Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Evening Metaverse

View
22 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >

22. Re: Evening Metaverse Nov 3, 2012, 02:27 nin
 
Maybe the two of us are looking at this as a glass half full/half empty type of deal.


Let's say we did get rid of the electoral college, pretend it's a really lopsided year and your candidate only got 38% of the vote nationally... "AWww shucks my vote didn't even count! I got nothing for doing that!"

But at least then, my vote would count towards the national vote. I'd be represented then, which is more than I am now.

You can say "people have to show up to represent this side", and I agree with that - except for the fact that some of these states have been lopsided for decades or more. No amount of "let's vote for the other guy" is going to change that. We can scream in the streets all we want, and the other 70% won't care. (Looking here, we've not gone blue since 1964! 1964!!! 48 fucking years! )

 
http://store.nin.com/index.php?cPath=10
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
21. Re: Evening Metaverse Nov 3, 2012, 02:15 Sepharo
 
ugh.. but it does.

If you all stayed home it would be 0% not 38%. You're just 12.1% away

By your logic every single person across the country who voted for the candidate who didn't win ... their vote "didn't count". Like someone pointed out here earlier, there's only one president. Let's say we did get rid of the electoral college, pretend it's a really lopsided year and your candidate only got 38% of the vote nationally... "AWww shucks my vote didn't even count! I got nothing for doing that!"
 
Avatar 17249
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
20. Re: Evening Metaverse Nov 3, 2012, 02:06 nin
 
I wasn't making an argument about the appropriateness/efficacy of the electoral college.

Well, I was, since it's why my vote doesn't count.

The minority candidate will never become the majority candidate if their supporters sit home crying about their vote not mattering.

When we get 38% of the vote, we're not sitting at home. We are, however, ignored thanks to the "winner take all" format of our EVs. And in my mind (I understand you see it differently), the result is the same as if we didn't vote: we still have nothing to show for our efforts/opinions/votes. I stood in line today for a half hour after work, and it will have zero effect on Tuesday.

And that's why my vote doesn't count.

 
http://store.nin.com/index.php?cPath=10
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
19. Re: Evening Metaverse Nov 3, 2012, 01:56 Sepharo
 
nin wrote on Nov 3, 2012, 01:49:
How do you suppose you make your candidate of choice the majority winner?
Come on, I know you understand what I'm saying here.

If the EVs were split, proportionally, THEN my vote would mean something.

Using a 60/40 split as an example (Oklahoma), the winner would get 4 EVs, and the loser would get 3. (warning: it's late and I'm drinking, so all math bets are off.)

Isn't that a better representation of people's actual votes?

I wasn't making an argument about the appropriateness/efficacy of the electoral college. I was taking issue with the claims of "my vote doesn't matter/count"... It does. It's +1 vote to your candidate, in your state, which will determine how the EVs go by the majority. The minority candidate will never become the majority candidate if their supporters sit home crying about their vote not mattering.

edit: Sorry I guess I did just hop into the middle of a discussion on the system itself and I can see how someone would think that's what I was discussing. But my post was about lopsided states and how people feel that they don't need to vote because their candidate is either far ahead or far behind... Your vote still counts.
 
Avatar 17249
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
18. Re: Evening Metaverse Nov 3, 2012, 01:49 nin
 
How do you suppose you make your candidate of choice the majority winner?
Come on, I know you understand what I'm saying here.

If the EVs were split, proportionally, THEN my vote would mean something.

Using a 60/40 split as an example (Oklahoma), the winner would get 4 EVs, and the loser would get 3. (warning: it's late and I'm drinking, so all math bets are off.)

