Delegate Math

Ambinder has a solid explanation of the whole thing, albeit including a questionable Rawls reference.

Comments

Ambinder is not, however, lexically prior to Yglesias.

Posted by V. | March 4, 2008 8:41 PM

Haha, that Rawls reference was awful.

Posted by R. Vangala | March 4, 2008 8:43 PM

No no no. this "simple" guide to running a Texas caucus I was looking at about ten minutes before Yglesias posted this is the thing that has the questionable Rawls reference.

Posted by Martin | March 4, 2008 9:33 PM

Uh, warning PDF there in the last comment.

Posted by Martin | March 4, 2008 9:35 PM

Thank God that Barack Obama owes nothing at all to that self-promoting douchebag John Rawls, whose pseudo-intellectual misadventures in philosophy have done nothing for the world but make people with even a tenuous grasp on reality want to puke all over his seemingly infinite output of mindless, irrelevant cant. Citing to Rawls in this context (as in almost any context) is possibly less useful than citing to a block of cheese.

Posted by T.K. | March 5, 2008 1:54 AM