Second, the thesis is they defrauded Ohio. You don’t think they can defraud Wikipedia?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Ohio,_2008
Claim: 2,940,000 blue votes.

http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/states/ohio.html
Claim: 2,708,000 blue votes.

Discrepancy: over 200,000. So which do you trust more? Personally wouldn’t trust either as far as I could throw them. Notably La Wik’s numbers are uncited, I don’t know where they got them.

La Wik’s numbers don’t match NYT’s for 2012 either, and the NYT reports it went down by 11,000, not 100,000. Congratulations, everyone is wrong.

…and so we are back to our Hierarchy / Exit binary.

I just wanted to say thank you for all the thought provoking / thought inculcating posts you’ve written this year, and for being so generous in the ensuing discussion in the comments section: it’s quite an education.

All the best for 2014.

On Jim, it’s very dispersed — often comments off his own blog (much superb commentary right here, for instance). The Natural Law essay has to be the central pillar — I certainly don’t see it as “quite libertarian” in anything other than a commendable way (but then I’m also an advocate of decentralized power). Competition trumps authority.