Isn't that a better representation of people's actual votes?

 
http://store.nin.com/index.php?cPath=10
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
17. Re: Evening Metaverse Nov 3, 2012, 01:44 Sepharo
 
nin wrote on Nov 3, 2012, 01:38:
Sepharo wrote on Nov 3, 2012, 01:35:
nin wrote on Nov 3, 2012, 01:31:
Sepharo wrote on Nov 3, 2012, 01:11:
nin wrote on Nov 3, 2012, 01:03:
Sepharo wrote on Nov 3, 2012, 00:47:
I've never understood this "vote doesn't count" crap that people pull at every U.S. election. Your vote always counts... Just because you're not in a "swing state" doesn't mean your vote doesn't count. The reason your state is not a "swing state" is because one side votes more than the other... Take a wild guess at how you can help make your state a "swing state".

It's not quite that simple. Check out Oklahoma, where I'm at, for a prime example...

http://electoral-vote.com/evp2012/Pres/Graphs/oklahoma.html

I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be looking at... I see polls showing the Republican candidate ahead and Republicans won Oklahoma in 2004/8.

Sitting at home saying "my vote doesn't matter" isn't going to fix anything, it's just going to make it worse. So yes, it is that simple... to make the state less lopsided you have to vote first.

I voted in every one of those - point out where my vote made a difference.

Hell, I voted this afternoon, and it won't make a difference this time either.

--> +1

That's it that's the difference. That's all you can do to directly effect it but I guess you could go out and convince others to vote as well and increase that number some. But it certainly counted, and that's my point.

Except it doesn't. All the EVs go to the majority winner. It's not like they're split.

How do you suppose you make your candidate of choice the majority winner?
Come on, I know you understand what I'm saying here.
 
Avatar 17249
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
16. Re: Evening Metaverse Nov 3, 2012, 01:38 nin
 
Sepharo wrote on Nov 3, 2012, 01:35:
nin wrote on Nov 3, 2012, 01:31:
Sepharo wrote on Nov 3, 2012, 01:11:
nin wrote on Nov 3, 2012, 01:03:
Sepharo wrote on Nov 3, 2012, 00:47:
I've never understood this "vote doesn't count" crap that people pull at every U.S. election. Your vote always counts... Just because you're not in a "swing state" doesn't mean your vote doesn't count. The reason your state is not a "swing state" is because one side votes more than the other... Take a wild guess at how you can help make your state a "swing state".

It's not quite that simple. Check out Oklahoma, where I'm at, for a prime example...

http://electoral-vote.com/evp2012/Pres/Graphs/oklahoma.html

I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be looking at... I see polls showing the Republican candidate ahead and Republicans won Oklahoma in 2004/8.

Sitting at home saying "my vote doesn't matter" isn't going to fix anything, it's just going to make it worse. So yes, it is that simple... to make the state less lopsided you have to vote first.

I voted in every one of those - point out where my vote made a difference.

Hell, I voted this afternoon, and it won't make a difference this time either.

--> +1

That's it that's the difference. That's all you can do to directly effect it but I guess you could go out and convince others to vote as well and increase that number some. But it certainly counted, and that's my point.

Except it doesn't. All the EVs go to the majority winner. It's not like they're split.

 
http://store.nin.com/index.php?cPath=10
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
15. Re: Evening Metaverse Nov 3, 2012, 01:35 Sepharo
 
nin wrote on Nov 3, 2012, 01:31:
Sepharo wrote on Nov 3, 2012, 01:11:
nin wrote on Nov 3, 2012, 01:03:
Sepharo wrote on Nov 3, 2012, 00:47:
I've never understood this "vote doesn't count" crap that people pull at every U.S. election. Your vote always counts... Just because you're not in a "swing state" doesn't mean your vote doesn't count. The reason your state is not a "swing state" is because one side votes more than the other... Take a wild guess at how you can help make your state a "swing state".

It's not quite that simple. Check out Oklahoma, where I'm at, for a prime example...

http://electoral-vote.com/evp2012/Pres/Graphs/oklahoma.html

I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be looking at... I see polls showing the Republican candidate ahead and Republicans won Oklahoma in 2004/8.

Sitting at home saying "my vote doesn't matter" isn't going to fix anything, it's just going to make it worse. So yes, it is that simple... to make the state less lopsided you have to vote first.

