profile cases.  Which means they must have been particularly sought out.

The anecdotes themselves stand on their own, and are cause for great concern.  But, I bet that same author could find 25 white officers off-duty of which 24 were profiled in some manner by white officers.  When you have a selection bias that you can ignore, you can create any narrative you want.

If the author did take greater care with the selection process, then it should be detailed, so we can appreciate the "rule" that we are being presented as opposed to the "exception" that it could very well be.

?

Monday, December 22, 2014

Rocket scientist congressman says goodbye to congress

First I heard of this guy, and I've lived here about as long as he's been a congressperson.  Reading this, and he seems my kinda guy.?

Friday, November 14, 2014

Hypocritical outrage by immigration opponents

There are over ten million undocumented persons in this country.  Congress has opened up its purse enough to fund the deportation of 5% of ?those persons.  What is USICE supposed to do?  Well, I would hope they'd go after those that are the biggest threat to USA.  This is no different than your local police force, and you don't want them to waste time going after every car going 1-5mph over the speed limit.  You want them to go after those cars at 15+ mph over the limit.  That sends a message to everyone else, and it also stops the dangerous drivers.

Now, if you REALLY want to stop the drivers in the 7-14mph over the speed limit, then guess what: it's going to cost you.  In taxes.

If you REALLY want to secure the borders and deport millions of undocumented persons, then guess what: it's going to cost you.  In taxes.

That's right, taxes.  Your government is funded by... taxes.  If you want your government to do more, then you  have to give them more money.   Of course, NO ONE wants to do that.

So, stop being a hypocrite about it.  And figure out the 5% that you want to deport, and figure out the 50% that are at the lowest priority.

Saturday, June 07, 2014

Creator of Calvin and Hobbes has drawn something

?Yup.

Wednesday, June 04, 2014

Russian dash-cam?  How about American bike-cam!

Not only is the whole thing cool, but I love the picture with the shadow. Who knew that David Letterman's MonkeyCam concept would be a thing that will eventually sweep the world?

Friday, May 02, 2014

Bar named Buck’s?  Ok.  Bar named Foston’s?  Ok.  The two together?

In a New York v Boston issue in NJ(*), the jury awarded 1.5 million dollars, presumably believing it was a first amendment issue rather than a zoning ordinance.  If someone wants to read the particulars, let us know the findings!

(*) For all intents and purposes, NJ is a suburb of NYC.?

Thursday, May 01, 2014

Apartheid

An interesting view from Jeff Goldberg of Bloomberg News, in discussing the use of the word apartheid. 

Few of the conditions I described in that 2004 article have changed, but I have decided, for a number of reasons, to try to avoid using the term apartheid to describe the situation in the West Bank.

One, deployment of the word doesn't start conversations, it ends them. (Former Middle East negotiator George Mitchell taught me this lesson.) Real enemies of Israel -- Muslim supremacists of Hamas, anti-Semites in the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement and so on -- use the term “apartheid” not to encourage a two-state solution that would end official discrimination on the West Bank, but to argue for the annihilation of Israel.?

I like the whole article for its sober, balanced view.  In short, once the enemies of peace adopt a word and use it as their own rallying cry, you can no longer use it in its original intended meaning. 

In USA, a term like "illegal alien" can't be used to discuss things in a rational manner.  Even if Obama was pro-immigration, he couldn't use the word "illegal alien", as it would look he was against immigration.  And a person dedicated to peace talks like Kerry is stuck in the same boat, that even if he wanted to use it in an intelligent manner, it's going to get misconstrued and used against the peace process.

Wednesday, April 23, 2014

How to have the legal power to arrest someone without being subject to government oversight

Work for the SPCA in NJ (and a few other states).

It was also a violation of normal police procedure, he said. Rotolo should know. Prior to becoming a lawyer he was a real cop, working on the Elizabeth police force. Like most real cops, he has little respect for the "wannabe cops" with a "gun-club mentality" in the SPCA.

That’s not my language. Those terms come from a 2000 report by the State Commission of Investigation on what were then 17 SPCA chapters around the state. The SPCAs are private groups that "are accountable to no governmental authority" the report stated. It concluded, "The time has come to repeal the government authority vested in the SPCAs."

?

Hurricane Carter

There's reality and there's Hollywood.?  It's a very long read, but it's a good one.  The journalist is one of my favorites.

Wednesday, January 29, 2014

Dummy-proofing school buses

?Incredible.

This would suggest that the "reminder system" needs to be activated from inside, rather than simply opening/closing the back door.

Tuesday, December 31, 2013

Air Canada, the Healthcare.gov of airlines

Incredible.  So, Air Canada has decided that to prevent transfer of vouchers to non-relatives, the transfer must be made to people who share the same last name.  This was summarized by the wife who kept her last name:

Turner’s wife, @Hilksom on Twitter, responded to the airline this way: “@AirCanada @theturner Sooooo… Turner can transfer the voucher to our NEIGHBOUR Kelly who has the same last name, but not his WIFE. Gotcha.”

Air Canada also appears to have suggested that: "Air Canada claimed the policy was designed to prevent fraud".  It's not clear fraud of what though, especially since its competitors, and peers "including West Jet, United, and U.S. Airways, allow passengers to transfer vouchers to individuals of their choosing".?

Friday, December 20, 2013

Canada Supreme Court says prostitution laws unconstitutional

This is the key point:

The court found the law was “grossly disproportionate” in that it removes the ability of prostitutes to enact safety measures like screening clients in public in order to avoid drunk or potentially violent encounters.

“These appeals and the cross-appeals are not about whether prostitution should be legal or not. They are about whether the laws Parliament has enacted on how prostitution may be carried out pass constitutional muster. I conclude that they do not,” McLaughlin wrote.

Also note:

While prostitution is legal in Canada, it is illegal to reside in or be caught unlawfully inside a bawdy-house, or brothel. It is also illegal to live off the profits of another person’s prostitution, a law typically aimed at pimps, and it is illegal to communicate in public for the purposes of prostitution.

?