Impeachment Proceedings Against Obama Begin?

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Impeachment Proceedings Against Obama Begin?

Postby sourmìlk » Wed Mar 14, 2012 12:55 am UTC

Honestly, I think we need to do whatever Russia is doing, because clearly it's working. Their voter turnout is 140%!
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Qaanol
The Cheshirest Catamount
Posts: 3069
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 11:55 pm UTC

Re: Impeachment Proceedings Against Obama Begin?

Postby Qaanol » Wed Mar 14, 2012 3:09 am UTC

sourmìlk wrote:Honestly, I think we need to do whatever Russia is doing, because clearly it's working. Their voter turnout is 140%!

146.47% in Rostovskaya Oblast!
wee free kings

User avatar
Yakk
Poster with most posts but no title.
Posts: 11128
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 7:27 pm UTC
Location: E pur si muove

Re: Impeachment Proceedings Against Obama Begin?

Postby Yakk » Wed Mar 14, 2012 4:36 am UTC

To me, AZ/NZ style PR is a non-starter. They all rely on party lists, either as part of the system, or as a pretty much required crutch for citizens who don't spend hours researching each candidates' position. And political people in parliament should mainly be responsible to the people who voted them in, not to a party structure that picks who gets in. FPTP already makes MPs overly reliant on parties -- systems that make it worse are not an acceptable alternative.

Because if the MPs exist to serve the party, why bother electing actual people? I want dozens or hundreds of people who each have the ability and the power to disagree with any kind of central authority in my parliaments.

To that extent, I find Westminister pattern distasteful, with the lock-step MP voting required to maintain the government. (The unanimity problem: if something requires unanimous consent to function, dissent is actually suppressed and weakened in practice.)
One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision - BR

Last edited by JHVH on Fri Oct 23, 4004 BCE 6:17 pm, edited 6 times in total.

Soralin
Posts: 1347
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 12:06 am UTC

Re: Impeachment Proceedings Against Obama Begin?

Postby Soralin » Wed Mar 14, 2012 5:31 am UTC

mike-l wrote:40% prefer A>B>C and I don't care if they vote for A only
30% prefer B>C>A and vote for B only
30% prefer C>B>A and vote for C only.

Griffin wrote:A had the most support, A should be the victor. Better someone gets what they want than no one does.

Spoiler candidates: They're not a bug, they're a feature!

I mean, look at the results above, that's what you would expect to find if you had 2 similar candidates on one side/party, and 1 candidate on the other side/party. And you're arguing that the 40% side should win out over the 60% side, because the 60% side split their vote between a couple of people that they think are both better than the alternative.
Griffin wrote:60% (A) > (B) > c
20% (C) > (B) > c
20$ (B) > a > c

Under an AV system, the most popular candidate (here, clearly B) runs away with the election. Under an IRV system, he is completely eliminated right from the get go.

Griffin wrote:That was exactly my point! The candidate wins, even though more people want B to win. That is called "a flaw".

B is not the most popular candidate in your example, A is. If it were just a direct election between A and B, A would win with 60% of the vote. So why should C joining the race change that result?

pizzazz
Posts: 487
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 4:44 pm UTC

Re: Impeachment Proceedings Against Obama Begin?

Postby pizzazz » Wed Mar 14, 2012 6:02 am UTC

It's pretty clear he's not going to be removed from office, and the proceedings will unlikely even get to a trial. This really just seems like a way to make a point.

edit: There is no perfect voting system.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7590
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Impeachment Proceedings Against Obama Begin?

Postby Zamfir » Wed Mar 14, 2012 6:10 am UTC

There are already more than enough threads about voting systems.

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: Impeachment Proceedings Against Obama Begin?

Postby 22/7 » Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:22 pm UTC

Can we go back to how compulsory voting that allows you to turn in a blank or Mickey Mouse ballot doesn't allow you to voice your opinion (or lack thereof) in exactly the same way that not showing up at all does? How is pushing a button that says "I prefer not to vote" any different than not showing up, and if it's the same, how is that removing a right?

Qaanol wrote:
Ghostbear wrote:It'd essentially make voter suppression no longer an issue. It'd cause frequently marginalized groups (due to low participation) less marginalized.

This is the first good argument in favor of mandatory voting that I’ve seen in this thread.
The reason I suggest it at all is that it would, at least theoretically, not allow candidates to pander to the extreme fringe of their party and win because only 35% of the population decided to go vote. I think most of the population would agree that someone who isn't all that hot on women working outside of the home if they have children isn't particularly representative of them as a political leader, but if they don't vote, they don't matter. I agree strongly, though, that those most commonly disenfranchised in much of the rest of life are also generally most disenfranchised at the voting booth.
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

User avatar
zmic
Posts: 427
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:38 pm UTC

Re: Impeachment Proceedings Against Obama Begin?

