Wednesday, January 05, 2005


Lee LeFever uses a chess analogy to try to make sense of the Washington State governor's race that will not end:
Sachiko and I were talking the other day about this and comparing it to a chess match that ends in a draw. More often than not, I think a draw indicates that neither player had a strong strategy (of course it could be the opposite too).

In a situation like ours in Washington, I wonder if the practical "draw" in the election is similar - that neither candidate connected with enough people to really create a majority?
While many draws in chess reflect the fact that neither player sees a strong strategy going forward from the current position, it usually doesn't mean that they didn't have a strong strategy leading up to the current state. Quite commonly, one player is pursuing a reasonable, or even strong, plan but his opponent simply defends well and reaches a position which is prospectless for both. Of course a draw is an acceptable outcome in a chess game, but proves wholly unsatisfactory in a political contest.

As to the specific political situation in Washington, I have no great insight to contribute.

No comments: