OT - VOTE!!! - (US Citizens)

[Pseudonym]

I voted, though yet again it was a case of me voting for the person I disliked least, rather than the one I was excited for. The last vote I recall enthusiastically casting was Clinton's first presidential bid, back in 92. Every vote since has been a vote for the lesser of two evils. I suppose I could take a vote on principle and cast my ballot for an third party candidate, but none have made me excited and enthusiastic to vote for them.

I did vote for a New Hampshire to hold a constitutional convention. That should be interesting if it passes.

 

[Atticus_of_Amber]

I voted, though yet again it was a case of me voting for the person I disliked least, rather than the one I was excited for. The last vote I recall enthusiastically casting was Clinton's first presidential bid, back in 92. Every vote since has been a vote for the lesser of two evils. I suppose I could take a vote on principle and cast my ballot for an third party candidate, but none have made me excited and enthusiastic to vote for them.

I did vote for a New Hampshire to hold a constitutional convention. That should be interesting if it passes.

Whenever I hear people say this, I'm reminded of something I think Karl Popper once said: The key question of political science is not "How can we ensure that we have good rulers?" but "How can we devise a system that will minimise the damage that bad rulers might do?"

He had a point...

 

[ichabod]

I voted today.

I can't remember the last time I was this disgusted with myself.

 

[Buttercup]

As I write this the polls are closed everywhere in the US except Hawaii and possibly Alaska. I hope everyone who was registered voted!

I went this morning at about 6:50. There were about 3 other voters there besides me and my husband. Hopefully the turnout picked up later in the day.

 

[Maerdwyn]

Um... nope . Most Western states' polls close at 8pm Pacific time, two hourse from now. Alaska's polls close in four hous, IIRC.

 

[Skarp Hedin]

I voted today as well. Wasn't exactly all that exciting, really, but not bad. We've got an interesting three-way race for governor that may turn ugly -- in Vermont, if you haven't got 50.5% of the popular vote, the state legislature chooses the governor.. the Democrat is likely to get the most voted, but the state House is mostly Republican right now, so that could yet interesting. Anyhow, while the intricacies of Vermont's politics no doubt fascinate you all, I actually posted to address Maraxle:

I don't agree with you about the electoral system at all, and I do live in a 3-electoral-vote state. There's no point getting into a big hoo-raw about it, but:

Also, keep in mind that the electoral college reps do not have to vote the same way as their state.

That's actually illegal here in Vermont. I do not know offhand if the miscast vote would count, or if the elector's vote would be recast properly, or what happens if an elector chooses to break this law, but it's illegal. So here, at least, they -do- have to vote the same way as the popular vote indicates. I'm given to understand, though I don't have any data for this offhand (maybe I can find some) that roughly half of the states have similar laws.

Edit: spelling

 

[DM_Matt]

RE: Mandatory Voting...

Demanding that people who for whatever reason are uninformed vote is a bad idea. The only people that should be making collective decisions for all of us are the ones who have actually considered their position and know what exactly they are supporting or opposing. If, like Dr. Midnight, you do not care to inform yourself, you are doing society a favor by not voting. There is nothing so wonderful about voting that outways the damage of done by those who vote uninformed.

RE: Electoral college

There are no Federal laws that bind the electors to vote the way that the voters tell them to, but the states are free do make such laws, and many do. However, they can only make laws to punish "faithless electors (thats the technical term)" after the fact. States cannot supersede Federal law, which gives the electors the right to vote as they see fit.

RE: Individual votes do not count

It is true that one vote does not matter. Virtually never does one vote determine an election. However, if people decided that they did not need to vote because one vote did not matter, serious problems would ensue. The paradox of voting is pretty much a huge-scale prisoners' dilemma, where if everyone thinks of themselves only (the time spent to vote has value...one vote does not), everyone suffers.

RE: The electoral college

The electoral college does indeed favor small states slightly, forcing candidates to pay attention to them. Remember that in practical terms, regional patterns of ideology and party loyalty and the nature of the two-party system itself requires candidates to pay attention to states of all sizes.

The electoral college system is also needed because it limits the power of regional interests and the interests of large population centers, which is considerable as it is. If you don't believe me, look at a district-by-district map of the 2000 presidential election. You'll see Gore (traditionally represented in blue) all along the coastlines where most of the major cities are, and Bush in most places in between except (generally) big cities. And in spite of the fact that a good look at the map makes it seem like Bush would be the overwhelming victor, Gore got slightly more popular votes!

 

[Paradigm]

I voted!

Unfortunately, with the exception for Governor, I was voting against people and topics instead instead of for something!

 

[Wormwood]

I voted!

Unfortunately, with the exception for Governor, I was voting against people and topics instead instead of for something!

As a fellow Floridian, I'm hoping you were voting against the same things I was voting against

 

[ichabod]

RE: Mandatory Voting...

Demanding that people who for whatever reason are uninformed vote is a bad idea. The only people that should be making collective decisions for all of us are the ones who have actually considered their position and know what exactly they are supporting or opposing. If, like Dr. Midnight, you do not care to inform yourself, you are doing society a favor by not voting. There is nothing so wonderful about voting that outways the damage of done by those who vote uninformed.

A: This sounds like you should have to pass a test in order to vote. Restricting the vote is a bad idea. You end up blocking poor people who would rather buy food than a tv or a newspaper or who work to much to keep up with things.

B: It's just not possible. The candidates don't campaign on the issues, rarely actually state what their position is, and when they do it's often so vague you can't really predict how they will vote on legislative issues.

RE: The electoral college

The electoral college does indeed favor small states slightly, forcing candidates to pay attention to them. Remember that in practical terms, regional patterns of ideology and party loyalty and the nature of the two-party system itself requires candidates to pay attention to states of all sizes.

Where it gets interesting is when you look at racial demographics. Then you realize that blacks and hispanics are concentrated in the more populous states. This means the average hispanic or black is voting for a smaller chunk of an electoral college vote than the average white.

So, do they need any statisticians in Australia?