How true is the Margarita Model?

[cosmicvortex20]

Margarita Model

[LiberalBushFan]

1. Not very true.

The Republicans are not centrist at all, yet the writer says both parties are "so centrist."

[cosmicvortex20]

2. Wow, a speed reader... its been posted for 15 sec...

Nice speed, but is the retention there?

[kar_the_terrible]

3. yes but

Are all democrats centrist too? I guess not

the link makes for good reading if you're bored with nothing to do (as I am right now) but little more. Too many simplifying assumptions... I tried something similar to compare racial profiling vs. random checks... but I found I could never simulate a system without making compromising assumptions.

Well anyway......

[wtmusic]

5. The Republicans are completely centrist

remember, centrist is defined as appealing to half the people in the country. Polls show that by definition Bush is a centrist.

The problem is public perception in the country has been grossly skewed by the media.

[jab105]

4. If you can get enough people on one side of the beach to buy

the margeritas you wont have to move to the middle :shrug:

[bemildred]

6. Babble. Propaganda babble.

The premise is contrary to observation. If you go to
such a beach you will see the vendors space themselves out.
Why? Because each vendor can serve a circle of clients
surrounding him. If he is next to another vendor, that
half of the circle is cut off, so he has fewer clients within
his reach. A vendor will seek out the largest clump of clients
that he can get all for himself and center himself in it.

No business likes competition.

The linear axis premise is false too.

There is more, but lets not bother.

[cosmicvortex20]

10. uh, maybe I just missed what your saying here...

In our analogy were using here, how would the vendors being spread out look like in relation to politics again? Are you suggesting the right go full tilt right and the left goes left and we both just forget about the middle?

Im not sure how that accomplishes much.

[bemildred]

20. Like a Parliamentary Democracy, where are there are

multiple parties spread out all over the political spectrum.
And they have to form coalitions and stuff, and people can often
actually vote for leaders whose positions they affirmatively
agree with, as opposed to here where you vote for the guy who
is least offensive.

[Ready4Change]

17. Clients are mobile, as well.

They can pick up their blanket and move closer to the vendor who provides the drinks they like best.

Further, they will move towards the vendor who can best CONVINCE those customers his drinks are best.

Now, with advertising, you have vendors moving towards those who can best be manipulated into buying ones drinks.

How does that fit the current day picture?

[bemildred]

21. Clients are indeed mobile.

I see you understand how fallacious this model is.
But if both vendors cluster together in the middle,
the clients have no choice. That is the point, in a way.

[pa28]

7. It's interesting

However, I think the Republicans have sold the idea that their "stand" exists in the middle when in fact it is far off at one end of the beach. False advertising on their part. To make matters worse the Democrats have done a poor job of pointing out it is actually the Republicans who are out of the mainstream.

[DBoon]

8. The Republicans have their stand by a storm drain outlet

festering with insects and smelling very bad. They have managed to convince people that this end of the beach is better though, and that the bad aroma is the scent of endless opportunity.

If someone tries to point out the shortcomings of this part of the beach, they are shouted down as a traitor and a socialist. The vehemence of these assaults intimidate other people who notice the Republican part of the beach is in fact an eyesore, and not all that is promised.

Some Republicans believe the stench and poor conditions of their beach are ordained by divine provence. They believe that moving to a better beach violates their religious pricipals. They believe the end of time is coming soon, and that those in the rotten, trashed beach area will be rewarded in the afterlife anyway.

The Democrats have their stand by a nicer, cleaner part of the beach, but few people go there because the Republicans have told them the Democrats will charge them too much (in taxes) for the Margaritas. This is true, but the Democrats' margaritas are tastier, and the price difference is less than what the Republicans say. Nobody wants to pay more, however, even if the inexpensive product is markedly inferior.

[cosmicvortex20]

11. I think your missing the point...

The article isnt about which side is "better", its about the dynamic that pulls both parties towards the center.

Once again, your preaching to the choir on which side it best here.

[DBoon]

15. The model assumes rational utility maximizing behavior

on the part of the beach goers and the vendors.

It also assumes that the location of the vendors is determined by the distribution of beachgoers.

I assume that the beachgoers are fundamentally irrational, in that they perceive as a "good" location one that is flawed, and that the vendors themselves influence the location of the beachgoers (against their best interests) through deception and intimidation.

I think my model fits our political system better.

[wtmusic]

12. Of course, Republicans will say Dems stand is by the storm drain...

and therein lies the problem. It's not in the Republican Party, whackos can believe whatever they want to. It's in damn near 50% of the country thinking that's a valid point of view.

That is the problem.

[cosmicvortex20]

9. Its these types of observations I find interesting...

Each side wants to beleive they are in the middle, when obviously, the middle is by definition where both of them meet.

Granted, its fun saying "we" occupy the center.

[Cat Atomic]

13. I think it ignores some very important points.

If we're to use the margarita metaphor, then both vendors are on the right side of the beach. People on the left will go to the closest vendor, sure- but it's still right of center and they've got one hell of a walk. But, says the vendor, "where else are they gonna go?".

What I'm saying is that the center can be moved by people with influence- the cart owners. They don't just cater to their "customers".

[cosmicvortex20]

14. Wouldnt natural selection preclude just such a thing?

In the analogy, each cart is free to move where it wants, but it chooses to move to the middle for its own good, for if it didnt, then the competing cart would get the majority of the buisness.

This is why the middle isnt defined by our subjective evaluation - but on the results of the actual elections and the behavior of the real campaigns.

[Cat Atomic]

16. The center is defined by majority opinions.

And in that respect, this model doesn't work.

For instance, look at national healthcare and social security. On both these issues, the political debate is right of center. The majority of Americans want national healthcare and they want Social Security left to function as it does now.

But that's not the political debate. The political debate on these issues is basically "how should we privatize them?".

The two parties are representing two different factions of wealthy America- or two different business factions. Neither wants to provide national healthcare. Both want to tamper with Social Security. And it's like this on many other issues as well.

I do think this "margarita model" might be a useful way of thinking about wedge issues, though.

[Ready4Change]

18. Only true if the beach is small.

For example, if the beach is 10 miles long, and clients can only walk 2.5 miles to get a drink, the vendors can maximize their individual incomes by setting up their stands at the 2.5 and 7.5 mile markers.

Once the beach becomes small enough that the vendors must share clients, then the center position becomes desireable, assuming other factors don't come into play.

[bemildred]

19. I see you get it.

But as the fellow above points out, the premise that the
major parties are in a competitive situation, i.e. that the
beach is small enough and that they want to maximize their
"business" at the expense of each other, is contrary to simple
observation. What one observes is that they collude to locate
their stands near each other at some distance from the middle
of the distribution of customers. This does NOT maximize their
prospective customer base, as is shown by the 40% voter turnout.
One can infer that competition is not their most important motive.

Howard Dean just pointed this out in another context, pointing out
that MANY Congressional districts are not merely not competitive,
but not competed for, there is no opposition to the incumbent,
however flawed he or she may be. Further, a reliable hack that
will lose is preferred as a Presidential Candidate to an outsider
that might win by attempting to address the concerns of the center.

[bemildred]

22. Why are there two vendors?

If the situation was truly competitive, as the model asserts,
one would expect more vendors to jump in until they were all
just making a living.

If there were five vendors would they still all clump together
in the middle because that would maximize their profits?
If you add a few more vendors, you can see how fallacious this
argument is.

The real story is that politically we have only two (major)
vendors, and they collude to address only a small part of the
political spectrum, and to prevent anyone else to get a foothold
on any other part of the beach. This is our "two-party system".