Using counterfactuals to identify decisive variables

Counterfactual history is used here to test assumptions rather than prove a preferred conclusion. The discussion first separates the established campaign narrative from the speculative alternatives considered afterward. It then asks whether each proposed change would alter the result, distinguishing decisive variables from background detail. The suggested method tests ideas that might disprove an interpretation instead of looking only for confirming evidence. A variable that can change without affecting the outcome matters less than one that redirects the campaign. This approach works best after the factual history is understood, especially in lectures and analytical discussion.