Postby zmic » Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:59 pm UTC

22/7 wrote:Can we go back to how compulsory voting that allows you to turn in a blank or Mickey Mouse ballot doesn't allow you to voice your opinion (or lack thereof) in exactly the same way that not showing up at all does? How is pushing a button that says "I prefer not to vote" any different than not showing up, and if it's the same, how is that removing a right?


If a blank vote is acceptable, and a blank vote is exactly the same as not showing up at all, then not showing up is also acceptable. So why then would you want to punish somebody for not showing up?

The opposite is much more sensible: not showing up is simply a very convenient way to cast a blank vote.

sigsfried
Posts: 580
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 10:28 am UTC

Re: Impeachment Proceedings Against Obama Begin?

Postby sigsfried » Thu Mar 15, 2012 12:25 am UTC

Because while the practical effect is the same, the reality is not the same. If you force people to vote but allow them to spoil the ballot they still have to go to the same amount of effort as if they don't vote. It is only the same if you think everyone who doesn't vote has made an active choice not to vote.

User avatar
ConMan
Shepherd's Pie?
Posts: 1690
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 11:56 am UTC
Location: Beacon Alpha

Re: Impeachment Proceedings Against Obama Begin?

Postby ConMan » Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:37 am UTC

Zamfir wrote: There are already more than enough threads about voting systems.

Guys? Red text. Please read it. If there's nothing more to say about potential impeachment of Obama then let the thread die a semi-honourable death. If there *is* something more to say about voting systems, find a better thread than this one to say it in.
pollywog wrote:
Wikihow wrote:* Smile a lot! Give a gay girl a knowing "Hey, I'm a lesbian too!" smile.
I want to learn this smile, perfect it, and then go around smiling at lesbians and freaking them out.

mike-l
Posts: 2758
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:16 am UTC

Re: Impeachment Proceedings Against Obama Begin?

Postby mike-l » Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:37 pm UTC

Indeed. I made my next post herefor those who wish to continue.
addams wrote:This forum has some very well educated people typing away in loops with Sourmilk. He is a lucky Sourmilk.

broken lader
Posts: 63
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 4:11 am UTC

Re: Impeachment Proceedings Against Obama Begin?

Postby broken lader » Mon Mar 19, 2012 6:55 am UTC

Spoiler:
Here's why Approval Voting is far superior to IRV.
http://www.electology.org/approval-voting-vs-irv

There's a lot of discussion of voting method "properties" (criteria) here, which is a common rookie mistake. It's like comparing the horsepower and aerodynamics of race cars, instead of just putting them on a track and doing timed trials. The timed trials for voting methods are "Bayesian Regret calculations". They measure average voter satisfaction, as a function of all failures of all "criteria", even ones that have never been invented — and using the actual frequency-times-severity of those property failures.
http://ScoreVoting.net/BayRegsFig.html

The criticism about Approval Voting being "un-majoritarian" are just incredibly primitive. This is the kind of argument people historically make when they just heard about voting methods the day prior, and are operating on intuition. I provide what I think is a pretty robust rebuttal to that argument, here.
http://www.electology.org/majority

The "it can elect a Condorcet loser" argument is similarly primitive. The key with these theoretical possibilities is to look at their FREQUENCY (probability) and the amount of DAMAGE (utility decrease) they cause when they happen. While it is possible that Approval Voting could elect a Condorcet loser, it appears that in practice, Approval Voting is more likely to elect Condorcet winners (when they exist) than real Condorcet methods.
http://ScoreVoting.net/AppCW.html

And when voters game Condorcet methods, you can get some pretty devastating outcomes.
http://ScoreVoting.net/DH3.html
http://ScoreVoting.net/CondBurial.html

Further, aside from the bullet-proof axiomatic proof that the "best candidate" is the one who maximizes the sum of individual voter utilities — NOT necessarily the Condorcet winner — there are some interesting thought experiments that can refute the Condorcet principle even from mere intuition. For instance, this argument is pretty brilliant and simple:
http://ScoreVoting.net/FishburnAntiC.html

Having studied this issue for almost six years, alongside Warren Smith (a Princeton math Ph.D. and voting theory luminary) I can only express great frustration at the regularity with which I encounter people speaking with great confidence on this complex and counterintuitive subject, only to find that they've barely scratched the surface of the modern science on the issue. There's a lot to read and ponder before you dismiss Approval Voting or Score Voting.

Clay Shentrup
The Center for Election Science


Posts on election methods should go to a different thread -- Zamfir


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests