I got this email from the Harris campaign, “ensure every vote is counted” caught my eye.
Also her donation link now indicates a portion of $$$ will go to “Harris for President’s Recount Account”
In states like WI, the candidate calling for a recount typically funds it. (1/3)
If the Dems are gearing up for something, the energy is there. I’ve seen several videos like this one on my feed. It has 1 million + views and lots of comments by users echoing similar ballot issues. (2/3)
Another one. Lots of views and comments on these. On the one hand, Dems risk looking like election deniers by calling for recounts. On the other hand, these people are questioning the democratic process and want answers. They expect their political party to help get them. (3/3)
I think it’s time to invest more in election infrastructure & make Election Day a federal holiday. Seems more like insufficient resourcing for mail-in, absentee, & early voting, than anything truly malevolent. The margins don’t seem like something a recount would change.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
15% of white top decile students are admitted to Harvard, and 56% of black top decile performers are. This is not unfair.
If you’re outraged at Affirmative Action because of this, it’s likely a misunderstanding of the data/statistics.
I’ll explain.
The reason a large proportion of the black students in the top decile are admitted is because there is a smaller population of black students in the top decile.
If that doesn’t make sense, no worries, I’ll break it down all the way.
The “why”
Nonwhite school districts receive $23 billion less than white districts, despite serving the same number of students. (Edbuild)
The study looked at 12.8 million children in predominately (75% or more) nonwhite districts & 12.5 million in predominately white districts.
You pay researchers to confirm your biases—I know, because I worked in the Brown University policy lab you fund. This video discusses how our head researchers’ NYT front page finding that police body worn cameras “have no effect” is a false claim.
The study was the largest randomized control trial of it’s kind. Thousands of officers participating. The treatment group was assigned to wear body cameras, the control group assigned not to duration of the study. Various metrics would determine behavior change—like use of force.
Public records of footage hours, witness complaints, and officer admissions show there was widespread noncompliance. Officers assigned to wear cameras often did not wear them or turn them on. It is obviously NOT possible observe the effect of body cameras if they don’t use them.
I used to look up to Paul Krugman. Even as recently as when I was in grad school at Brown & we read his publications in “Economics of Inequality & Public Policy.” I cannot respect someone who criticizes any school of thought or body of work without doing the reading.
This was a class where we analyzed a lot of research. To think that someone in academia would consistently criticizes others’s work without understanding it—which is clearly the case here because he misrepresents MMT constantly—is mind boggling. You just don’t do it. But he does.
Strawman argumentation is so dangerous—the debates over monetary and fiscal policy determine resource allocation. What he is doing is not a simple faux pas in the realm of academia. It’s downright cruel on a human level.