Replies

I’m no chess grandmaster. Yet, I’ve long noticed that the liberal arts folks who’ve never touched a chess board think differently.

Concept#1: to win the game, you must weaken your opponent, not simply promote your own pieces. Small victories are crucial, impose losses on your opponent and they accumulate, even if it means sacrificing one of your own pieces.

A. In the POTUS primaries, it is largely meaningless to discuss alternative candidates as long as it is clear that the front-runner is coasting to victory after victory on his way to the nomination.

B. Before the “party membership” gets a chance to decide who their preferred nominee is ... this frontrunner must be defeated. Only then is the contest opened up to a legitimate competition among alternatives. First task: defeat the frontrunner!

example: Bob Dole: lost Alaska, skipped LA, won IA 26 to 23, lost NH 27 to 26, 2nd in DEL, 2nd in AZ. He recovered to be nominated. It was very close to knocking Dole out of the race, but not enough. The opposition was too split up to realize that job #1 was to bury Dole.

Here are Romney’s defeats in 2008 and 2012.
2008 Iowa, 2nd to Huckabee
2008 NH, 2nd to McCain
lost FLA. knocked out soon after.

2012, tie in IA, lost western NH, but swept the rest of state, lost SC to NEWT, lost CO MO MN to RS, tie in Maine with Paul. That was close to damaging MITT, but not nearly enough.

C. FOR 2016, the bottom line is: MITT & BUSH MUST LOSE IA NH SC FLA. Any candidate that can do that in one of those state, I’m for it. If Walker & Cruz do not compete in NH, there is no sense supporting them there! If somebody cannot win SC, they are useless to our cause there! This is a state-by-state contest.

D. If this sites turns into Cruz & Walker headquarters, I will hafta ask, “what state?” If they write off NH & ME that leaves Rand Paul as the only alternative there.

E. The grassroots of Lincoln County Maine participated in a meaningful manner. They organized, got their voters to the caucus ... and elected a slate of delegates for RS, Newt and RonPaul: Mitt got only about 25% of the delegates. That’s a meaningful event as opposed to the pundits on the web who go on and on in the ether, but never land in a particular spot on the ground.

“Metacognitive skills are important in chess. Children can review their games to see what mistakes have been made. In this way, students can improve their strategy and fine-tune their critical thinking skills.”
http://lessonplanspage.com/mathchessproblemsolving28-htm/

Perhaps one of you wordsmiths can put this idea into an articulate explanation.