I voted in every one of those - point out where my vote made a difference.

Hell, I voted this afternoon, and it won't make a difference this time either.

--> +1

That's it that's the difference. That's all you can do to directly effect it but I guess you could go out and convince others to vote as well and increase that number some. But it certainly counted, and that's my point. But I figure you understand that seeing as how you did actually vote, my problem is with those who don't.
 
Avatar 17249
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
14. Re: Evening Metaverse Nov 3, 2012, 01:31 nin
 
Sepharo wrote on Nov 3, 2012, 01:11:
nin wrote on Nov 3, 2012, 01:03:
Sepharo wrote on Nov 3, 2012, 00:47:
I've never understood this "vote doesn't count" crap that people pull at every U.S. election. Your vote always counts... Just because you're not in a "swing state" doesn't mean your vote doesn't count. The reason your state is not a "swing state" is because one side votes more than the other... Take a wild guess at how you can help make your state a "swing state".

It's not quite that simple. Check out Oklahoma, where I'm at, for a prime example...

http://electoral-vote.com/evp2012/Pres/Graphs/oklahoma.html

I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be looking at... I see polls showing the Republican candidate ahead and Republicans won Oklahoma in 2004/8.

Sitting at home saying "my vote doesn't matter" isn't going to fix anything, it's just going to make it worse. So yes, it is that simple... to make the state less lopsided you have to vote first.

I voted in every one of those - point out where my vote made a difference.

Hell, I voted this afternoon, and it won't make a difference this time either.

It has nothing to do with making the state less lop sided, when the majority of the state (this part of the country, actually) has a radically different mindset.

 
http://store.nin.com/index.php?cPath=10
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
13. Re: Evening Metaverse Nov 3, 2012, 01:11 Sepharo
 
nin wrote on Nov 3, 2012, 01:03:
Sepharo wrote on Nov 3, 2012, 00:47:
I've never understood this "vote doesn't count" crap that people pull at every U.S. election. Your vote always counts... Just because you're not in a "swing state" doesn't mean your vote doesn't count. The reason your state is not a "swing state" is because one side votes more than the other... Take a wild guess at how you can help make your state a "swing state".

It's not quite that simple. Check out Oklahoma, where I'm at, for a prime example...

http://electoral-vote.com/evp2012/Pres/Graphs/oklahoma.html

I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be looking at... I see polls showing the Republican candidate ahead and Republicans won Oklahoma in 2004/8.

Sitting at home saying "my vote doesn't matter" isn't going to fix anything, it's just going to make it worse. So yes, it is that simple... to make the state less lopsided you have to vote first.
 
Avatar 17249
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
12. Re: Evening Metaverse Nov 3, 2012, 01:03 nin
 
Sepharo wrote on Nov 3, 2012, 00:47:
I've never understood this "vote doesn't count" crap that people pull at every U.S. election. Your vote always counts... Just because you're not in a "swing state" doesn't mean your vote doesn't count. The reason your state is not a "swing state" is because one side votes more than the other... Take a wild guess at how you can help make your state a "swing state".

It's not quite that simple. Check out Oklahoma, where I'm at, for a prime example...

http://electoral-vote.com/evp2012/Pres/Graphs/oklahoma.html

 
http://store.nin.com/index.php?cPath=10
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
11. Re: Evening Metaverse Nov 3, 2012, 00:47 Sepharo
 
I've never understood this "vote doesn't count" crap that people pull at every U.S. election. Your vote always counts... Just because you're not in a "swing state" doesn't mean your vote doesn't count. The reason your state is not a "swing state" is because one side votes more than the other... Take a wild guess at how you can help make your state a "swing state".  
Avatar 17249
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
10. Re: Evening Metaverse Nov 2, 2012, 14:53 Mordecai Walfish
 
BobBob wrote on Nov 2, 2012, 10:02:
eRe4s3r wrote on Nov 2, 2012, 05:04:
Seriously, I am flabberghasted. I never realized the election system in the USA is that .... messy

Are you from the USA? If not, go worry about your own country's problems.

