The Significance of the Vote in Buffalo

Writing in a vote is generally an admission of futility.

"Rather than vote for X or Y, I'll write in a vote for Mickey Mouse," one says.

If there is only one name on a printed ballot for a particular post, that candidate, then, is generally regarded as a shoo-in.

But like the propositions discussed by Sportin' Life in Porgy and Bess, it ain't necessarily so. (Sportin' Life is portrayed above, as performed by John W. Bubbles in 1935.)

A write-in campaign was launched this year by the mayor of Buffalo, New York in order to retain the post of Mayor. It has established that, when the candidate is an incumbent, it can work.

Byron Brown, a Democrat who has served four terms as mayor, lost the primary election in June to India Walton: a nurse, union activist, and socialist. The Republican Party did not offer any nominee. So the only candidate listed on the ballots when they were printed up in September was ... India Walton.

What might have been seen as a death blow to any remaining chance Brown might have had for remaining in office through write-in votes was this: on September 19 The Buffalo News reported that Brown and his administration are under investigation by the FBI on matters that involve municipal contracts. Nobody will say more, because no charges have been filed, but this sounds like a pay-to-play scheme was at work. "Cross my palms with silver and you get your contract."

Yet, have I mentioned this yet? Brown found a way to win. Or, an alternative way to express the point, the only candidate on the ballot found a way to lose.

It probably had something to do with the defects of "defund the police" as a political slogan. Brown got more than 58% of the vote.

Comments

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge. We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave. First, Plato is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability. I only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere. At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak

Jamesian Philosophy Refreshed

Search This Blog