Punditry has its limits. You try to learn as much as you can about an issue, look for patterns and trends, and then tell a story stringing together the facts you've gathered. You tell a story because you're trying to make a point, and people remember and respond well to stories. From our distant past reliance on oral tradition to spread knowledge, to growing up as children listening to our parents read, to grabbing a great book, watching a movie, or telling a story ourselves - stories are how we understand and learn. But stories involve generalizations. We'll never know what was in the head of each voter casting a ballot in yesterday's Illinois 14th Congressional Democratic Primary. Some voters may have researched every issue they cared about and voted certain of their choice. Others may have randomly grabbed a leaflet and liked what it said about the candidate. Some may have liked a candidates' name because it reminded them of their uncle. Others may have employed the childhood decision game "Eenie meanie minie moe." bored now has written "campaigns are won by money, message, management and mobilization." That's no doubt true - but one would be foolish not to include 'chance, luck, or opportunity' - Machiavelli, no slouch in things strategic, figured "Fortuna" amounted to half of what happens in human affairs. That sounds about right to me.
What are some factors that would seem to explain a lot of what happened Tuesday?
Let's begin today a national letter writing campaign sending hundreds of thousands of letters to every newspaper in America, calling for front page coverage of the dangers of another Constitutional crisis from another questionable election, and editorial campaigns to prevent this travesty while there is still time.
Amazingly, incredibly, unbelievably, six years after the Florida recount of 2000 America could well be facing a historic and profound election decided weeks after the vote, by courts counting votes, after voters finish voting.