The U.S.A. has, indeed, evolved to the position of being the entire world's problem, whether they want it or not.

Shuttering outsiders from contemplating this seems hugely ignorant, when our bases litter the landscape of their countries and our actions have a direct effect on their economies, as well as ours.

Maybe we could use a couple "curious outsiders" to help spark a discussion about this internally, as we certainly have not had any level of intellectual conversation about our election process without brandishing our ever-ignorant patriotic fangs and cries of "Heracy!" here in the USA.
 
Avatar 56178
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
9. Re: Evening Metaverse Nov 2, 2012, 10:53 Creston
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Nov 2, 2012, 09:53:
But at least in Holland a coalition would result in 50%+ of vote potential being in power at the end, or re-election in worst case. That is really what democracy is about imo. Who cares if a government can't hold on to power for the period it's elected, coaltions rise and fall ..and let's be honest, Holland is the worst example of European voting systems you could pick due to its internal issues but Holland is not worse for it. ;p

But it really doesn't guarantee that (the 50+% thing.) All it guarantees is that the party with the most votes gets to choose who gets to be in the government. And there have been times when they couldn't form a coalition to get above that 50%, and thus they had a completely ineffective government for four years, as they could never get anything passed. (since the majority was waging opposition.)

And even IF they can get a 50% majority, typically they have to involve smaller parties that have absolutely nothing in common with them, causing them to have to create bullshit compromises on issues that are just as toothless as the Kyoto protocol.

My confusion is simply, why does the US population allow these 2 parties to continue doing this? They are perverting democracy to the core. And as a European it is really hard to grasp how you can consider that still a democracy.

First of, the US is NOT a democracy. It is a Republic. Second, what is the US population supposed to do about it? Because it's so evenly split and because of what they are fed by their own parties and the media, both sides of the population feel that the other side is to blame for all ills. And that's exactly the kind of ignorant bullshit that the majority of both parties try to keep in place.

There are some on both sides of the aisle who realize that you can get a lot more done by working together, but sadly they are a small group.

So what's the population to do? Other than... I guess revolt?

Yeah you get to vote, but 50% of the votes don't actually matter. In worst case you get someone in power the majority of the population did not vote for. That is not democracy. -> Democracy is a form of government in which all eligible citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives.

When the winner gets all, that is no longer the case.

You seem to be getting a few things confused here. You're taking the presidential vote and treating that as the one thing that gets voted on, completely ignoring the vote for senatorial and congressional seats. How else would you vote for a president? Have Obama get 53% of power, and Romney 47% of power? Confused

There can only BE one president. The senate and congress, however, are far more closely divided/aligned. (it's typically only a few points above and below 50%).


Obviously the parties (both of them) have no interest in changing things... but you can see from the climate in the USA how bad it is when 2 parties are literally at war with each other.

I think you literally don't know what the word literally means. :p
And again, a lot of this hatred is what you see here on blues, where the majority of the left leaning guys hate conservatives, and the majority of the right leaning guys hate democrats. And it's a lot of how the news love to portray it. In reality, most people don't hate the other side, and they just wish someone would cooperate and get some actual work done.

Heck I half expect there to be a secession of republican states sooner or later. There is no way this current political climate in the US will lead to progress or stability.

Yeah, that's never gonna happen.

Of course adding to this, Holland and Germany, being nearly identical systems and all, obviously have their own issues in that the other 49.99% in worst case is opposition party with no power. At all, but at least in recent times, it is no longer a 2 party system. And with more parties in a coalition, more voter interests are actually represented.. although one could argue that a 8% party should not have any major say....

Multiple party systems are often just as bad as two party systems. Sadly.

