1. #34501
    Merely a Setback Breccia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    29,949
    Quote Originally Posted by PhaelixWW View Post
    But that's not the way RCV works.
    Damn I was thinking Borda Count.

  2. #34502
    Quote Originally Posted by PhaelixWW View Post
    But that's not the way RCV works. The candidate with the fewest rank 1 choices is eliminated before moving to the next iteration. Jorgensen would never win in that scenario, because she would never ever be highest percentage rank 1 vote. You literally could not eliminate Biden or Trump before eliminating Jorgensen.
    RCV is hard for people to understand, so it will be hard to implement nationally.

    I don't see any downsides to it, but I haven't done a ton of research on it.

  3. #34503
    Elemental Lord zealo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    8,420
    Quote Originally Posted by Flower Milk View Post
    If you think it's a "pipedream" then you have to accept that in America we also needlessly let 68,000 Americans die every year because they can't afford healthcare. Do you think that is acceptable to you? How many years and how many thousands of Americans dying because they're too poor do you think we should put up with until it is no longer considered a "pipedream"?
    You're not going to get anything even resembling M4A without building sufficient support for it in congress first. No matter who the president is, congress still holds the purse strings.

    It's just the political realities of the current situation that progressives have nowhere close to the amount of presence needed in the right places to make it happen.

  4. #34504
    The Lightbringer GreenGoldSharpie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    3,321
    Quote Originally Posted by PACOX View Post
    Aka Democrats are useless.
    So are leftists, and that's the problem. Both are engaging in aspirational politics instead of challenging the GOP media machine and cultural proclivities that have totally replaced policy for the right. Why don't we have an answer to, say, Sinclair Broadcasting?

  5. #34505
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenGoldSharpie View Post
    And how, pray tell, do we "fight for you"? We don't have a path to pass what you want.
    At the very least the Democratic Party could support Medicare for All as part of their party platform so I and others at least know they WANT to fight for it when they get a path to pass it. They voted it down as party of the Democratic Party platform at the last Democratic convention even though a majority of Democratic voters support it.
    Last edited by Flower Milk; 2020-11-11 at 09:33 PM.

  6. #34506
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenGoldSharpie View Post
    So are leftists, and that's the problem. Both are engaging in aspirational politics instead of challenging the GOP media machine and cultural proclivities that have totally replaced policy for the right. Why don't we have an answer to, say, Sinclair Broadcasting?
    I've been saying this since the election. Policies don't matter, messaging does.

  7. #34507
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    Yes.

    Imagine you're a typical Democrat. Your choices would be Biden, Jorgensen, Trump.

    Imagine you're a typical Republican. You leave your party because Trump is a giant fuckwad. Your choices would be Biden, Jorgensen, Trump.

    Imagine you're a member of Trump's cult. Your choices would be Trump, Jogensen, Biden.

    If there's a tie, Jorgensen wins. Not because of deserving anything (1% pop vote) but because the partisan divide between rational and irrational is so wide.

    Now, could we ramp up to a better shot at this? Absolutely. Redo the problem with Biden, Sanders, Trump, Kasich, and Jorgensen. Much better situation.
    With RCV if there was a tie, Jorgensen wouldn't win, because they had the least amount of votes. In RCV there has to be an actual majority for the candidate to win unlike now where it's a plurality.

    Here's video on how RCV works.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHRPMJmzBBw

  8. #34508
    Scarab Lord PhaelixWW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Washington (né California)
    Posts
    4,915
    Quote Originally Posted by Monster Hunter View Post
    it would be an improvment but it dosnt fix alot of the fundemental problems in the US system.
    Sure, it would be but one step among many.


    Quote Originally Posted by Monster Hunter View Post
    for a start you would need wider reforming just to have rank first actualy mean anything, under the electoral colledge system most states work on a winner takes all basis, thus ranking your preferances is meaningless when the most popular gets 100% of the states actual votes in the end.

    also it still elves america with a retarded two party system, and a president that is grossly over powered compared to modern democracy's.
    Again, that's not how RCV actually works. It allows for multiple parties to exist without the risk of one candidate playing spoiler to a somewhat similar candidate, even in a FPTP system. The only possibility for a spoiler would be in the Presidential race, due to the nature of the Electoral College.

    Obviously, the hope would be that a) RCV would promote more honest third-party options for every race other than the Presidency, and b) the country continues trying to find a way to end the EC, probably through the NPVIC.
    "The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." --Alexandre Dumas-fils

  9. #34509
    Quote Originally Posted by kaelleria View Post
    I've been saying this since the election. Policies don't matter, messaging does.
    You need both, though.

    Can't do good messaging without having policies to do the messaging about.

  10. #34510
    Quote Originally Posted by Katchii View Post
    You need both, though.

    Can't do good messaging without having policies to do the messaging about.
    I mean clearly you can. Trump just got 70m votes with no policies to speak of.

  11. #34511
    Merely a Setback Breccia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    29,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Katchii View Post
    With RCV if there was a tie
    Yeah, yeah, I was thinking of something else.

    There are flaws in every system, but our current one strongly encourages this level of partisanship. I think it's worth looking at other options.

  12. #34512
    https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/11/polit...use/index.html

    White House political affairs director Brian Jack now has covid.

