Quick take: Follow-up on confirmation bias and the Trump endorsement

 It will take a few more days to see who wins the Pennsylvania senate primary, but following up on yesterday's observation, note the following.  Those who rush to declare Trump's endorsement to be some sort of magic pixie dust will point to Mastriano's victory in the Pennsylvania gubernatorial primary, while ignoring, for example, Madison Cawthorn.  You cannot do that.  The whole point of yesterday's post is that you have to look at the totality of Trump's record.  You cannot look at the victories of Trump's endorsees and declare them to be determined by Trump's endorsement, post hoc ergo propter hoc, and then look for excuses to throw out all of the observations of his endorsees who lost.  Nope.  You have to look at the complete data set, and yes, the data set is still in the process of compiling, in the form of a win-loss record.  You don't get to count the wins while throwing out the losses.  That's not how social science works.