Thanks for acknowledging the math. Medium contributors tend to denigrate this angle or just not respond. I have been accused by being "too analytical" when working on volunteer boards.

Another angle is that a closer election--like 0.94m vs 0.85m--will likely bring a new energy for the next election. Better candidates and more resources.

When the election is seen as a loss, not much energy goes into the campaign. The party will find third-rate candidates just put a name on the ballot beside the party name. Better candidates will not risk the effort to lose.

This leads to a poor performance for the next election. The cycle repeats.

---------------

You and I will likely be the only people reading this math piece. I doubt it will be influential.

But we really need to move beyond this math.