  13. #34513
    The Lightbringer GreenGoldSharpie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    3,321
    Quote Originally Posted by Flower Milk View Post
    At the very least the Democratic Party could support Medicare for All as party of their party platform so I and others at least know they WANT to fight for it when they get a path to pass it. They voted it down as party of the Democratic Party platform at the last Democratic convention even though a majority of Democratic voters support it.
    Why? This is what I mean about aspirational politics. Who gives a shit what they support if it's impossible. Fuck party platforms. If you want M4A you need to create a situation where it's possible to pass M4A not scream at how terrible the DNC is from the outside. That was the opportunity this year, and both the left-center and the left utterly shit the bed.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by kaelleria View Post
    I've been saying this since the election. Policies don't matter, messaging does.
    Not just messaging, but saturation. We are winning the culture wars in a broad sense, but it's time to turn those wins into votes and longterm party gains. You only do that by pushing your win into the suburbs and rural areas too.

  14. #34514
    Quote Originally Posted by kaelleria View Post
    I mean clearly you can. Trump just got 70m votes with no policies to speak of.
    As much as people say this, he actually does. Republicans look at what their base wants, like crackdown on immigration, and then craft immigration policies to fuck over immigrants like upping ICE, and then they craft slogans like "Build the Wall" to go along with those policies. Ask yourself, how do you know that "Build the Wall" is racist? It is because of the racist policies and messaging behind it.

    Democrats look at an activist created slogan like "Defund the Police" and ignore it and craft no messaging or narrative behind it, it is no surprise when Republicans then turn around and use it as an opening to attack them on since they're not even bothering to talk about it.

  15. #34515
    Quote Originally Posted by PhaelixWW View Post
    Sure, it would be but one step among many.



    Again, that's not how RCV actually works. It allows for multiple parties to exist without the risk of one candidate playing spoiler to a somewhat similar candidate, even in a FPTP system. The only possibility for a spoiler would be in the Presidential race, due to the nature of the Electoral College.

    Obviously, the hope would be that a) RCV would promote more honest third-party options for every race other than the Presidency, and b) the country continues trying to find a way to end the EC, probably through the NPVIC.
    yes but the problem is you dont actualy vote for a presedential candidate, you vote for electoral representatives and the state awards all of them to the candidate with the most votes, so the method you use to vote dosn't actual matter who ever gets the most preferance still gets 100% of the vote from thats states electoral colledge, and its that principle that drives america into its current state of two parties, more nuanced voting wont change anything in a winner takes all system.

  16. #34516
    Scarab Lord PhaelixWW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Washington (né California)
    Posts
    4,915
    Quote Originally Posted by kaelleria View Post
    RCV is hard for people to understand, so it will be hard to implement nationally.

    I don't see any downsides to it, but I haven't done a ton of research on it.
    It's a little bit hard to understand the benefit of it, I guess (as evidenced by me asking if anyone can think of a downside), but it's not hard to understand how to actually vote in an RCV system.

    As the ones who would have to be convinced would be state legislatures, I'm less concerned with whether or not the layperson understands the full logic, as long as they can accept the fact that it allows them more flexibility in their choice for whom they vote.
    "The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." --Alexandre Dumas-fils

  17. #34517
    Quote Originally Posted by kaelleria View Post
    I mean clearly you can. Trump just got 70m votes with no policies to speak of.
    Terrifyingly enough, he did have policies though, they're just not really political ones. His cult did get behind him on his ideas and are following him as a result of things he's supported and said.

  18. #34518
    The Unstoppable Force Belize's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Gen-OT College of Shitposting
    Posts
    20,242
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/11/polit...use/index.html

    White House political affairs director Brian Jack now has covid.
    Oh no!

    Anyways

  19. #34519
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenGoldSharpie View Post
    Why? This is what I mean about aspirational politics. Who gives a shit what they support if it's impossible. Fuck party platforms. If you want M4A you need to create a situation where it's possible to pass M4A not scream at how terrible the DNC is from the outside. That was the opportunity this year, and both the left-center and the left utterly shit the bed.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Not just messaging, but saturation. We are winning the culture wars in a broad sense, but it's time to turn those wins into votes and longterm party gains. You only do that by pushing your win into the suburbs and rural areas too.
    I give a shit if the Democratic Party supports Medicare for All, and I'm sure the millions of Americans who just lost their jobs and health insurance in the middle of a pandemic probably do, too. You can't earn their trust if you're not even at least telling people you support the very policies people want and need just to LIVE. And they need to convince those people to vote for them if they want the power needed to pass policies like M4A. You are ignoring the part of the voting process that involves "winning people over to vote for you", and just telling them to vote for you because progress will never be made if they don't. You give people something to vote for, and they will show up to vote for you, that is how it works.
    Last edited by Flower Milk; 2020-11-11 at 09:41 PM.

  20. #34520
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenGoldSharpie View Post
    Why? This is what I mean about aspirational politics. Who gives a shit what they support if it's impossible. Fuck party platforms. If you want M4A you need to create a situation where it's possible to pass M4A not scream at how terrible the DNC is from the outside. That was the opportunity this year, and both the left-center and the left utterly shit the bed.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Not just messaging, but saturation. We are winning the culture wars in a broad sense, but it's time to turn those wins into votes and longterm party gains. You only do that by pushing your win into the suburbs and rural areas too.
    I agree whole heartedly. I linked a focus group discussion of Trump supporters that believe there is systemic racism in policing and support moving some of the money to things like mental health....

    Guess why they voted Trump - Defund the Police.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •