@AlextheYounga@MatthewTanous You’re acting as if the converse of a proposition implies the proposition itself. Arguing against “correlation does not imply causation” on the basis that “causation implies correlation” is unsound.
@hw_moore I realise this analysis has become less true since 1994, but I’m not sure on the extent and what you said seems to take Bagehot/Westminster system for granted.
@hw_moore In theory the US system works on basis of (aspirant) legislators cultivating personal vote. Eg, Mayhew’s “electoral connection”, Moynihan’s rejection of Clinton healthcare plan, dominance of House by Democrats until 1994 despite GOP presidencies that were success on own terms.
@MistyBluefla This is fantastically dishonest. That conviction was overturned because a psychiatrist had given false testimony. In the re-trial, she was found not guilty by reason of insanity.
@mactellomckeown Where does the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party fit into this? (I wouldn’t characterise them as left or right, but one might argue this leaves pro-Israel advocates with a natural home in the centre, at least as it exists in US.)
@UnionJacked__ When McSweeney was director of Labour Together, he visited Corbyn (nominally) to share results from polling of Lab members. Get In (iirc) records JC as being more interested in talking about Gramsci than what McSweeney had to say.
@hw_moore To what extent is the reputation of sociology as unrigorous justified?
The only sociology(-adjacent) papers I’ve read are Pager 2002 and Pager 2022, published in AJS and ASR. Both were essentially randomised control trials.
Neither left me with an impression of “softness”.