How does it happen? If first has to do with the intrinsic nature of the endeavor. They keep doubling down, even in the absence of evidence that the virus is pervasive, as it is not in whole regions of the country. Our political leaders seem not to be able to read the data and act in ways that reverse their errors. But this stringency chart shows that the U.S. Other countries wrongly locked down their economies but then their leadership rolled back the lockdowns soon after, perhaps realizing their error, or responding to evidence of herd immunity, or in response to public pressure. The problem is real in any political system but the United States in this pandemic has proven itself unusually afflicted with pot commitment. And when all else fails, there’s always the option of running away. Shifting the conversation or communicating through functionaries are others. Feigning thoughtfulness or humility is another. Indeed: attempting to wrest control of a narrative – an endeavor which under any other circumstances would be viewed as attempting to mold reality itself – is one way in which public figures avoid being backed into a corner. Further still, Cuomo just announced that he’ll be writing a book offering a “clear game plan” for battling the coronavirus. Yet instead of an apology, he has sought to blame the current presidential administration. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo’s edict, which sent thousands of elderly patients from hospitals back to nursing homes, resulted in the deaths of thousands – perhaps over 10,000. – has offered many examples of this tendency.

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic – now clearly in remission in the U.S. And where the poker player bears direct and unavoidable personal responsibility for mistakes, public figures tend to slide onto the next issue, leaving the public holding the bag. The ways in which they distance themselves from the consequences of their choices to maintain a perception of infallibility, additionally, is often disillusioning for those who observe it. The difference is that where a pot committed card player is often forced into a losing and sometimes humiliating position, wielders of influence (building upon the poker metaphor) nearly always have a number of outs they can exercise.

Whatever the case, it’s a compelling metaphor for the way in which intellectuals and politicians – people with outsized influence – are often unwilling to admit or abandon discredited opinions or initiatives. Some players think the concept of pot commitment is just an excuse for making bad calls others seem to wind up in that situation regularly. If you fold you’ll be short-stacked, and if you call you’ll be all-in and probably lose. A disproportionate portion of your chips are in the pot, it’s a no-win situation, and the only chance of survival is to bluff your way out. For some reason or another – a distraction, an erroneous calculation, going on tilt, or something else – you’re suddenly pot committed. Every poker player, amateur or professional, has had this experience.

Pot committed definition