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
8. Re: Evening Metaverse Nov 2, 2012, 10:04 eRe4s3r
 
BobBob wrote on Nov 2, 2012, 10:02:
eRe4s3r wrote on Nov 2, 2012, 05:04:
Seriously, I am flabberghasted. I never realized the election system in the USA is that .... messy

Are you from the USA? If not, go worry about your own country's problems.

I will once the USA has no nuclear weapons anymore, and not the largest military on the planet... As it is, a republican president would be a huge danger to the world. So only someone who is blind and living in a cave would not worry.

And you tell me not to worry, when you got batshit insane people like Sarah Palin having a valid chance to become president or vice president in command of the largest nuclear arsenal in the world?
 
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
7. Re: Evening Metaverse Nov 2, 2012, 10:02 BobBob
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Nov 2, 2012, 05:04:
Seriously, I am flabberghasted. I never realized the election system in the USA is that .... messy

Are you from the USA? If not, go worry about your own country's problems.
 
http://tinyurl.com/WeatherImmunity Whew
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
6. Re: Evening Metaverse Nov 2, 2012, 09:53 eRe4s3r
 
But at least in Holland a coalition would result in 50%+ of vote potential being in power at the end, or re-election in worst case. That is really what democracy is about imo. Who cares if a government can't hold on to power for the period it's elected, coaltions rise and fall ..and let's be honest, Holland is the worst example of European voting systems you could pick due to its internal issues but Holland is not worse for it. ;p

My confusion is simply, why does the US population allow these 2 parties to continue doing this? They are perverting democracy to the core. And as a European it is really hard to grasp how you can consider that still a democracy. Yeah you get to vote, but 50% of the votes don't actually matter. In worst case you get someone in power the majority of the population did not vote for. That is not democracy. -> Democracy is a form of government in which all eligible citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives.

When the winner gets all, that is no longer the case. Obviously the parties (both of them) have no interest in changing things... but you can see from the climate in the USA how bad it is when 2 parties are literally at war with each other. Heck I half expect there to be a secession of republican states sooner or later. There is no way this current political climate in the US will lead to progress or stability.

Of course adding to this, Holland and Germany, being nearly identical systems and all, obviously have their own issues in that the other 49.99% in worst case is opposition party with no power. At all, but at least in recent times, it is no longer a 2 party system. And with more parties in a coalition, more voter interests are actually represented.. although one could argue that a 8% party should not have any major say....

This comment was edited on Nov 2, 2012, 10:03.
 
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
5. Re: Evening Metaverse Nov 2, 2012, 09:10 Creston
 
Btw, the "Make them say whatever you want on twitter" thing would have been much funnier in 2000.

Bush : Strategery!
Gore : Lockbox!

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
4. Re: Evening Metaverse Nov 2, 2012, 09:09 Creston
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Nov 2, 2012, 05:04:
I listened to a podcast about the US election system today where they talked about the last 3 presidential elections and how it all works what happened there, frauds, Swift Voting (pacs) etc..... and gotta say.. WOW. You call that a fair and free democracy? Winner takes all (enforces that only 2 parties ever are relevant)? Federal states can decide how the election ballots look, what machines to use where and then you have voting fraud that is not recounted because a news station "calls" a result and everyone goes home? Or the entire idea about PAC's, Swing states and how any other state is completely ignored by the election race? Caging, Red shifting...

Or how the electoral college is not bound to vote how the people voted (like at all?) Or how when a candidate was voted by more people, the one who has the most electoral college votes on his side wins anyway (how is that a democracy, majority rule is still defined by someone having the MAJORITY of support!)? Or how 3rd parties are barred from the entire election race by design (winner takes all literally is designed so that only 2 parties ever can compete). And in effect, makes both parties nearly identical in a perverse way. Or how there is absolutely no system in place to prevent double votes? Or that you can only vote on a weekday (where the poor who need every $ have to take an entire day worth of income loss if they want to vote?) And how you can call an election working if people have to wait 8 hours in line because there is only 1 voting machine?

Seriously, I am flabberghasted. I never realized the election system in the USA is that .... messy

The system is brutally poor, but there are a few inconsistencies in what you are saying.

- Just because a news channel "calls" a state for a particular candidate doesn't mean everybody just packs up and goes home. It's the actual result of the votes in that state that decide who the electoral college votes go to. Not where the news networks say they should go to (although most of them would absolutely fucking love that.)

There's also been a study that showed that left-leaning news networks (ie, pretty much everyone except Fox) call states for democrat candidates quicker than they do for republican candidates, and Fox obviously does so vice versa. So paying any attention to the news networks and their "calling" a state for someone is the height of ignorance. (as was amply demonstrated in 2000, when they had to recant their "calls" like six or seven times.)

- While it is true that the electoral college doesn't actually have to vote the way the people have voted, as far as I know this has only ever happened once. (I'm sure people with more knowledge on this matter will correct me.) Since the dipshits who make up the electoral college actually get paid a ridiculous amount of money to have to work one day every four years, committing that kind of voter fraud would also be really stupid. (as you're pretty much guaranteed to at least be fired.)

- The poor don't have to take an entire day's worth of income loss to vote. The large majority of voting booths are open like 20 hours on election day. You can find a time to go around your work hours, and if you can't, you can fill out a "vote by proxy" card and have someone go vote for you.

- as for the 8 hours waiting time, I have no idea where that happens. Typically I wait in line for 10-15 mins or so, but admittedly I live in a very low population area. But while the lines downtown are generally bigger, they also move a lot faster (since they have more machines.)

- If you think the double voting is bad, look up some of the stories about cows voting. But voting fraud happens everywhere.


All this said, yes, the voting system in the US is bullshit. Electoral votes probably made sense back in 1798 when people couldn't afford to travel five months to Washington to cast a vote. Now it's just utter horseshit, and after the fiasco of 2000, it REALLY should have been abolished. We easily have the technology to just count everyone's vote in real time and go by most votes, but neither party apparently wants to see that happen. And since it would take an Act of Congress to MAKE it happen, I guess we're going to be stuck with this horseshit for the rest of time.

And yes, third parties really don't have much of a chance, which is again the Democrats and Republicans making sure that THEY only ever have the power. It's a pisspoor system, but then again, most other systems suck too.

You complain about winner takes all, but in many countries where they have a many-party system, it's still the same. To give an example, the CDA party in Holland could get 43% of the votes (and thus seats in the Second Chamber), and the VVD party could get 42.9% of the vote. It's the CDA that then gets to decide who all gets to be in the government, and they are under no obligation whatsoever to actually invite the VVD to be IN the government. They can just reach out to all the shitty small parties and form a government with them, and all the VVD can do then is (actually officially termed thus) Wage Opposition for four years.

I'm sure there are countries where # of votes is directly tied to the amount of influence you get in the government, but sadly in most cases it's simply not so. The winner gets to decide everything. The reason it just looks so bad in the US is because there are only two parties and they are by now almost diametrically opposed to one another. So if you voted Republican and the Democrats win by like 5 electoral college votes (or vice versa), you stand the chance of getting a president completely opposed to your views, even though the election result would seem to indicate that would be unfair.

I just have no idea how it's ever going to get changed. The republicans and democrats will do everything they possibly to keep the status quo.

It could be worse, I guess. Holland's government just fell for like the 5th time in 12 or so years...

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
3. Re: Evening Metaverse Nov 2, 2012, 06:05 Kajetan
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Nov 2, 2012, 05:04:
Seriously, I am flabberghasted. I never realized the election system in the USA is that .... messy
This is what you get, when you are the pinnacle of democracy and freedom. There is no need for fixing or improvement, because it already is perfect. And therefore no one really cares.

The first step in becoming irrelevant is proclaiming to be number one. And the US just did that over and over again. Until proclaiming to be number one was more important than actually doing something to BE number one.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
22 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo